B3_W9126G-16-R-0004-0005.pdf

W9126G-16-R-0004

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate the follow ing changes.

1. Extend proposal due date and time.

2. Provide ProjNet inquiries as an attachment.

3. Update Contract Specialist Point of Contact Information All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 30

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 08-Apr-2016

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W9126G-16-R-0004

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

26-Feb-2016

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 X is extended, 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

08-Apr-2016

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 CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

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 response date/time has changed from 11-Apr-2016 02:00 PM to 14-Apr-2016 02:00 PM.

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

The following have been modified:

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 COPIES OF SOLICITATION DOCUMENTS AND AMENDMENTS

1.4 OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

1.5 SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD/NAICS CODE

1.6 PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS

1.7 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

1.8 ACCURACY IN PROPOSALS

1.9 PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL

1.10 PROPOSAL FORMAT & GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.11 JOINT VENTURE PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

1.12 BID GUARANTEE (PHASE 2 ONLY)

1.13 CONTRACT PRICES - BIDDING SCHEDULE (PHASE 2 ONLY)

1.14 TASK AND DELIVERY ORDER OMBUDSMAN

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK (SCOPE)

1.1.1 The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Fort Worth District (SWF) intends to award a target of four

(4) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOC) to provide Repair and Alterations (RA) services of Land Ports of Entry (LPOE) to support the Department of Homeland Security’s LPOE RA program. The geographical region covered under this scope is primarily Washington (WA), Idaho (ID) and Montana (MT) but may support other Southwestern Division (SWD) military, civil works, and International Interagency Section (IIS) projects. Task orders will be issued as firm fixed price. Offers will only be accepted from the following Socio-Economic Category: 100% Small Business set-aside.

1.1.2 The Construction services required include a wide variety of multidisciplinary services required for preparation of, but not limited to, renovation, repairs, preventive maintenance, environmental abatement, and erosion control, earthwork and operations construction activities; restoration of roads, parking lots, bridges, fences, gates, equipment and fixtures, as applicable under these MATOCs. The contracts are not only intended to execute design-build construction and design-bid-build, but to provide a timely response to remediation of facilities, e.g., maintenance, repair, asbestos and lead-based 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.

1.1.3 The estimated maximum task order limitation is $5,000,000.00 with a minimum task order limitation of $2,000. The total estimated MATOC pool capacity is $45,000,000.00.

1.1.4 Offers for this solicitation will be evaluated using Two-Phase Design-Build Selection Procedures.

1.1.4.1 In Phase 1, interested firms or joint venture entities (referred to as “Offerors”) shall submit specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully perform task orders under the awarded contract. The Government will evaluate the qualifications in accordance with the criteria described in this solicitation and intends to select the most highly qualified offerors of Phase 1 to compete in Phase 2.

1.1.4.2 In Phase 2, the selected Offerors will submit proposals for evaluation in accordance with Section 00 22 20.

The Contracting Officer (KO)/Source Selection Authority (SSA) will award a target of four (4) firm fixed-priced IDIQ contracts to the responsible Offerors whose proposals conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable with regard to pricing for the initial Task Order, and whose proposal offers the best overall value to the Government, considering the price and non-price factors described herein.

1.1.5. The Government may or may not exceed the stated minimum/maximum task order limitation upon mutual agreement of all parties.

1.1.6. This will be a negotiated acquisition; there will be no public bid opening.

1.1.7. All contracts will be awarded based upon an evaluation of the overall Best Value to the Government using the FAR Part 15 Tradeoff process.

1.1.8. General Description of Seed Task Order: Please note the following is a general description of the anticipated Seed Task Order; it is not the final description. Provide the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Office of Administration (OA), Facilities Management and Engineering (FM&E) Directorate, Field Operations Facilities Program Management Office (FOFPMO) with construction support to repair and revise the domestic water systems at the CBP LPOE locations identified below. This work will involve separating and handling domestic and fire protection systems individually to protect the integrity of the domestic water system for potable use. This work will entail re-routing the domestic water piping away from, and around, the fire protection cistern. The ultimate goal is to achieve domestic water quality that will meet both primary and secondary drinking water regulations. Some LPOEs may also require inspection of and adjustment or replacement of water treatment systems; construction of new wells;

and freeze-proofing existing supply systems.

Construction shall add or incorporate the necessary water treatment equipment to produce high quality water that is clear in vision, does not smell of any pungent odor and has a pleasant taste. All water treatment, handling and storage designs must achieve water test results that pass both primary and secondary drinking water regulations, for all domestic water used in the facilities. Water treatment system performance, confirmed by water quality testing results, must be clearly defined in the design specifications as a condition of acceptance of the Construction Contractor’s work.

The requirement is to treat the entire domestic system at each LPOE. The water at each location shall be treated at the source and not at the point of use (i.e. simply treated at the break room sinks). The goal is to provide full confidence in the use of the source water as a whole by the LPOE Officers, Port Directors and all the visitors in all aspects of each facility, including the public restrooms.

Locations:

Nighthawk LPOE, Loomis, WA 98297

Frontier LPOE Northport, WA 99157

Boundary LPOE Colville, WA

Del Bonita LPOE Cut Bank, MT 59427-9109

1.2. CONTRACT COST CEILING LIMITATION FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COSTS

The Construction 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. Please Note: This paragraph applies to DB projects only

1.3. 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 (W9126G16R0004).

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 Section

1.10 below of 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.

1.4. OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

1.4.1 Bidder Inquiry

1.4.1.1 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.

http://www.projnet.org/projnet

1.4.1.1.1 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.

1.4.1.1.2 From this page you may view all bidder inquiries or add inquiry. Only one question will be allowed per inquiry. If multiple questions are included in a single inquiry, only the first question will be answered. All others will remain unanswered until entered in as single inquiries.

1.4.1.1.3 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.

1.4.1.1.4 The Solicitation Number is: W9126G-16-R-0004

1.4.1.1.5 The Bidder Inquiry Key is: 92J55M-6PCTYE

1.4.1.2 The Bidder Inquiry System will be closed to new inquiries seven (7) calendar days prior to proposal submission in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation, if necessary. If the System is not closed in a timely manner, an inquiry posted within seven calendar days of the receipt of proposals will still be regarded as untimely and will not afforded a substantive response.

1.4.1.3 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.

1.4.1.4 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.

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

1.5. SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD/NAICS CODE

The small business size standard for NAICS Code 238990 is $15M.

1.6. 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.

1.7. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

The Government intends to hold a pre-proposal conference during Phase 1 and Phase 2. The date, location, and time will be announced by Amendment. The offeror must submit, via e-mail, the firm's name, address, point of contact, telephone number, and up to three personnel planning to attend to the Government point of contact identified below no later than five (5) calendar days prior to the conference:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth District Tiffany Jolly Contract Specialist Email: Tiffany.S.Jolly@usace.army.mil

Kimberly Rheaume Contract Specialist Email: kimberly.f.rheaume@usace.army.mil

Only the most highly qualified offerors of Phase 1 will participate in the pre-proposal conference for Phase 2.

During this conference, the requirements set forth in the solicitation will be reviewed and discussed, with part of the conference to include a question and answer period.

1.8. ACCURACY IN PROPOSALS

Proposals must set forth 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.

1.9. PROPOSAL SUBMITTALS (PHASE 1 & 2)

1.9.1 In an effect 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/safe/

At the AMRDEC SAFE website, select the link: Non-CAC Users “For users without a CAC OR if your computer is not configured to read your CAC. Using this option will allow you to access SAFE as a guest.” When completing the information for transmittal at the AMRDEC SAFE website, notification should be submitted to Contract Specialist, Tiffany Jolly, email:Tiffany.S.Jolly@usace.army.mil Kimberly Rheaume, email kimberly.f.rheaume@usace.army.mil; and Contracting Officer, Linda Eadie, email linda.d.eadie@usace.army.mil.

A copy of your proposal must be submitted to the following email address: CESWF- CTPreawardProposal@usace.army.mil.

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

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

1.9.4 Offers received by email, modifications thereto, or cancellations of offers will be accepted (optional);

however, the Government’s preference is for Offerors to submit their proposal through the ARMRDEC SAFE website.

1.9.5 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.

1.10. PROPOSAL FORMAT & GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS (PHASE 1)

1.10.1 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 must be numbered.

1.10.2 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.

1.10.3 Hard copies will not be accepted.

1.10.4 “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 https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/ mailto:CESWF-CTPreawardProposal@usace.army.mil mailto:CESWF-CTPreawardProposal@usace.army.mil 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”.

1.10.5 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.

1.10.6 For submissions with page limitations, the pages will be counted as follows: One side of the paper is one page; and a page with information on both the front and back of a single sheet of paper will be counted as two pages.

Pages furnished for organizational purposes only, such as a “Table of Contents” or divider tabs, are not included in the page limitation.

1.10.7 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.

1.10.8 Within three (3) days of contract award, each Contractor shall submit their conformed proposal via the AMRDEC SAFE website at: https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/SAFE2/Welcome.aspx.

1.11. 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.

1.12. 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.

1.13. 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.

1.14 TASK AND DELIVERY ORDER OMBUDSMAN:

USACE Task and Delivery Order Ombudsman:

Ms. Jacqueline C. Woodson Acquisition Support Division U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 7701 Telegraph Road, Casey Building, Room 2115 Alexandria, VA 22315 Phone: 703-428-6323 Email: Jacqueline.C.Woodson@usace.army.mil https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/SAFE2/Welcome.aspx

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

The following have been modified:

SECTION 00 22 10

PHASE 1 OF 2 PHASE DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.0 OVERVIEW

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

4.0 PHASE 1 PROPOSAL AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

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

6.0 Volume 1 - TAB B – FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE

6.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

6.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

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

7.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

7.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

8.0 Volume 1 – TAB D – FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

8.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

8.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

8.3. DEFINITIONS

9.0 PHASE 1 – RATINGS – PHASE 1 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

9.1. SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

9.2. EVALUATION

9.3. DISCUSSIONS

9.4. EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

9.5. DEFINITIONS

9.6. PAST PERFORMANCE RISK RATINGS

SECTION 00 22 10 ATTACHMENTS

1 – PROPOSAL DATA SHEETS

2 - EXPERIENCE INFORMATION

3 - RESUME FORM – KEY PERSONNEL AND QUALIFICATIONS

4 – DESIGNER – PAST PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

5 – NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1. The Fort Worth District intends to award a Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) with a target of four (4) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts to provide Repair and Alterations (RA) services of Land Ports of Entry (LPOE) in of the support the Department of Homeland Security’s LPOE RA program. The estimated maximum task order limitation is $5,000,000 with a minimum task order limitation of $2,000.

1.2. In Phase 1 of the 2 phase design build selection procedures, interested firms or joint venture entities (referred to as “Offerors”) shall submit specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully execute a wide variety of multidisciplinary services required for preparation of, but not limited to, renovation, repairs, preventive maintenance, environmental abatement, and erosion control, earthwork and operations construction activities; restoration of roads, parking lots, bridges, fences, gates, equipment and fixtures, as applicable under these MATOCs. The contracts are not only intended to execute design-build construction and design-bid-build, but to provide a timely response to remediation of facilities, e.g., maintenance, repair, asbestos and lead-based 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 to select the most responsible offerors to compete in Phase 2.

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 MATOC with a target of four (4) firm fixed-price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity contracts. Award will be fair and reasonable with regard to pricing for the initial task order, and whose proposals offer the best overall value to the Government, considering the price and non-price factors described herein.

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD (MATOC)

2.1. The Contracting Officer will award a target of four (4) firm fixed-price Indefinite Delivery Indefinite

Quantity contracts to the responsible Offerors whose proposals the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable with regard to pricing for the initial task order, and whose proposals offer the best overall value to the Government, considering the price and non-price factors described herein. All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are considered significantly more important than the price; however the initial Task Order award may not exceed the cost limitation described in Section 00 73 10, which will be provided during Phase 2 for the seed project. The intent of this solicitation is to obtain the best value proposal within the contract cost limitation for the initial task order.

There is no obligation to approach or match the contract cost limitation in the offer. Innovations in proposals will be evaluated to determine if creative ideas of the Offeror are a better value to the Government compared to the minimum criteria. After the Government evaluates and rates each proposal, the SSEB prepares the comparative analysis to determine best value and make a recommendation to the SSA which proposals represent the best value for award.

2.2. First Award and Seed Project. Award of the first IDIQ will be made to the Offeror whose proposal is determined to represent the best overall value to the Government based on the evaluated ratings and the proposed price for the initial task order. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers. The Government will not award a contract to an Offeror whose proposal contains a deficiency, as defined in FAR 15.001. If there is a lower priced, conforming offer(s), the SSA must determine that the added value of a more expensive proposal for the initial task order would justify award to that Offeror. When the SSA determines that the best value proposal is other than the lowest-priced proposal, the document must explicitly justify paying a price premium regardless of the superiority of the proposal's non-cost rating. The justification must clearly state what benefits or advantages the Government is receiving for the added price and why it is in the Government's interest to expend the additional funds. This justification is required even when the solicitation indicates that non-cost factors are more important than cost/price. Likewise, where the SSA determines the non-cost benefits offered by the higher-priced, technically superior proposal are not worth the price premium as compared to the other offeror(s), an explicit justification also is necessary. The Offeror receiving the first award will receive the task order for the seed project with the award of the basic IDIQ.

2.3. Subsequent Awards and Minimum Guarantee Task Orders. Award of the subsequent IDIQ contracts will be made to the Offeror(s) whose proposal(s) is (are) considered to represent the a target of three (3) next best value(s) to the Government based on the evaluated ratings and the proposed price for the seed project;

with a target of four (4) total IDIQ awards. The price proposed under Phase 2 will be used to assist in the evaluation of the best value proposals for award of an IDIQ.

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

3.1. 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 as joint ventures or as key team subcontractors. Joint-Venture offerors must be in compliance with FAR 19.1403. Any legally organized Offeror may submit a proposal. All designs must be under the direct supervision of appropriately licensed professionals for each discipline involved.

3.2. 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.

4.0 PHASE 1 - PROPOSAL CONTENTS 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 Vol. 1, Tab B Experience Most important factor

Factor 2 Vol. 1, Tab C Organization and Technical Approach Less important than Factor 1

Factor 3 Vol. 1, Tab D Past Performance Less important than Factor 2

5.0 PHASE 1 - VOLUME 1, TAB A - STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

5.1. 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 the following documents (if applicable). If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), include a copy of the JV Agreement. If a JV Agreement has not been finalized/approved, indicate its status. JV Agreements must clearly indicate the percentages of the JV participants, in particular the percent of the controlling party, and a clear delineation of responsibilities and authorizes between the JV parties. If the Offeror is a Limited Liability Company, include a copy of the Articles of Organization and Operating Agreement. If the Offeror has teaming agreements and/or letters of commitment, please include under this Tab.

6.0 VOLUME 1, TAB B – FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE

6.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

6.1.1. The offeror must submit at least three (3) examples of recent, relevant repair, alteration or construction experience of the firm or proposed team members using only the Experience Information Form provided as Attachment 2. Each example is not to exceed three (3) pages. Offeror shall submit no more than five (5) projects total. (Documentation submitted that exceeds twenty (20) pages will not be considered by the Government).

6.1.2. Recent means completed, or currently in progress with at least 75% construction completed, within the past seven (7) years from the date of this solicitation.

Projects will be considered relevant to this procurement if they are the same or similar in complexity, in type, scope, and magnitude:

An example of repair, alteration, or construction of a facility involving at least three of these trades;

architectural, MEP, structural or civil with a construction value of at least $200,000.

Note: Ensure the descriptions clearly identify which required project type(s) it meets.

6.1.3. Offeror must be the Prime Contractor on a minimum of two projects submitted.

6.1.4. If the Offeror is a joint venture, limited liability corporation, or integrated design-bid-build firm, provide experience information for construction projects relevant to each of the projects listed above.

If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division or unit submitting the offer.

6.1.5. The Offeror may provide a supplemental narrative (not project list), not to exceed two pages, explaining how any corporate experience that is not directly related to the specific projects above is applicable to this project and how the Government will benefit. In any case, the experience submission shall not exceed 20 pages.

6.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

6.2.1. The Government will review the project descriptions submitted, subject to the established quantity limitations, to ensure the experience requirements have been met. Experience in the following project types may be considered a strength.

(a) A minimum of two examples of repair, alteration, or construction of a facility involving any of these trades; architectural, MEP, structural or civil with a construction value of at least $200,000.

(b) A minimum of one example repair, alteration, or construction of a facility involving two of more of these trades; architectural, MEP, structural or civil with a construction value of at least $500,000.

6.2.2. The Government will review any supplemental narratives submitted, up to two pages, to determine how the corporate experience described may benefit the Government, which may be considered a strength.

7.0 VOLUME 1, TAB C – FACTOR 2 – ORGANIZATION AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

7.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

7.1.1. This information should address the Offeror’s organization and intended technical approach to executing the contract. Limit the information to fifteen (15) pages or less clearly but concisely describing the organizational and technical approach to project management and execution. The offeror shall provide an organizational chart within the fifteen-page limit. Resumes are excluded from the maximum fifteen (15) page limit. Documentation that exceeds fifteen (15) pages will not be considered by the Government.

7.1.2. Organization: Identify the construction firm that will be utilized on this contract, their technical competencies, roles and responsibilities. Demonstrate an understanding of the risk management process associated with design-build processes. Describe any previous teaming experience between current team members. Describe the team members, their resources, how their resources will be utilized, their roles and responsibilities, and include an Organizational Chart. Project Managers must have a minimum of 10 years’ experience managing construction projects or a minimum of 5 years’ experience managing construction projects combined with an Engineering or Construction Management bachelor’s degree.

Construction superintendents must have at least ten (10) years’ experience on construction projects. The Design Lead must have a minimum of five years design experience combined with an Engineering bachelor’s degree. Design Team will include a Civil, Mechanical, Structural, Architectural, and Electrical Engineer; each will have a minimum of at least two years combined with a bachelor’s degree in the appropriate trade. The resume Form – Key Personnel and Qualifications (Attachment 3) must be used.

7.1.3. Capability:

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

7.1.3.2. Describe your capability to support this project concurrently with other projected on-going or new work. Describe your resources available and your capabilities to manage and execute several concurrent Task Orders, which may be located in remote locations throughout the US. Describe why your firm is especially qualified to undertake this contract.

7.1.3.3. Single Contract and Aggregate Bonding Capacity: Evidence of Bonding Capacity: Submit a letter of commitment from a surety, signed by an officer or agent authorized to bond, that identifies the offeror’s available bonding capacity and limits that the surety will bond the Offeror, as the successful awardee for this project, taking into consideration the Cost Ceiling Limitation described in this Solicitation.

Evidence of minimum aggregate bonding capacity of $20,000,000.00. The surety must be acceptable to the Government and must appear on the Department of Treasury Circular 570 “Companies Holding Certificates of Authority as Acceptable Sureties on Federal Bonds and Acceptable Reinsuring Companies.”

If the Offeror submits evidence from an individual Surety, the individual surety must include documentation meeting the requirements of FAR 28.203 and contract clause 52.228-11. If the joint venture involves a constructor and an A-E firm and the constructor intends to provide the bond, provide a complete explanation with confirmation from the surety.

7.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

7.2.1. Organization: The Government will evaluate the construction team members proposed to be utilized on this contract, their technical competencies, roles and responsibilities to determine experience and skills.

7.2.2. Evidence of previous teaming experience between current team members will be evaluated and may be considered a strength.

7.2.3. The credentials of the proposed Project Manager will be reviewed to ensure they have an

Engineering or Construction Management degree and at least five (5) years’ experience on construction projects or a minimum of 10 years’ experience managing construction projects. Additional experience over 10 years with an Engineering or Construction Management degree may be considered a strength.

7.2.4. The credentials of the proposed Construction Superintendent(s) will be reviewed to ensure they have at least ten (10) years’ experience on construction projects. Additional experience over 15 years may be considered a strength.

7.2.5. The credentials of the proposed Design Lead will be reviewed to ensure they have an Engineering degree and at least five (5) years’ experience on design projects. Additional experience over 10 years may be considered a strength.

7.2.6. The credentials of the proposed Design Team will be reviewed to ensure they each have an Engineering degree in their specific trade and at least two (2) years’ experience on design projects.

Additional experience over 5 years with an Engineering degree in their specific trade may be considered a strength.

7.2.7. Capability:

7.2.7.1. The Government will review your identified resources in personnel, construction, plant and equipment available to self-perform required work, the type of work your firm is capable of self-performing and the types of work you intend to self-perform to evaluate your firm’s ability to comply with the requirements of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting in Section 00 72 00, if awarded this contract. Substantial ability to self-perform work required under this contract may be considered a strength.

7.2.7.2. The Government will review your identified capability to support this project concurrently with other projected on-going or new work, manage and execute several concurrent Task Orders, which may be located in remote locations throughout the Northwestern US, and firm’s qualification to undertake this contract to determine your ability to successfully perform multiple projects simultaneously. Evidence of your ability to perform up to four, NTE minimum bonding capacity of $20,000,000 projects simultaneously in geographically separate and isolated areas may be considered a strength.

7.2.7.3. The offeror must show satisfactory bonding capacity and access to a surety listed on the

Department of the Treasury’s Circular 570 for at least the amount stated in the Solicitation in clause 52.216-19, Order Limitations. Individual sureties must be acceptable per the requirements of FAR 28.203 and contract clause 52.228-11.

8.0 VOLUME 1, TAB D – FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

8.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

8.1.1. The Offeror’s construction entities shall each demonstrate past performance through the submission of recent/relevant projects, using the NAV/FAC USACE Past Performance Questions.

(Attachment 5) and Designer – Past Performance Assessment Worksheet (Attachment 4) for each project submitted in Factor 1, Experience. The Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation (Attachment 6 5) 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, Experience that does not have a final CPARS evaluation or is a non-Federal Government project. 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 to which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond, the contractor will be given an opportunity to provide rebuttal. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Tiffany Jolly Kimberly Rheaume, via e-mail at: Tiffany.S.Jolly@usace.army.mil kimberly.f.rheaume@usace.army.mil mailto: 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. There is not a page limitation for this Factor.

8.1.2. Do not request past performance questionnaires (PPQ) on projects that have final CPARS evaluations. If a CPARS evaluation exists and a PPQ is provided for the same project, the mailto:

CPARS evaluation will be reviewed as the official past performance record for the project, and the PPQ will not be considered by the Source Selection Board or the Source Selection Authority.

8.1.3. For USACE or other DoD projects which are underway but do not yet have an interim or final

CPARS evaluation, one PPQ per contract may be submitted; to be considered, the PPQ shall be signed by the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) for the contract.

8.1.4. Offerors may submit performance recognition documents received within the last seven (7) years from the date of this solicitation such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition relevant to the submitted projects to demonstrate the Offeror’s performance capabilities and customer satisfaction.

8.1.5. 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.

8.1.6. Projects will be considered relevant to this procurement if they are similar in complexity, in type, scope, and magnitude. Relevancy is defined under Tab B, Factor 1, Experience.

8.1.7. The Offeror may provide a supplemental narrative (not project lists), not to exceed two pages, explaining how any corporate past performance for the construction and design entities that is not directly related to the specific projects above is applicable to this project and how the Government will benefit.

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

8.2. RELEVANCY DETERMINATION:

8.2.1. The Government will review 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.

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

8.2.3. Contracts with lower degrees of relevance will not be as strong of predictors of likely future contract performance success and will typically have less influence on the final past performance confidence rating.

8.2.4. Contracts that have little or no relevance typically do not influence the performance confidence rating; however, any contracts with adverse past performance could reflect larger company-wide concerns and may impact upon the past performance confidence rating.

8.2.5. To be determined relevant or higher, the construction entity(ies) must each submit a collection of projects that meets all defined aspects of relevancy relative to their role on this MATOC.

8.3. CONFIDENCE EVALUATION CRITERIA:

8.3.1. The SSEB will review the past performance information available, to include 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.

8.3.2. In determining the performance confidence rating for Past Performance, the degree of relevancy / recency of all of the considered efforts; the overall performance record of the offeror on each contract assessed; number and severity of problems, the demonstrated effectiveness of corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised); and trend data will be considered. Contracts with higher degrees of relevance will typically have a greater influence on the final performance confidence rating. Contracts with lower degrees of relevance will typically have less influence on the final performance confidence rating however, any contracts with adverse past performance could reflect larger company-wide concerns and may impact upon the past performance confidence rating. The resulting relevance assessment conclusions will then be combined, along with the assessed quality of performance on prior contracts, to arrive at a single performance confidence rating for the Past Performance Factor.

8.3.3. The performance 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.

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

9.0 RATING AND EVALUATION PROCEDURES

9.1. SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

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.

9.2. EVALUATION

9.2.1. The SSEB will evaluate the proposals and assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor. Offerors for the Phase 1 submission are cautioned to put forth their best efforts for the 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.

9.2.2. The Government reserves the right to allow proposal revisions in accordance with FAR 15.306(d)(5) Exchanges with Offerors After Receipt of Proposals, if deemed necessary to determine the most highly qualified Offerors.

9.2.3. The Contracting Officer will award a target of four (4) firm fixed-price contracts to the firms whose proposals offer the best overall value to the Government, considering the price and non-price factors.

9.3. DISCUSSIONS (If Necessary) –

9.3.1. During Phase 1, the Government intends to shortlist firms without discussions to move to

Phase 2.A “Competitive Range” is a subjective determination of the most highly rated proposals in the event that discussions with Offerors are required. In such an event, the SSA will approve a competitive range of all the most highly rated proposals.

9.3.2. If discussions are held, the Government may engage in a broad give and take with each Offeror in the competitive range, in accordance…