am_2.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

The Solicitation for FY18 TEMF Vehicle Maintenance Shop, Fort Hood, Texas is amended as follows.

NOTICE: the submission date and time for the contractor proposal(s) has been extended to 19 Oct 2018, at 2pm CDT.

See SF30 Continuation Sheet(s)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 3

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 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

W912618R1986

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

27-Aug-2018

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

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, is not extended.

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

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

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

01-Oct-2018

CODE

US ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, FORT WORTH

ATTN: CESWF-CT

819 TAYLOR ST, ROOM 2A19

P.O. BOX 17300

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:

X

W9126G18R1986

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

1. Asbestos abatement and demolition of the following buildings have been removed from the scope of work:

11040, 11043, 11044, 11047, 11048, 11050 and 11052.

2. Asbestos Surveys have been removed from the RFP.

3. The Specification Section for Design-Bid-Build Selection Procedures in the RFP has been clarified by replacement.

4. The submission date and time for the contractor proposal(s) has been extended from 11 Oct 2018 to 19 Oct 2018, at 2pm CDT.

5.

The Submittal Register in the RFP has been clarified by replacement.6.

The Wage Determination Schedule in this RFP has been replaced with a more current schedule.

8. The Specification Section for Factory-Fabricated Fuel Storage Tanks in the RFP has been clarified by replacement.

9. The Specification Section for Bridge Cranes has been provided as an additional section for the RFP.

10.The Specification Section for Advanced Modeling Requirements has been provided as an additional section for the RFP

CHANGES TO SOLICITATION W9126G18R1986

CHANGES TO THE SPECIFICATIONS

1. Deleted Sections - The following subsections noted below are deleted in their entirety.

02 41 00 A Asbestos Survey Report 02 41 00 B Asbestos Survey Report 02 41 00 C Asbestos Survey Report 02 41 00 D Asbestos Survey Report 02 41 00 E Asbestos Survey Report 02 41 00 F Asbestos Survey Report 02 41 00 G Asbestos Survey Report 02 41 00 H Asbestos Survey Report

2. Replacement Sections - The following specification sections noted W9126G18R1986, AMENDMENT 0002, are replaced as noted below.

3. New Sections - The following specification sections noted W9126G18R1986, AMENDMENT 0002, are provided as noted below.

01 33 39.00 10 ADVANCED MODELING (BIM/CIM/GIS/CAD) REQUIREMENTS

41 22 13.13 BRIDGE CRANES

00 10 00 SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD, SF-1442

00 73 46 WAGE DETERMINATION SCHEDULE (Wage Decision TX 180279 Replaced) 01 33 00 A SUBMITTAL REGISTER (Replaced in its Entirety)

22 00 00 PLUMBING, GENERAL PURPOSE

33 56 10 FACTORY-FABRICATED FUEL TANKS

The General Purpose Plumbing Specification section was clarified by replacement.7.

W9126G18R1986

CHANGES TO THE DRAWINGS

4. Deleted Drawings - The following drawings noted below are deleted in their entirety.

CD102 DEMOLITION PLAN II

CD501 DEMOLITION BLDG 11050 AS-BUILTS ARCH FLOOR PLANS

CD502 DEMOLITION BLDG 11050 AS-BUILTS ARCH FLOOR PLANS & SECTIONS

CD503 DEMOLITION BLDG 11050 AS-BUILTS ARCH ELEVATIONS

CD504 DEMOLITION BLDG 11050 AS-BUILTS ARCH ELEVATIONS

CD505 DEMOLITION BLDG 11050 AS-BUILTS ARCH ELEVATIONS

CD506 DEMOLITION BLDG 11050 AS-BUILTS ARCH ELEVATIONS

CD507 DEMOLITION BLDG 11050 AS-BUILTS ARCH FOUNDATION PLAN & DETAILS

CD508 DEMOLITION BLDG 11050 AS-BUILTS ARCH FOUNDATION PLAN & DETAILS

CD509 DEMOLITION BLDG 11050 AS-BUILTS ARCH 2ND FLR FRAMING PLAN & DETAILS

CD510 DEMOLITION BLDG 11050 AS-BUILTS ARCH ROOF FRAMING PLAN

CD511 DEMOLITION BLDG 11052 AS-BUILTS ARCH FLR PLAN, ELEVS & SECTIONS

CD515 DEMOLITION BLDG 11043 WATER SUPPLY/TREATMENT

5. Replaced Drawings - The following revised drawings noted W9126G18R1986, AMENDMENT 0002 below, are replaced in their entirety.

1A-003 LIFE SAFETY PLAN 1ST FLOOR PLAN AREA A

1A-004 LIFE SAFETY PLAN 1ST FLOOR PLAN AREA B

1A-005 LIFE SAFETY PLAN 1ST FLOOR PLAN AREA C

1A-100 COMPOSITE FLOOR PLANS

1A-101 1ST FLOOR PARTIAL PLAN AREA A

1A-102 1ST FLOOR PARTIAL PLAN AREA B

1A-103 1ST FLOOR PARTIAL PLAN AREA C

1A-201 BUILDING ELEVATIONS

1A-301 BUILDING CROSS SECTION

1A-302 BUILDING LONGITUDINAL SECTION

1A-502 PLAN DETAILS II

1A-701 AIR BARRIER PLANS AND SECTIONS

1EL001 LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE & CONTROL SCHEDULE

1ET101 1ST FLOOR – AREA A TELECOMMUNICATION PLAN

1ET102 1ST FLOOR – AREA B TELECOMMUNICATION PLAN

1FA001 FIRE ALARM LEGEND

2EG601 GROUNDING RISER DIAGRAM

2ET601 TELECOMMUNICATION RISER DIAGRAM

3EG601 GROUNDING RISER DIAGRAM

3ET601 TELECOMMUNICATION RISER DIAGRAM

6EG601 GROUNDING RISER DIAGRAM

6ET601 TELECOMMUNICATION RISER DIAGRAM

CD100 OVERALL DEMOLITION PLAN

CS105 SITE PLAN V

CS106 SITE PLAN VI

G-002 INDEX OF DRAWINGS

G-100 HAUL ROUTE & PROJECT LOCATION MAP I

End of Summary of Changes

Firm-Fixed Priced construction project to Construct a Tactical Equipment Maintenance Facility at Fort Hood, Texas.

This is an Unrestricted Acquisition. The construction magnitude of this project is betw een $25,000,000 to $100,000,000.

NAICS Code: 236220 FSC: Y1EA Size Standard: $36.5 million

**If the contractor fails to provide adequate and acceptable bond documents and insurance certif icate w ithin ten days af ter contract aw ard, such f ailure shall constitute ground for termination f or default w ithout the requirement for the Contracting Off icer to f irst issue a "show cause" letter. The Government w ill not allow the contractor to w ork on the project unless the bond documents and insurance certif icate have been accepted by the Contracting Off icer and a signed Notice to Proceed has been issued to the contractor.

KRISTI LIKES 817.886.1088

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

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______10 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________720 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________FAR 52.211-10

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

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

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________0 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________ (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time of fers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

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

D. Offers providing less than _______120 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

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

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

US ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, FORT WORTH

ATTN: CESWF-CT

819 TAYLOR ST, ROOM 2A17

FORT WORTH TX 76102-0300

W9126G

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE W9126G

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

(hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

CESWF-EC

819 TAYLOR STREET, ROOM 4A17

FORT WORTH, TX 76102

FORT WORTH TX 76102

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

817-886-6403FAX:TEL: 817-886-1043 TEL: 817-886-1680 FAX:

W9126G18R1986 2

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation, Offer and Award, SF-1442

27 AUGUST 2018

11 October 2018

2PM

(AM#0002) 19 (AM#0002)

W9126G18R1986, AMENDMENT 0002

M2ECAJMC

Line

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

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

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

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

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

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

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

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

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

W9126G18R1986, AMENDMENT 0002

SECTION 00 22 11

DESIGN-BID-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

1. OVERVIEW

2. BASIS OF AWARD

3. GENERAL INSTRUCTION

3.1. GENERAL PROPOSAL FORMAT

4. EVALUATION FACTORS AND WEIGHTING, VOLUME 1, TECHNICAL

4.1. GENERAL

4.2. PROPOSAL CONTENTS AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

5. TAB A– FACTOR 1–PAST PERFORMANCE

5.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.2. RELEVANCY DETERMINATION

5.3. CONFIDENCE EVALUATION CRITERIA

6. TAB B – FACTOR 2 – SUMMARY SCHEDULE

6.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

7. TAB C –FACTOR 3 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION

7.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

8. PRICE AND OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION, VOLUME 2, PRICE

8.1. TABLE 2 - Volume 2 – PRICE AND OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION

8.2. GENERAL

9. TAB A – FACTOR 4 – PRICE (STANDARD FORM 1442 AND BID SCHEDULE)

9.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

9.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

10. TAB B – BID GUARANTEE

10.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

10.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

11. TAB C – REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

11.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

11.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

12. TAB D – SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

12.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

12.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

13. TAB E –REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS

13.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

13.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

TEMF Vehicle Maintenance Shop

14. EVALUATION CRITERIA

14.1. GENERAL

14.2. DISCUSSIONS (IF NECESSARY)

15. EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

15.1.GENERAL

15.2 REVIEW WRITE-UP

15.3 RATING SYSTEM

16. DEFINITIONS

17. PAST PERFORMANCE RATINGS

18. ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT 1- PROPOSAL DATA SHEETS

ATTACHMENT 2- PAST PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

ATTACHMENT 3- COMPANY PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRRE

ATTACHMENT 4- SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

ATTACHMENT 5- CERTIFICATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (APR 2010)

1.0 OVERVIEW

This Request for Proposal (RFP) solicits for the construction of a Tactical Equipment Maintenance Facility (TEMF), Fort Hood, Texas. The Design-Bid-Build project shall consist of the construction of Standard design Vehicle Maintenance Shop with a large TEMF, Organizational Storage with accompanying parking and Supporting facilities.

This solicitation is for a Design-Bid-Build, Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) contract at Fort Hood, Texas. The work shall be in accordance with the Request for Proposal documents. The proposed project will be a competitive Unrestricted, Full-and-Open competition resulting in the award of a firm-fixed price contract procured in accordance with FAR 15.101, Negotiated Procurement using the “Tradeoff Process”.

The Tradeoff Process permits the tradeoffs among cost, price and/or non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal. Offerors submit their performance and capability information for review and consideration by the Government. Relative weights among technical factors are provided in Section 4: Evaluation Factors & Weighting. The Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) reviews, evaluates, and rates the proposals against the source selection criteria in the RFP. A competitive range consisting of the most highly qualified technical Offerors will be established prior to discussions (if held). Concurrently, the Government analyzes price proposals of Offerors utilizing the project cost proposal. Price will not be rated, but will be a factor in making the final best value determination for award. The Source Selection Authority (SSA) compares proposals and determines the best value for the government. The perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal must merit the additional cost, and the rationale for tradeoffs must be documented.

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

The Contracting Officer (KO) will award a firm fixed-price contract to that responsible Offeror whose proposal the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines offers the best overall value to the Government. Best Value means the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement. In using the best value approach, the Government seeks to award a contract to the Offeror who gives the Government the greatest confidence that it will best meet our requirements.

This process may result in an award being made to a firm with a higher-priced offer where the decision is consistent with the evaluation criteria/factors and the SSA determines that the technical or service superiority and/or overall business approach and/or superior past performance of the higher-priced offer outweighs the cost difference.

The SSA, using sound business judgment, bases the award decision on an integrated assessment of the evaluation criteria in the factors described below. While the entire evaluation team strives for maximum objectivity, the selection process is subjective by nature and professional judgment is implicit throughout the best value process. Ultimately, the contract shall be awarded to the Offeror whose proposal, based upon the evaluation criteria, represents the best value to the Government.

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

In order to determine which proposal(s) represent the best value, the Government will be determined by a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in this RFP.

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

Conversely, as differences in price become less distinct, differences in technical ratings and relative advantages and disadvantages between proposals are of increased importance to the determination. All evaluation factors when combined are significantly more important than price.

The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer(s). The right is also reserved to reject any and all offers.

Offerors are reminded to include their best technical and price terms in their initial offer and not to automatically assume that they will have an opportunity to participate in discussions or be asked to submit a revised offer.

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

Firms formally organized as a single entity firms 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. Any legally organized Offeror may submit a proposal.

Contractor Team Arrangements. Contractor Team Arrangements are considered an arrangement in which: two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor; or (2) a potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program. In accordance with FAR Subpart 9.6, the Government will recognize the integrity and validity of contractor team arrangements; provided, the arrangements are identified and company relationships are fully disclosed in the offer. The Offeror shall identify the major or critical aspects of the requirement to be performed by those identified in the Contractor Team Arrangement. The submission must contain a narrative that clearly explains the relevance to a particular factor of information concerning a company that is part of a Contractor Team Arrangement. The Government will consider the adequacy of this explanation in deciding the relevance of the information to this procurement.

Any Offeror submitting an offer in the name of a joint venture, shall include a fully executed copy of the joint venture agreement with the offer. Joint venture agreements which require SBA approval may be submitted absent the requisite SBA Servicing Agency approving authorities’ signature; however, the Offeror shall submit evidence from the Offeror’s SBA Servicing Agency that the Offeror has notified and discussed the proposed joint venture for this project with the appropriate SBA personnel.

Offerors shall submit their proposal per the instructions provided in Section 00 21 00. Proposals are due no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

3.1 PROPOSAL FORMAT:

(1) Submit only the electronic documents. Submit only the electronic files specifically requested. All files submitted shall be in PDF format. Do not submit excess information, to include audio-visual materials, electronic media, etc. All pages shall be numbered.

(2) PDF pages shall be formatted to print on 8 ½ by 11 inch paper, unless another paper size is specifically authorized 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. PDF drawings and summary schedule diagrams shall be sized to print on 11x17 inch paper.

(3) Hard copies shall not be submitted, with the exception of the bid guarantee. Refer to Section 00 21 00,

1.12 Bid Guarantee for bid guarantee submission requirements.

(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”.

(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.

(6) For submissions with page limitations, the corresponding PDF pages will be counted.

(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.

(8) Within three (3) days of contract award, the contractor receiving the award shall electronically submit their conformed proposal.

4.0 EVALUATION FACTORS AND WEIGHTING, VOLUME 1, TECHNICAL

4.1 GENERAL:

Offerors are invited to submit a proposal, as indicated below. (AM#0002) Attachment 1, Proposal Data Sheet, shall be included with Volume 1, Technical. (AM#0002) The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria described herein, using the evaluation rating systems outlined in the Design-Bid-Build selection procedures. Price information will be evaluated for fairness, reasonableness, and for material unbalancing, as described herein. The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.

4.2. PROPOSAL CONTENTS AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

VOLUME 1 – Technical

Table 1 - Volume 1 – PROPOSAL CONTENTS AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

Location Factor Number Description Relative Importance

TAB A Factor 1 PAST PERFORMANCE Most Important

TAB B Factor 2 SUMMARY SCHEDULE Less Important than Factor 1. More Important than Factor 3.

TAB C Factor 3 SMALL BUSINESS

PARTICIPATION

Less Important than Factor 1 & Factor 2.

5.0 TAB A – FACTOR 1 - PAST PERFORMANCE

5.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

5.1.1. The Offerors shall demonstrate past performance through the submission of similar projects, using the Construction – Past Performance Assessment Worksheet (AM#0002)(PPAW Attachment 2). (AM#0002) If the Offeror is a Joint Venture, Partnership, Teaming Arrangement, or Parent company/subsidiary/affiliate as identified in the offeror’s proposal, provide past performance information for 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. If projects were design-bid-build, identify them as such. Offerors can submit no more than five (5) projects (up to one (AM#0002) proposal data sheet PPAW (AM@0002) per project) that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the scope of the work for this solicitation to be considered relevant. Two (2) of the five (5) projects submitted for past performance may be a current construction project with at least 50% construction progress completed. If offeror is proposing as a Joint Venture (JV), Partnership

W9126G18R1986, AMENDMENT 0002

TEMF Vehicle Maintenance Shop

M2ECAJMC

Line

M2ECAJMC

Line and/or Teaming Arrangement and past performance cannot be provided as such, each partner shall submit past performance information, with no more than three (3) projects each.

5.1.2. The Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation (Attachment 3) is provided for the Offeror to submit to the client for each project the Offeror included for Factor 1, Past Performance that does not have an interim or final CPARS or CCASS 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 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 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, Kristi Likes, via e-mail at: Kristi.L.Likes@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date.

5.1.2.1. 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.

5.1.2.2. Do not request PPQ on projects that have interim or final CPARS or CCASS evaluations. If an interim or final CPARS or CCASS evaluation exists and a PPQ is provided for the same project, the CPARS or CCASS 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.

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

5.1.3. (AM#0001) Offerors shall submit the CPARS, CCASS or PPQ relevant to each project with their proposal for Factor 1, Past Performance. (AM#0001) Offerors are not required to submit any additional past performance information. The Government will utilize CPARS, CCASS and any other information deemed relevant to assess confidence in the Offeror’s ability to perform.

5.1.3.1. Offerors may submit information on past performance issues and corrective actions taken to prevent these issues from reoccurring. Discuss whether these corrective actions have been implemented on contracts awarded subsequent to the performance issues, the effectiveness of the corrective actions, and POC information for the subsequent contracts.

5.1.4. 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 rests with the Offeror.

5.1.5. 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.

W9126G18R1986, AMENDMENT 0002

mailto:Kristi.L.Likes@usace.army.mil

5.2 RELEVANCY DETERMINATION:

5.2.1. Offeror may submit no more than five (5) projects. Offeror must have a minimum of two (2) projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the Tactical Equipment Maintenance Facility for this solicitation AND with the construction value of at least $25 million to be considered very relevant. Two (2) of the five (5) projects submitted for past performance may be a current construction project with at least 50% construction progress completed. Projects submitted at 100% complete must have been completed within the last six (6) years from the date of the solicitation.

5.2.2. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant the past performance is to the project under consideration. Relevancy is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance. 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.

5.2.3. 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.

5.2.4. 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.

5.2.5. 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 have impact upon the past performance confidence rating.

5.2.6. Based on the relevancy of the projects submitted, an overall relevancy determination will be assessed as an interim step prior to establishing a confidence rating.

5.3 CONFIDENCE EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.3.1. The SSEB will review the past performance information available, to include CPARS, CCASS 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 Offerors 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. Owners/references may be asked to comment on items such as quality of construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting construction errors, warranty work, etc. 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. In determining the performance confidence rating for Past Performance, the degree of relevancy 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. Contracts which are comparatively more recent may be better predictors of likely future success than older contracts. The resulting relevant/recent 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.

5.3.3. 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 (Neutral) confidence will be assigned.

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

6.0 TAB B – FACTOR 2 – Schedule Summary

6.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

6.1.1. Proposed Contract Duration: The Offeror shall propose the overall contract duration in the CLIN Schedule, not to exceed the maximum contract duration specified in Section 01 00 00.00 44. The proposed duration will become the contractually binding schedule. In assessing the reasonableness of the proposed contract duration, the Government will take into account how well the proposed summary schedule supports the proposed duration, as well as use other information, such as but not limited to, independent judgment concerning logic, constraints and typical construction durations. A proposed contract duration shorter than the maximum allowed duration will receive additional rating consideration, provided the schedule is realistic and deemed to be achievable. The Government will consider an unreasonably condensed contract duration, which places additional cost or schedule risk on the Government or which may create a risk of contract or performance failure, as a significant weakness or a deficiency, depending upon the evaluators' judgment.

6.1.2. Summary Schedule: Submit a summary level schedule for construction. This schedule will, after contract award, be replaced with a project schedule as required by Section 01 32 01.00 10 – Project Schedule. The schedule shall be task oriented, indicating the number of calendar days, after notice to proceed, by which milestones are to be achieved. Offeror may use a critical path or other method of their choice; however, schedules shall be graphically represented and shall include, at a minimum, Activity ID, Activity Description, Original Duration, early start and early finish dates, and total float for each activity.

The proposed schedule shall include an activity that shows the proposed overall contract duration in calendar days. Schedules must include the following items:

(a) Show activities for the Large TEMF, Organizational Storage Building, POL Storage Building, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Storage Building, site work and utilities in sufficient detail to demonstrate an understanding of the scope of work to include design documents and to substantiate the reasonableness and realism of the proposed duration.

(b) Show submittal preparation and review/approval activities for long lead items to demonstrate an understanding of the submittal process and minimum review times for Government approved submittals. (See Section 01 33 00 Submittal Procedures.)

(c) Show activities for work in sufficient detail to demonstrate your understanding of the requirements for working in this area. (See Section 01 00 00.00 44 Construction Schedule).

(d) Show turnover per design documents. The time to complete the construction and turnover to the Government must consider the requirement for the Contractor’s CQC completion inspection and the subsequent joint Contractor-Government turnover inspection. Show closeout activities, to include the Red Zone meeting, record drawings, O&M manuals, to demonstrate your understanding of the closeout requirements for the contract

(e) Show activities for coordination with private utility providers and demonstrate your understanding of planning for completion of construction.

(f) Indicate the anticipated overall critical path on the schedule.

6.1.3. Evaluation Criteria: The Government will evaluate the schedule to assess the strength of understanding of the project scope, coordination and restrictions which must be considered in the schedule including long lead items, private utility provider coordination, and closeout process. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's capability to schedule the complete project within the proposed contract duration and the realism of the schedule. A schedule that offers advantage(s) to the Government over one that merely indicates an adequate understanding of the scope, restrictions, major milestones and general understanding of the contract requirements will receive additional consideration.

7 TAB C – FACTOR 3 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION

7.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

7.1.1 All Offerors shall identify the extent to which Small Businesses (SBs), Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (VOSBs), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (SDVOSBs), HUBZone Small Businesses, Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDBs), Woman-Owned Small Businesses (WOSBs) and Historically Black Colleges/Universities or Minority Institutions (HBCU/MIs) would be utilized in the performance of this proposed contract. For small businesses, as defined by the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code applicable to this solicitation, the Offeror shall identify their own participation as a SB, VOSB, SDVOSB, HUBZONE SB, SDB, WOSB, or HBCU/MI, and it will be considered in evaluating the proposed small business participation plan (use Attachment 4 - Small Business Participation Plan).

7.1.2 Offerors must propose goals for Small Business Participation. Small business participation goals are to be a percentage of total contract dollars (total proposed amount including options). Provide an overall goal to be accomplished through collective small business participation from any type of small business, to include all small business programs, and propose individual goals for each small business program

7.1.3 The Offerors proposal must meet the minimum Total Small Business Participation goal (all types of small business combined) of 15% of total proposed contract value including all options for this acquisition.

7.1.4 A small business Offeror also receives credit for their small business participation as a Prime Contractor and can apply their dollar value when calculating percentages in all the applicable small business categories.

7.1.5 Evaluation Criteria: Small Business Participation Plans (from large and small businesses) will be evaluated on the basis of:

a. The extent to which Small Business (SB) firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in the proposal;

b. The extent of commitment to Small Business firms (for example, enforceable commitments will be given additional consideration than non-enforceable commitments);

c. The complexity and variety of the work small business firms are to perform;

d. Past performance of the Offerors in complying with the requirement of the clauses 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, and 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (large business only); and

e. The extent of participation of SB firms in terms of value of the total acquisition and the extent of which the proposal meets or exceeds the small business participation goals for this acquisition.

8 PRICE AND OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION, VOLUME 2, PRICE

8.1 Table 2 - Volume 2 – PRICE AND OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION

Factor Location Description Relative Importance

FACTOR 4

Vol. 2, TAB A

PRICE and Other Required Information

Not rated.

All evaluation factors when combined are significantly more important than price

Vol. 2, TAB B BID GUARANTEE Acceptable/Unacceptable

Vol. 2, TAB C REQUIRED PRE-AWARD

INFORMATION

Acceptable/Unacceptable

Vol. 2, TAB D SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (not applicable to small businesses)

Acceptable/Unacceptable

Vol. 2, TAB E REPRESENTATION AND

CERTIFICATIONS

Acceptable/Unacceptable

8.2 GENERAL

Submit the other required information in a separate envelope labeled: “Volume 2 – Price and Other Required Information.”

9 TAB A – FACTOR 4 PRICE (STANDARD FORM 1442 AND BID SCHEDULE)

9.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Submit the properly filled out and executed SF 1442, along with the Bid Schedule, containing proposed line item and total pricing, as well as the proposed contract duration. See instructions in Section 00 21

00, “Instructions to Offerors”.

Supplemental Price Breakdown. If deemed necessary to evaluate the price proposals, the Government will request a price breakdown of the contract line items in a sealed envelope marked “Price Breakdown Information”, in Excel format. The Government will provide details on where and how to send the breakdown. This information will not be needed sooner than three working days after the proposal submission due date. This information is not an opportunity for an Offeror to revise its non-price or price proposal.

9.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

Price will not be rated or scored, but will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness through the use of a price analysis. The price evaluators will also check for appearance of unbalanced line item prices. Offerors are cautioned to distribute direct costs, such as material, labor, equipment, subcontracts, etc. and to evenly distribute indirect costs, such as job overhead, home office overhead, bond, etc., to the appropriate contract line items.

P arties shall presume that field overhead costs through the proposed contract duration are inclusive in the offered price for the contract.

If deemed necessary, the supplemental price breakdown information will be used to assist the Government in performing the price evaluations described above.

10 TAB B – BID GUARANTEE

10.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Submit the Bid Guarantee in accordance with FAR 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee.

10.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

This item is not rated. The Government will review the Bid Guarantee for legal sufficiency. The Bid Guarantee must be legally sufficient. Failure to submit a bid guarantee may make the Offeror’s proposal ineligible for award.

11 TAB C – REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

11.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Submit this information for the Contracting Officer’s determination of Offeror responsibility, which includes the following:

11.1.1 A list of present commitments, including the dollar value thereof, and name of the organization under which the work is being performed. Include names and telephone numbers of personnel within each organization who are familiar with the prospective contractor’s performance.

11.1.2 A certified statement listing; (1) each contract award within the preceding three month period exceeding $1,000,000.00 in value with a brief description of the contract; and (2) each contract award within the preceding three year period not already physically completed and exceeding $5,000,000.00 in value with a brief description of the contract.

11.1.3 If the prospective contractor is a Joint Venture, each Joint Venture member will be required to submit the above defined certification.

11.1.4 ATTACHMENT 5 - Certification Regarding Responsibility Matters (Apr 2010).

11.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

The Contracting Officer shall use this information in making a responsibility determination for award to the Successful Offeror, in accordance with FAR Part 9. Failure to achieve an affirmative responsibility determination will make the Offeror ineligible for award.

12 TAB D - SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (not applicable to small businesses)

12.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Subcontracting Plans shall reflect and be consistent with the commitments offered in the Small Business Participation Plan. In accordance with DFARS 215.304 (c), when an evaluation assesses the extent that small businesses and HBCUs are specifically identified in proposals, the small businesses and HBCUs considered in the evaluation shall be listed in any subcontracting plan submitted.

In accordance with DFARS 215.304 (c), any small business and HBCUs identified in Factor 4, Small Business Participation (Section 00 22 11 Attachment 4) must be included in the subcontracting plan. Subcontracting Plan shall reflect and be consistent with the commitments offered in the Small Business Participation Plan.

12.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

The Government will evaluate the Plan in accordance with AFARS Appendix DD (http://farsite.hill.af.mil/VFAFARA.HTM) and with the requirements of FAR Clause 52.219-9. Offerors are encouraged to review AFARS Appendix DD for how the subcontracting plan will be reviewed. To be acceptable, subcontracting plans must address all requirements in AFARS Appendix DD, DD-301.

Only the selected Offeror’s plan will be reviewed and must be approved prior to award of the contract.

13 TAB E – REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS

13.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Confirm that the Offeror’s representations and certifications have been completed in the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) within the System for Award Management (SAM) website in accordance with FAR 52.204-8. Submit the representations and certifications not covered by ORCA that are included in Section 00 45 00 of this solicitation, under this tab.

The representations and certifications submitted under this tab and online will be reviewed to ensure the Offeror’s representations are consistent, accurate and in accordance with regulation. It will not be rated.

14 EVALUATION CRITERIA

14.1 GENERAL:

The Source Selection Evaluation Board will evaluate the proposals and assign a consensus rating for each technical evaluation factor, utilizing the evaluation and rating system described in Section 00 22 11.

Vol 2, Tabs B, C, D, and E, will be reviewed and determined “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”. The following definitions apply to Volume 2 only:

“Acceptable”: Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

14.2. DISCUSSIONS (If necessary)

The Government intends to award without discussions. A “Competitive Range” is a subjective determination of

W9126G18R1986, AMENDMENT 0002

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/VFAFARA.HTM 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.

If discussions are held, the Government may engage in a broad give and take with each Offeror in the competitive range, in accordance with FAR 15.306 (d). The Government will provide the Offeror an advance agenda for the discussions. During discussions, the Government may ask the Offeror to further explain its proposal and to answer questions about it.

Upon conclusion of…