Amendment_0002_-_W9126G-12-R-0083.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)

30-105-04 EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Solicitation W9126G-12-R-0083, SDVOSB MATOC

A. This amendment is to confirm that this solicitation is set-aside for Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Businesses. The document text has been changed from "Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business (SDVOB)" to “Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB)".

B. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 26

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15C. DATE SIGNED 15B. 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 W9126G-12-R-0083

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

17-Dec-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 1 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

04-Jan-2013

CODE

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS FORT WORTH

819 TAYLOR ST, RM 2A17

FORT WORTH TX 76102-0300

W9126G 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODE CODE

EMAIL: TEL:

W9126G-12-R-0083

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SECTION SF30 - CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 11 00 - STANDARD FORM (SF) 1442 AND CLIN SCHEDULE

The required performance has changed

From: Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business (SDVOB) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) for Construction Services for the United States Army Corps of Engineer (USACE) in Southwestern Division (SWD) and its surrounding areas consisting of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. PROJECT MAGNITUDE is between $2,500.00 and $6,000,000.00 – IAW DFARS 236.204.NAICS:

236220Size Standard: $33.5MOfferor must be registered in System for Award Management (SAM) to be eligible for award.**Blocks 11 and 12: As specified per Task Order.**Block 13B: A Bid Guarantee is not required until Phase 2 of this solicitation. See Section 00 21 00, Contract Clause 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee.

To: Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) for Construction Services for the United States Army Corps of Engineer (USACE) in Southwestern Division (SWD) and its surrounding areas consisting of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. PROJECT MAGNITUDE is between $2,500.00 and $6,000,000.00 – IAW DFARS 236.204.NAICS:

236220Size Standard: $33.5MOfferor must be registered in System for Award Management (SAM) to be eligible for award.**Blocks 11 and 12: As specified per Task Order.**Block 13B: A Bid Guarantee is not required until Phase 2 of this solicitation. See Section 00 21 00, Contract Clause 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee. .

CLIN 0001

The CLIN description has changed from SWD SDVOB MATOC - Base Year to SWD SDVOSB MATOC

- Base Year.

The CLIN extended description has changed from SWD SDVOB MATOC: This contract is a firm fixed price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) , for a BASE PERIOD of 12 months. (See next contract line items for option year details) to SWD SDVOSB MATOC: This contract is a firm fixed price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) , for a BASE PERIOD of 12 months. (See next contract line items for option year details).

CLIN 0002

The CLIN description has changed from SWD SDVOB MATOC - Option Year 1 to SWD SDVOSB MATOC - Option Year 1.

The CLIN extended description has changed from SWD SDVOB MATOC: This contract is a firm fixed price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) , for option year one. to SWD SDVOSB MATOC: This contract is a firm fixed price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) , for option year one..

CLIN 0003

The CLIN description has changed from SWD SDVOB MATOC - Option Year 2 to SWD SDVOSB MATOC - Option Year 2.

The CLIN extended description has changed from SWD SDVOB MATOC: This contract is a firm fixed price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) , for option year two. to SWD SDVOSB MATOC: This contract is a firm fixed price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity

(IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) , for option year two..

CLIN 0004

The CLIN description has changed from SWD SDVOB MATOC - Option Year 3 to SWD SDVOSB MATOC - Option Year 3.

The CLIN extended description has changed from SWD SDVOB MATOC: This contract is a firm fixed price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) , for option year three. to SWD SDVOSB MATOC: This contract is a firm fixed price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) , for option year three..

CLIN 0005

The CLIN description has changed from SWD SDVOB MATOC - Option Year 4 to SWD SDVOSB MATOC - Option Year 4.

The CLIN extended description has changed from SWD SDVOB MATOC: This contract is a firm fixed price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) , for option year four. to SWD SDVOSB MATOC: This contract is a firm fixed price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) , for option year four..

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS

SECTION 00 21 00 (ID/IQ)

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1.2 CONTRACT COST LIMITATION FOR DESIGN AND CONTRUCTION COSTS

1.3 GOVERNMENT SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

1.4 COPIES OF SOLICITATION DOCUMENTS AND AMENDMENTS

1.5 OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

1.6 SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD/NAICS CODE

1.7 PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS

1.8 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

1.9 ACCURACY IN PROPOSALS

1.10 PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL

1.11 PROPOSAL FORMAT & GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.12 JOINT VENTURE PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

1.13 BID GUARANTEE

1.14 CONTRACT PRICES - BIDDING SCHEDULE (PHASE 2 ONLY)

1.15 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK

The Fort Worth District intends to award at least two (2) but no more than six (6) contracts as Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOCs) in Southwestern Division and its surrounding areas of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. The estimated maximum task order limitation of $6 million and a minimum task order limitation of $2500. In determining which contractor pool to solicit for a given task order requirement the Government will consider - 1) the complexity of the work, 2) contract task order limitation, 3) on-going work, 4) bonding capacity, and any other task order specific requirement.

The Government may exceed the stated maximum task order limitation upon mutual agreement of all parties. The solicitation will be a negotiated acquisition; there will be no public bid opening. All contracts will be awarded based upon an evaluation of the overall Best Value to the Government.

General Description of Work: Scope of work includes, but is not limited to, construction activities such as new construction, renovation, repairs, preventive maintenance, environmental abatement, and erosion control, earthwork and operations construction activities as applicable under these MATOCs. The contracts are not only intended to execute new construction, design-build and design-bid-build, but to provide a timely response to remediation of facilities, e.g., maintenance, repair, asbestos and lead-base paint abatement, and minor construction situations relating to, but not limited to, civil, mechanical, plumbing, structural, electrical, heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), instrumentation, anti-terrorism and force protection.

1.2. CONTRACT COST CEILING LIMITATION FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

COSTS

The Contract Cost Limitation (CCL) will be provided with the Request for Proposals (RFPs) for each Task Order. It is the Government's intent to award at full scope within the CCL. The Magnitude of Construction for 100% designed projects will be stated on each Task Order in accordance with DFARS 236.204.

1.3. GOVERNMENT SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

The Offeror(s) must ensure that ALL mail inquiries are sent to the Fort Worth District, U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, relating to either pre-contract or post-contract award. A return mailing address is required on the outside of the envelope, package, box, etc. All mail must be addressed to the Contracting office as specified below (no exceptions):

U.S. Army Engineer District, Fort Worth ATTN: CESWF-CT-C, Contract Specialist, Ashley Morgan

PO Box 17300 819 Taylor Street (Room 2A17) Fort Worth, TX, 76102-0300

All Federal Express/UPS/etc. packages are required to have Offeror’s physical address and the above contracting office address including room number, contract specialist’s name and telephone number for proper delivery.

1.4. COPIES OF SOLICITATION DOCUMENTS AND AMENDMENTS

Copies of the solicitation and all amendments are available by INTERNET ACCESS ONLY.

All solicitation documents and amendments will be posted on Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website at http://www.fbo.gov/ and Offeror can access solicitation documents by solicitation number without dashes (i.e., for sample W9126G12R0083).

It is solely the Contractor’s responsibility to check the fbo.gov website for the solicitation and any amendments prior to the RFP closing date. The Offeror shall submit in its proposal all requested information as specified in this solicitation. There will be no public opening of the proposals received as a result of this solicitation.

Additional information regarding this solicitation and potential Offerors (i.e., interested vendors list) and/or subcontractors will be available fbo.gov website under the solicitation number.

1.5. OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

1.5.1 Bidder Inquiry

1.5.1.1 Technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures or bonds are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at http://www.projnet.org/projnet.

1.5.1.1.1 To submit and review bid inquiry items, bidders will need to be a current registered user or self-register into system. To self-register go to web page, click BID tab select Bidder Inquiry, select agency USACE, enter Key for this solicitation listed below, and your e-mail address, click login. Fill in all required information and click create user. Verify that information on next screen is correct and click to continue.

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

1.5.1.1.3 Bidders will receive an acknowledgement of their question via email, followed by an answer to their question after it has been processed by our technical team.

1.5.1.1.4 The Solicitation Number is: W9126G-12-R-0083

1.5.1.1.5 The Bidder Inquiry Key is: 2ZQT7H-6TG2U4

http://www.fbo.gov/

1.5.1.2 The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquires 5 days prior to proposal submission in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation, if necessary.

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

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

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

1.6. SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD/NAICS CODE

See Section 00 45 00, FAR 52.204-8 ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS (FEB 2009) for the small business size standard/NAICS Code.

1.7. PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS

This Request for Proposal (RFP) does not commit the Government to pay as a direct charge any costs incurred by the Offeror in the preparation and submission of its proposal or revisions. A stipend is not authorized for unsuccessful Phase 2 Offerors in accordance with Section 00 22 20.

1.8. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

If the Government intends to hold a pre-proposal conference, it will be announced after the Offerors are selected to participate in Phase 2 of the solicitation process.

1.9. ACCURACY IN PROPOSALS

Proposals must set forth with full, accurate, and complete information as required by this RFP, (including attachments). The penalty for making false statements is prescribed in 18 U.S.C.

1001.

1.10. PROPOSAL SUBMITTALS (PHASE 1 & 2)

1.10.1 In an effott to reduce paperwork and cost, ALL Phase 1 and Phase 2 proposals shall be submitted electronically via the AMRDEC SAFE website at:

https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/SAFE2/Welcome.aspx .

At the AMRDEC SAFE website, select the link: I do not have a CAC or this machine is not configured to read my CAC and I would like to access SAFE as the Guest User, to register, access the site and submit your proposal(s). When completing the information for transmittal at the AMRDEC SAFE website, notification should be submitted to Contract Specialist, Ashley https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/SAFE2/Welcome.aspx

Morgan, email ashley.morgan@usace.army.mil and Contracting Officer, John Rodgers, email john.h.rodgers@usace.army.mil.

1.10.2 Offers received by telegraph, modifications thereto, or cancellations of offers will not be accepted.

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

1.10.4 Offers received by e mail, modifications thereto, or cancellations of offers will be accepted.

1.10.5 SITE VISIT: See Specification Section – Site Visit (PHASE 2)

IMPORTANT NOTES: (1) Remarks and explanations addressed during the conference shall not qualify or alter the terms and conditions of the solicitation. (2) The terms and conditions of the solicitation remain unchanged unless the solicitation is formally amended in writing.

1.11. PROPOSAL FORMAT & GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS (PHASE 1)

1.11.1 Submit only the electronic-documents. Submit only the electronic files specifically authorized and/or required elsewhere in this section. Do not submit excess information, to include audio-visual materials, electronic media, etc. All pages should be numbered.

1.11.2 PDF pages should be formatted to print on 8 ½ by 11 inch paper, unless another paper size is specifically authorized elsewhere in this section for a particular submission. Spreadsheets must fit to 11” x 14” or 11” x 17” paper size unless specifically authorized in this section for a particular submission. Do not use a font size smaller than 10, an unusual font style such as script, or condensed print for any submission. All page margins must be at least 1 inch wide, but may include headers and footers of the solicitation, project title and company.

1.11.3 Hard copies will not be submitted.

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

1.11.5 In the case of an Offeror that is part of a large, multi-segmented business concern, provide information directly pertaining to the specific segment of the business concern (i.e., the division, group, unit, etc.) that will perform work under the prospective contract.

mailto:ashley.morgan@usace.army.mil mailto:john.h.rodgers@usace.army.mil

1.11.6 For submissions with page limitations, the pages will be counted as follows: One side of the paper is one page; information on both the back and front of one sheet of paper will be counted as two pages. Where authorized, fold-out pages (11" x 14" or 11" x 17") will count as one page (not applicable for electronic submissions). Pages furnished for organizational purposes only, such as a “Table of Contents” or divider tabs, are not included in the page limitation.

1.11.7 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 or amendment, e.g., Error, Omission or Clarification shall be included and be annotated for each revision. Proposal replacement pages shall be numbered and clearly marked “REVISED”, with the date of revision.

Revised page will be submitted in a different color than the original pages being replaced.

1.11.8 Within three (3) days of contract award, the awarded seed task order contractor shall submit their conformed proposal via an electronic CD Rom or DVD +/-R.

1.12. JOINT VENTURE PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

When proposing as a joint venture, all members of the joint venture shall sign the SF 1442 and the bid bond unless a written agreement by the joint venture is furnished with the proposal designating one firm with the authority to bind the other member(s) of the joint venture. In addition, a copy of the joint venture agreement shall be submitted with the proposal. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements may eliminate the proposal from further consideration.

1.13. BID GUARANTEE (PHASE 2 ONLY)

A Bid Guarantee is not required for the Phase 1 proposal submission. A Bid Guarantee will be required for the initial Task Order during Phase 2 of this solicitation. The penal sum of the bond for the task order will be required as in provision 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee. Facsimile Bonds are not acceptable.

1.14. CONTRACT PRICES - BIDDING SCHEDULE (PHASE 2 ONLY)

Payment for the various items listed in the Bidding Schedule shall constitute full compensation for furnishing all plant, labor, equipment, appliances, materials and bonds (performance and payment), and for performing all operations required to complete the work in conformity with the drawings and specifications. All costs for work not specifically mentioned in the Bidding Schedule shall be included in the contract prices for the items listed.

1.15 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

SECTION 00 22 10 - PHASE 1 OF A 2 PHASE-DESIGN BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

The following have been modified:

PHASE 1 OF 2 PHASE DB SELECTIO

SECTION 00 22 10

PHASE 1 OF 2 PHASE DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.0 OVERVIEW

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

3.0 PHASE 1 PROPOSAL AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

4.0 Volume 1 - TAB A – STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

5.0 Volume 1 - TAB B – FACTOR 1-1 – PAST PERFORMANCE

5.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.2. RELEVANCY EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.3. CONFIDENCE EVALUATION CRITERIA

6.0 Volume 1 - TAB C – FACTOR 1-2 – ORGANIZATION AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

6.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

6.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

7.0 PHASE 1 RATINGS

8.0 PHASE 1 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

8.1. SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

8.2. EVALUATION

8.3. EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

8.4. DEFINITIONS

8.5. PAST PERFORMANCE RISK RATINGS

PHASE ONE – SECTION 00 22 10 ATTACHMENTS

1 – PROPOSAL DATA SHEETS

2 –PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRRE

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1. The Fort Worth District intends to award two (2) but no more than six (6) SDVOSB Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOC) in the Southwestern Division and its surrounding areas of Arizona, Arkansas, California, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. The estimated maximum task order limitation is $6 million with a minimum task order limitation of $2,500. In determining which contractor to solicit for a given task order requirement the Government will consider - 1) the complexity of the work, 2) contract task order limitation, 3) on-going work, 4) bonding capacity, and any other task order specific requirement.

1.2. In Phase 1 of the 2 phase design-build selection procedure, interested firms or joint venture entities (referred to as “Offerors”) submit specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully execute a wide variety of construction activities, to include but not limited to, new construction, renovation, repairs, preventive maintenance, environmental abatement, and erosion control, earthwork and operations construction activities as applicable under these MATOCs. The contracts are not only intended to execute new construction, design-build and design-bid-build, but to provide a timely response to remediation of facilities, e.g., maintenance, repair, asbestos and lead-base paint abatement, and minor construction situations relating to, but not limited to, civil, mechanical, plumbing, structural, electrical, heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), instrumentation, anti-terrorism and force protection. The Government will evaluate the qualifications in accordance with the criteria described herein and intends to select up to six (6) of the Phase 1 Offerors to compete in Phase 2.

The Government reserves the right to select more than six (6) of the Phase 1 Offerors if, in the opinion of the Source Selection Authority, consideration of additional offerors is warranted.

1.3. In Phase 2, the selected Phase 2 Offerors will submit proposals for evaluation in accordance with Section 00 22 20. In Phase 2, the Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed-price contract to the firm whose proposal offers the best overall value to the Government, considering the price and non-price factors described in Phase 2.

1.4. The selected Phase 2 Offerors will be announced by special notice or synopsis to the Federal Business Opportunities website. Offerors may be contacted separately to request their proposal.

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1. Firms formally organized as design-build entities, design firms and construction contractors that have associated specifically for this project, consortia of firms or any other interested parties may submit proposals. Associations may be joint ventures or key team subcontractors. Any legally organized Offeror may submit a proposal. All designs must be under the direct supervision of appropriately licensed professionals for each discipline involved.

2.2. Submit the Phase 1 proposal in electronic format, as described in Section 00 21 00. Note that the Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits, in paragraph 6.1.1 below.

PHASE 1 DOES NOT INVOLVE PRICING SUBMISSION.

3.0 PHASE 1 PROPOSAL AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

PHASE 1, VOLUME 1 – TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

Factor Location Description Relative Importance Vol.1, Tab A SF 1442 and Proposal Data Sheet N/A

FACTOR 1-1 Vol. 1, Tab B Past Performance Equal to Factor 1-2 Sub Factor 1 Relevancy Equal in importance to Sub Factor 2 Sub Factor 2 Confidence Equal in importance to Sub Factor 1 Factor 1-2 Vol. 1, Tab C Organization and Technical

Approach Equal to Factor 1-1

4.0 TAB A - STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

4.1. Submit the SF 1442, completed and signed by a person authorized by the Offeror. Include the completed proposal data sheet (See attachment 1, provided at the end of this Section) and Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable)

5.0 TAB B – FACTOR 1-1 – PAST PERFORMANCE

5.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.1.1. The Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation (Attachment 2) is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the Offeror included in its proposal for Factor: 1, Past Performance. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQ’s should be submitted with your proposal. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If any negative past performance information is received, the contractor will be given an opportunity to provide rebuttal. If the client request, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Ashley Morgan, via e-mail at: ashley.morgan@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposals PPQ’s previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

5.1.2. Also include performance recognition documents received within the last five (5) years such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

5.1.3. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluation of past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS number of team members (Partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquires of owner representative(s), Federal Awardees Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rest with the Offeror.

5.1.4. The Offeror’s construction and design entities should each demonstrate past performance through the submission of similar projects using the PPQ. If the Offeror is a joint venture, limited liability corporation, or integrated design-build firm, provide past performance information for design and construction projects relevant to each of the proposed roles on this project. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division or unit submitting the offer. Design firms may list prime contractors they have worked for or Government, private or commercial mailto:ashley.morgan@usace.army.mil customers. If projects were design-build, so identify them in Section 4, Project Description of the PPQ.

Both the prime contractor and the design firm(s) shall each submit no more than five (5) projects completed or fully designed and at least 50% construction progress completed within 5 years from the date of this solicitation that best represent their experience similar to the scope of work for this solicitation.

If multiple design firms are utilized, each design firm will be allowed to submit up to five (5) projects. Two

(2) of the five (5) projects submitted may be fully designed and at least 50% construction progress completed. If Offeror is proposing as a Joint Venture (JV) and past performance cannot be provided as a JV, each partner can submit no more than five (5) projects each.

5.1.5. Projects will be considered relevant to this procurement if they are similar in complexity, in type, scope, and magnitude. Relevancy is defined as:

(a) A minimum of one example of vertical construction with a construction value of at least $3,000,000.

(b) A minimum of one example of repair/renovation project with a construction value of at least $1,000,000.

(c) A minimum of one example of Design/Build project with a construction value of at least $1,000,000

(d) Must be the Prime Contractor on a minimum of two projects submitted; Design firms must be the Designer of Record on a minimum of two projects submitted.

5.1.6. The Offeror may provide a supplemental narrative (not project lists), not to exceed two pages, explaining how any corporate past performance that is not directly related to the specific projects above is applicable to this project and how the Government will benefit. The following information may be considered:

5.1.6.1. Describe previous design-build past performance. The Offeror may include past performance on other types of projects.

5.1.6.2. The above information is limited to projects that are substantially complete(fully designed and at least 50% construction progress completed ) or that have been completed and turned over no longer than the past five years preceding the date of this solicitation.

5.1.6.3. Offerors may submit but, are not required to submit any additional past performance information. The Government will utilize CCASS, ACASS, CPARS and any other information deemed relevant to assess confidence in the Offeror’s ability to perform.

5.2. RELEVANCY EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.2.1. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant the past performance is to the project under consideration. Past performance on the projects identified in the project forms will receive more consideration than past performance provided in the supplemental narrative. The Government will place greater value on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor, depending upon overall role and relevancy considerations. Federal Government project past performance will not be rated inherently more important than non-Federal Government project past performance.

5.2.2. More relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

5.3. CONFIDENCE EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.3.1. The SSEB will review the past performance information available, to include ACASS, CCASS, CPARS and other past performance information deemed relevant, to determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, the Government will only evaluate past performance of the division or unit submitting the offer. If the Government cannot establish the Offeror’s relevant past performance, it reserves the right to utilize the Past Performance Questionnaire to conduct telephone interviews on any source it deems relevant to the evaluation. The Government will not release the information gathered to the Offeror at any time, in order for the Government to solicit candid, unbiased interview comments. The Government’s evaluation is not limited to past performance information on the cited example projects.

5.3.2. The confidence rating will be established based on the past performance of the firms or that of its predecessor, if applicable. An entity may not establish past performance based on the past performance of its key personnel apart from that of the entity. If the Government does not obtain past performance information and cannot establish a past performance record for the Offeror through other sources, a rating of Unknown confidence will be assigned.

5.3.3. If negative information is received, the Offeror will be given an opportunity to provide input as required by FAR 15. ACASS, CCASS, and CPARs that are part of the official record will be utilized as if the Offeror has already had an opportunity to respond.

6.0 TAB C –FACTOR 1-2 - ORGANIZATION AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

6.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

6.1.1. This information should address the Offeror’s organization and intended technical approach to executing the contract. Demonstrate an understanding of the risk management process associated with design-build process. Limit the information to fifteen (15) pages or less clearly but concisely describe the organizational and technical approach to project management and execution.

6.1.2. Organization: Demonstrate an understanding of the fundamental design-build problem, i.e.

a design and construction proposal that complies with the RFP requirements including the funding constraints of the cost limitation (CCL). Demonstrate an understanding of the risk management process associated with design-build processes. Describe the team members, their resources, how their resources will be utilized, and their roles and responsibilities. Describe any previous teaming experience between current team members. Include a general description of the work the Offeror will self-perform to be compliant with the requirements of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause 52.219-14, Limitations On Subcontracting in Section 00 72 00.

6.1.3. Technical Approach for Design-Build: Describe the technical approach to design and construction. Include information on design and construction. Describe team members’ knowledge of and expertise in LEED certification. Describe your firm’s familiarity with applicable codes and local conditions.

6.1.4. Collaborative Approach for Design-Build: Describe interactions within the team and with the Corps of Engineers during the design. Discuss the role and interaction of the design team with the construction team during design and construction. Provide information on how your design-build team will manage co-location of design and construction team members manage Government comments, the design team’s involvement throughout construction, and how sub-contractors will be integrated into design and construction. Discuss how the configuration management system will track and control design evolution and changes during design for quality control and to facilitate quicker Government reviews. Describe the role of the construction team members during design. Describe the role and interaction of the design team with the construction team during construction, addressing, as a minimum, maintaining configuration management of the design during construction, including control and approval of revisions to the accepted design; requests for information; shop drawing and submittal reviews and approvals; progress meetings; site visits, if any; contract completion, closeout, as-built and completion documentation.

6.1.5. Planning and Scheduling: Provide information on your team’s project scheduling capabilities for design and construction. Identify the system you will utilize and how your team will implement the schedule to manage design and construction. Discuss internal procedures for handling delays to minimize “schedule creep”. The Government is looking for ways the design-builder will streamline design and construction, manage labor and other resource constraints in an effort to reduce costs and provide an achievable and flexible schedule that will work with the installation’s troop movement schedule. In Phase 2, the Offeror will develop a summary schedule. In Phase 1, the Government is interested in the Offeror’s planning and scheduling capabilities.

6.1.6. Quality Control: Provide information on your team’s capabilities to assure quality control.

Describe your quality control approach, corporate systems, and capabilities to maintain quality control of the design and construction. Provide specific information on how you will manage design quality control, track design evolution and changes during design to meet the schedule and to facilitate quicker Government reviews. Provide information on how you will handle internal and external requests for information, shop drawings, submittal reviews, progress meetings, site visits, contract completion, closeout, as-built, and completion documentation. After contract award, the selected design-builder will submit their Quality Control Plan for Government Approval.

6.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA:

6.2.1. The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, and any deficiencies in the organization and technical approach. The Government will evaluate the firm’s understanding of design-build and the capability to execute the project. Some additional specific evaluation criteria are listed below.

6.2.2. Organization: The Government will evaluate the clarity and strength of the overall organization, the structure and staffing to execute the entire scope of work. The Offeror is required to select and commit to design firms to achieve an “acceptable” rating. Joint venture participants’ contribution to the project should be commensurate with their skills and background. Previous teaming by the construction contractor and design firm(s) will be considered a strength. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s capability and intent to comply with the applicable requirements for self-performance of work by the prime contractor.

6.2.3. Technical Approach for Design and Construction: The firm(s) preparing the design must demonstrate qualifications and expertise in sustainable design and development and design, based on project experience on projects that have achieved US Green Building Council’s LEED certification.

Additional consideration will be given if both the construction contractor and the design firms demonstrate qualifications and experience in LEED certification. The Government will evaluate demonstrated familiarity with applicable codes and local conditions.

6.2.4. Collaborative Approach for Design-Build: The Government will evaluate the integration of the design and construction firms and the staff during design and construction. The constructor must be actively involved in the design process, not just leaving it up to the designer (see Special Contract

Requirement: “Constructor’s Role during Design”, Section 00 73 00). The Offeror must have an effective configuration management system to control and track revisions to the design. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the design process and the roles of the designers of record and the Government reviewers. The Government will evaluate the role of the designer in maintaining design integrity throughout the process, including its key roles during construction. Additional consideration will be given to a team that includes as many subcontractors as possible (e.g., the key subs for electrical and mechanical, the fire protection subcontractor, fabricators, etc.) during design development, prior to release of the applicable design packages for construction, so that systems and trade coordination can reduce interferences, increase constructability and speed up construction operations.

6.2.5. Planning and Scheduling: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s scheduling capabilities to develop and implement an integrated fast track design-build schedule and the systems that will be utilized to implement the schedule. The Government places a higher value on an offer that provides methods to streamline construction and manage labor and other resource constraints in an effort to reduce costs and supports an achievable and flexible schedule that will work with the installation’s troop movement schedule.

6.2.6. Quality Control: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s capabilities and understanding of the contractually required quality control processes for both design and construction. The Government places value upon continued participation by the designers of record during the construction quality control process. The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the staffing plan to cover all required tasks and responsibilities.

7.0 PHASE 1 RATINGS

7.1. The SSA will select the best qualified offerors for Phase 2 based on the factors described above.

8.0 PHASE 1 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

8.1. SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

8.1.1. The SSEB will be established to conduct the evaluation of proposals received in response to this solicitation. The evaluation will be based on the content of the proposal, proposal corrections and any information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information. The SSEB will not consider any proposal incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

8.2. EVALUATION

8.2.1. The SSEB will evaluate the proposals and assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor. Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts for the Phase 1 submission and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to determine their performance capability. Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in their proposal after submitting it in response to Phase 1.

8.2.2. The Government reserves the right to allow proposal corrections, if deemed necessary to determine the most highly qualified Offerors to shortlist for Phase 2.

8.2.3. The Contracting Officer, independently exercising prudent business judgment, intends to select up to six (6) of the most highly qualified Offerors to short-list for Phase 2. However, the government reserves the right to select more than six (6) if, in the opinion of the Contracting Officer, the results of Phase 1 evaluations warrants additional offerors for consideration in Phase 2.

8.3. EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

8.3.1. General: The Government will review the proposals and rate the quality of each evaluation factor. The SSEB will rate each proposal against the specified evaluation criteria in the Solicitation requirements.

8.3.2. Review Write-up: The Government will support each rating with a narrative, separately listing all strengths or advantages, weaknesses or disadvantages, deficiencies, and required clarifications.

8.3.3. Rating System: After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies, the SSEB will assign an adjectival rating of “Outstanding”, “Good”, “Acceptable”, “Marginal”, or “Unacceptable” to each factor. The rating will reflect the Government’s confidence in each Offeror’s technical ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the RFP.

8.4. DEFINITIONS

8.4.1. Deficiency. A deficiency is a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

8.4.2. Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

8.4.3. Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

8.4.4. Strength. Any aspect of an Offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

8.4.5. Significant Strength. A significant strength appreciably enhances the merit of a proposal or appreciably enhances the probability of successful contract performance.

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

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

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

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

8.4.10. Unacceptable. Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies.

Proposal is unawardable.

8.4.11. PAST PERFORMANCE RATINGS. Two ratings shall be assigned to Past Performance, a Relevancy rating and a Confidence rating.

8.4.11.1. The relevancy rating will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be acquired under this solicitation.

Relevancy is defined in paragraph 5.1.1 of this Section.

8.4.11.2. The confidence rating assess the risks associated with each Offeror's likelihood of success in performing the requirements stated in the RFP based on the Offeror's demonstrated performance on recent contracts. SSEB members and the SSA may use personal knowledge or information from other sources in its evaluation of an Offeror’s past performance, provided such information is consistent with the established evaluation criteria of the RFP. Offerors that have no relevant performance record will be given a neutral/unknown confidence rating.

8.4.12. Relevancy Rating System

8.4.12.1. Unknown Relevance (Neutral). 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.

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

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

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

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

8.4.13. Confidence Rating System

8.4.13.1. Unknown Confidence (Neutral). 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. .

8.4.13.2. Substantial Confidence. Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

8.4.13.3. Satisfactory Confidence. Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

8.4.13.4. Limited Confidence. Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

8.4.13.5. No Confidence. Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

8.4.14. The Relevancy ratings and Confidence rating will be utilized to determine an overall Past Performance Rating described in the table below which will be utilized in the trade-off analysis.

Overall Past Performance Rating Chart

Very Relevant

Marginal Acceptable Good Outstanding

Relevant

Marginal Acceptable Acceptable Good

Somewhat Relevant

Marginal Marginal Acceptable Acceptable

Not Relevant

Unsatisfactory Marginal Marginal Marginal

No Confidence

Limited Confidence

Satisfactory Confidence

Substantial Confidence

PHASE 1 - TAB A

PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

SECTION 00 22 10 - ATTACHMENT 1

Solicitation Number

Firm

Address

Phone

Fax

Email

Tax ID Number

DUNS Number

Also provide any other assigned number that identifies the member firm(s) in the ACASS or CCASS databases.