B3a_AM1_20R0006.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The Solicitation for Repair Airfield Drainage; Laughlin AFB, Texas is amended as follows.

See SF30 Continuation Sheet(s)

NOTE: Proposal Receipt date is 21 November 2019; at 2:00 p.m.,CT.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 2

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15C. 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 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

W9126G20R0006

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

24-Oct-2019

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, X is not extended.

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

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

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

24 -Oct-2019

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 CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9126G20R0006

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

CHANGES TO SOLICITATION W9126G20R0006

CHANGES TO CLIN SCHEDULE

1. CLIN Schedule: The CLIN Notes have been updated and replaced with the accompanying new CLIN Notes, bearing the notation W9126G20R0006-0001:

CHANGES TO DIVISION 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

2. Section 00 21 00 INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS: Section 00 21 00 has been updated and replaced in its entirety, bearing the notation W9126G20R0006-0001:

CHANGES TO THE SPECIFICATIONS

3. Replacement Sections: Replace the following section, with the accompanying new section of the same number and title bearing the notation W9126G20R0006-0001:

01 00 00.00 44 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE

4. Added Sections: The following section has been added to the solicitation, bearing the notation W9126G20R0006-0001:

01 52 00.00 44 GOVERNMENT FIELD OFFICE

5. Deleted Sections: The following section has been deleted from the solicitation.

01 50 00 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES AND CONTROLS

ADDED APPENDIX

6. Added Appendix.- The following appendix has been added to the solicitation, bearing the notation W9126G20R0006-0001:

APPENDIX A GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS

ADDED ATTACHMENT

7. Added Attachment.- The following attachment has been added to the solicitation, bearing the notation W9126G20R0006-0001:

10-16-19 HAUL ROUTE EXHIBIT.pdf

End of Summary of Changes

Laughlin AFB, Repair Airfield Drainage LA19RAD

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS

DIVISION 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

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

00 11 00.02 CONTRACT LINE ITEM SCHEDULE

00 21 00 INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

00 45 00 REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS

00 72 00 CONTRACT CLAUSES

00 73 00 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

DIVISION 01 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 00 00.00 44 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE

01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE

01 33 00 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES

01 33 29 SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING

01 35 13.10 00 SPECIAL PROJECT PROCEDURES - SURVEYING

01 35 13.20 00 SPECIAL PROJECT PROCEDURES - CAD

01 35 13.30 00 SPECIAL PROJECT PROCEDURES - GIS

01 35 18.00 44 SPECIAL PROJECT PROCEDURES FOR LAUGHLIN AIR FORCE BASE

01 35 26 GOVERNMENTAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS

01 42 00 SOURCES FOR REFERENCE PUBLICATIONS

01 45 00.00 10 QUALITY CONTROL

01 45 00.15 10 RESIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM CONTRACTOR MODE(RMS CM)

01 50 00 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES AND CONTROLS

01 52 00.00 44 GOVERNMENT FIELD OFFICE AMENDMENT NO. 0001

01 57 20.00 10 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

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

01 57 25.00 44 SWPP PLAN INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE REPORT FORM

01 58 00 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION

01 62 35 RECYCLED / RECOVERED MATERIALS

01 74 19 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE MANAGEMENT

01 78 00 CLOSEOUT SUBMITTALS

01 78 23 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE DATA

DIVISION 02 - EXISTING CONDITIONS

02 41 00 DEMOLITION

DIVISION 03 - CONCRETE

03 30 00 CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE

03 30 53 MISCELLANEOUS CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE

03 31 01.00 10 CAST-IN-PLACE STRUCTURAL CONCRETE FOR CIVIL WORKS

03 42 13.00 10 PLANT-PRECAST CONCRETE PRODUCTS FOR BELOW GRADE

CONSTRUCTION

DIVISION 31 - EARTHWORK

31 00 00 EARTHWORK

31 05 21 GEOGRID SOIL REINFORCEMENT

31 23 00.00 20 EXCAVATION AND FILL

DIVISION 32 - EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS

32 11 20 SUBBASES FOR FLEXIBLE PAVING

32 11 23 AGGREGATE BASE COURSES

32 11 23.23 BASE COURSE DRAINAGE LAYERS

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1

<AM#0001>

</AM#0001>

W9126G20R0006-0001 m2ecdcwn Cross-Out

32 12 15.13 ASPHALT PAVING FOR AIRFIELDS

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

32 13 14.13 CONCRETE PAVING FOR AIRFIELDS AND OTHER HEAVY DUTY

PAVEMENTS

32 17 23 PAVEMENT MARKINGS

32 31 13.53 HIGH-SECURITY CHAIN LINK FENCES AND GATES

32 92 19 SEEDING

32 92 23 SODDING

DIVISION 33 - UTILITIES

33 05 23 TRENCHLESS UTILITY INSTALLATION

33 40 00 STORM DRAINAGE UTILITIES

-- End of Project Table of Contents --

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 2

W9126G20R0006-0001

Section: 00 11 00 W9126G19R0025

REPAIR AIRFIELD DRAINAGE

FY 19

Laughlin AFB, Texas

CONTRACT LINE ITEM SCHEDULE

NOTES:

NOTE NO. 1. To better facilitate the receipt and proposal process, all modifications to proposals are to be submitted on copies of the latest Contract Line Item (CLIN) schedules as published in the solicitation or the latest amendment thereto. In lieu of indicating additions/deductions to line items, all Offerors should state their revised prices for each item.

NOTE NO. 2. Offerors must insert a price on all numbered items of the CLIN Schedule. Failure to do so may result in the offer being unacceptable

NOTE NO. 3. All the extensions of the unit prices shown will be subject to verification by the Government. In case of variation between the unit price and the extension, the unit price will be considered to be the offer.

NOTE NO. 4. The Offeror shall propose a total integrated contract duration in number of calendar days after the Notice to Proceed (NTP) is received by the Contractor, whether via electronic means or hard copy, whichever is the earliest method of delivery. The total number of proposed calendar days for design and construction through completion, ready for turnover shall not exceed the number of calendar days specified in Section 01 00 00.00 44 Construction Schedule. The proposed duration shall become the required contract duration. The Government may issue the NTP via e-mail or Facsimile (FAX) or by other means. Day number 1 is the day after the date of receipt of the NTP. See also Sections 00 72 00 Contract Clauses, clause Commencement, Prosecution and Completion of Work.

NOTE NO. 5. Responders are advised that this requirement may be delayed, cancelled or revised at any time during the solicitation, selection, evaluation, negotiation and/or final award process based on decisions related to DOD changes in force structure and disposition of the Armed Forces.

NOTE NO. 6. Any proposal that is materially unbalanced as to prices for the Base Schedule may be rejected. An unbalanced proposal is one that is based on prices significantly less than the cost for some work and prices that are significantly overstated for other work and can also exist where only overpricing or underpricing exists.

NOTE NO. 7. ABBREVIATIONS

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

a. JOB

END OF CLIN SCHEDULE

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

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

The required response date/time has changed from 04-Nov-2019 10:00 AM to 21-Nov-2019 02:00 PM.

The Issued By organization has changed from

US ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, FORT WORTH

ATTN: CESWF-CT

819 TAYLOR ST, ROOM 2A17

FORT WORTH TX 76102-0300

to

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS FORT WORTH

819 TAYLOR ST, CT OFC RM 2A17

FORT WORTH TX 76102-0300

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

The following have been added by full text:

INSTRUCTION TO OFFERS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

PART I – GENERAL INFORMATION

A. INQUIRIES

OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

Questions and/or comments relative to these documents should be submitted via e-mail or mailed to:

Contract Specialist – Primary POC U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Worth District ATTN: Sara Guzman-Walter Federal Building 819 Taylor Street, Rm 2A17 Fort Worth, Texas 76102-0300

Phone: (817) 886-1049 Fax: (817) 886-6403

Email: Sara.N.Guzman-Walter@usace.army.mil

Bidder Inquiry 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

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 continue.

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

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.

The Solicitation Number is: W9126G20R0006 The Bidder Inquiry Key is: HFK48N-E7Z4SB

Last day to submit ProjNet questions is seven (7) calendar days prior to proposal due date 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 be afforded a substantive response.

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.

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

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

Oral explanations or instructions are not binding. Any information given to an Offeror which impacts the solicitation and/or offer will be given in the form of a written amendment to the solicitation.

As this is a competitive negotiation acquisition, there is no public bid opening and no information will be given out as to the number of Offerors or the results of the competition until all awards are made.

B. DIRECTIONS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS

1. In an effort to reduce paperwork and cost, ALL proposals shall be submitted electronically via the FEDBIZOPPS (FBO.GOV) “Electronic Response” feature. The FBO vendor user guide has information & instructions on how to utilize this feature. The FBO vendor user guide is accessible via the following web URL:

https://www.fbo.gov/downloads/FBO_Vendor_Guide.pdf.

2. DELIVERY of hard copies and/or CD-ROMs of offers, modifications thereto, or cancellations of offers will not be accepted.

3. OFFERS BY TELEGRAPH. Offers received by telegraph, modifications thereto, or cancellations of offers will or will not be accepted.

4. FACSIMILE OFFERS. Facsimile offers, modifications thereto, or cancellations of offers will or will not be accepted.

5. EMAIL. Offers received by email, modifications thereto, or cancellations of offers will or will not be accepted. Only the FBO submitted proposal will be accepted and evaluated by the Government.

PART II – PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

A. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS

1. REQUIREMENT FOR SEPARATE PRICE AND TECHNICAL PROPOSALS.

a. Each Offeror must submit both a Price Proposal and a Technical Proposal. The Price Proposal and the Technical Proposal must be submitted as separate volumes. Ensure that the outside of each separate volume is clearly marked to indicate its contents; and the identity of the Offeror.

b. Both the Price Proposal and the Technical Proposal must be received by the closing date and time set for receipt of proposals.

c. No dollar amounts from the Price Proposal are to be included in the Technical Proposal.

d. All information intended to be evaluated as part of the Technical Proposal must be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal. Do not merely cross-reference similar material in the Price Proposal, or vice versa. Also, do not include links to websites in lieu of incorporating information into your proposal.

e. Do not include exceptions to the terms and conditions of the solicitation in either the technical or price proposal.

Should the offer include any standard company terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation, the offer may be determined "unacceptable" and thus ineligible for award. Should the Offeror have any questions related to specific terms and conditions, these should be resolved prior to submission of the offer.

2. PROPOSAL FORMAT & GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

a. 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 shall be numbered. A single side of a sheet of paper equals one page.

b. Offerors are advised to follow the FBO instructions for uploading files, to include files larger than 10MB (java upload). FBO has not posted official file size limitations for its electronic response module; however, it has been observed that uploads to FBO tend to be problematic when the files are sized 100MB or greater. If needed, Offerors are advised to break the files down into smaller sections in order to upload it to the system.

c. Although hard copies are not accepted, each file shall be clearly indexed, and logically assembled. Font size shall be 10 or larger. An unusual font style, such as script or condensed print, shall not be used for any submission.

All page margins shall be at least one (1) inch wide, but may include headers and footers of the solicitation, project title, and company. Pages shall 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 11x14 or 11x17 paper size unless specifically authorized in this section for a particular submission. Offerors shall prepare proposals in the English language. Proposals shall be in a narrative format, organized and titled so that each section of the proposal follows the order and format of the factors. Information presented should be organized so as to pertain to only the evaluation factor in the section that the information is presented. Information pertaining to more than one evaluation factor should be repeated in each section for each applicable factor. Electronic files shall be Microsoft Windows compatible. Files shall be submitted in their native format (i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc.), or if in pdf format, shall be in searchable text. If the electronic files are of a size at which they must be compressed (zipped), they shall be compressed into one zipped folder.

d. Interested parties shall submit responses no later than the date specified on the solicitation document. The time & date of proposal receipt will be the upload completion / delivery time & date recorded within FBO. Do not assume that electronic submission will occur instantaneously. Large files (e.g. 10MB or more) will take some time to upload. Offerors should time their upload effort with prudence by not waiting until the last few minutes—this will allow for unexpected delays in the transmittal process and troubleshooting. Proposal submission difficulties should be coordinated with the Federal Service Desk at https://fsd.gov and/or 1-866-606-8220 (Mon-Fri 8am-8pm Eastern Time UTC -5:00). Experience shows that if an upload doesn’t complete until after the deadline, the FBO system WILL NOT COMPLETE. The FBO system will automatically shut off the “Electronic Submission” feature at the specified deadline--once that occurs, the feature will disappear from the announcement. Offerors are encouraged to keep a copy of the upload confirmation for their record. Submissions after the deadline may be emailed to Sara Guzman-Walter, Contract Specialist at -sara.n.guzman-walter@usace.army.mil and Scott Bonner, Contracting Officer at scott.bonner@usace.army.mil, but be advised they will be considered late and as such will be processed in accordance with FAR 15.208.

e. “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”.

f. 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.

g. 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.

3. VENTURE PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS. When proposing as a joint venture, all members of the joint venture shall sign 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. For 8(a) or 8(a) joint venture, the Offeror shall ensure that it complies with the applicable requirements of 13 CFR Part 124 respectively.

4. BID GUARANTEE. A Bid Guarantee will be required with this proposal. The penal sum of the bond is as stated in provision 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee.

5. DISCUSSIONS. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors, in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors—Competitive Acquisitions. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary.

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.

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 discussions, those Offerors still considered the most highly rated, will be afforded an opportunity to submit their proposal revisions for final evaluation and selection.

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

6. COST OR PRICING DATA. Offerors are not required to submit Cost or Pricing Data with their offers.

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS

SUPPLEMENTAL INSTRUCTIONS

A. OVERVIEW

The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria described herein, using the evaluation rating systems outlined for selection procedures. Price information will be evaluated for fairness, reasonableness, and for material unbalancing, as described herein.

Evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.

B. BASIS OF AWARD

The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed-price contract to the responsible Offeror whose proposal conforms to the Request for Proposal (RFP), is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, considering the non-price factors described herein, and price as determined by the SSA. All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are considered significantly more important than the price. The intent of this RFP is to obtain the best value proposal. After the Government individually evaluates each proposal, the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority will compare proposals to determine which proposal represents the best value. 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 Contracting Officer/SSA must determine that the added value of a more expensive proposal would justify award to that Offeror.

PROPOSAL CONTENTS AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

C. VOLUME 1, TECHNICAL PROPOSAL – SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

Submit the Technical proposal in a searchable, unsecured PDF file titled:

“W9126G20R0006_Firmname_Volume 1_Factor#_Description.pdf”

*Enter your firm’s name for Firmname. Enter applicable factor number and description for Factor#_Description.

Location

Factor

Description

Relative Importance

Vol. 1 TAB A

Factor 1

Past Performance

Most Important Factor

Vol. 1 TAB B

Factor 2

Schedule Summary

2nd Most Important Factor. Less important than Factor 1, more important than Factor 3.

Vol. 1 TAB C

Factor 3

Small Business Participation Plan

3rd Most Important Factor. Less important than Factors 1 or 2.

1. VOLUME 1, FACTOR 1 – TAB A, PAST PERFORMANCE

a. Submission Requirements

1. The Offeror shall each demonstrate past performance through the submission of similar projects, using the Past Performance Assessment Worksheet, (See Appendix D, Attachment 1).

If the Offeror is a joint venture, 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. Offeror shall submit a minimum of three (3) and no more than five (5) projects completed or substantially completed within 6 years from the date of this solicitation that best represents their experience similar to the scope of work for this solicitation. At least one (1) project submitted must be 100% completed. Any additional projects submitted (not to exceed the maximum) must be at least 50% construction progress completed. If Offeror is proposing as a Joint Venture (JV) and past performance cannot be provided as a JV, each partner shall submit past performance information, not to exceed the maximum of five (5) projects total.

2. The Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), (See Appendix D, Attachment 2), is provided for the Offeror to submit to the client for each project the Offeror included in its proposal for Factor 3, Past Performance that does not have a final CCASS or 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 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, Sara Guzman- Walter, via e-mail at: sara.n.guzman-walter@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date.

Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposals PPQ’s previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

3. Do not request a PPQ on project(s) that have final evaluations. If a final CCASS or CPARS evaluation exists and a PPQ is provided for the same project, the CCASS or 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 Evaluation Board or the Source Selection Authority.

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

5. Offerors may submit performance recognition documents received within the last six (6) years, 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.

6. 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.

7. 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(s) of team members (Partnership, Joint Venture, Teaming Arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries 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.

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

(a) Prime and/or Subcontractor experience in renovation/repair of airfield drainage or paving or equivalent commercial airfield type: and

(b) Prime Contractor Management of a Construction value of at least $20,000,000.00; and

(c ) Prime and/or Subcontractor experience in underground storm water drainage, and

(d) Prime and/or Subcontractor experience in jack and bore with drainage piping under pavement.

9. 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.

b. RELEVANCY DETERMINATION:

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

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

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.

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.

5. 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. For an overall relevancy determination of “relevant” or higher, the Offeror must demonstrate past performance that meets any defined aspects of relevancy on this project.

c. CONFIDENCE EVALUATION CRITERIA:

1. The SSEB will review the past performance information available, to include CCASS, CPARS and other past performance information deemed relevant, to determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, the Government will only evaluate past performance of the division or unit submitting the offer. If the Government cannot establish the Offeror’s relevant past performance, it reserves the right to utilize the Past Performance Questionnaire to conduct telephone interviews on any source it deems relevant to the evaluation. Owners/references may be asked to comment on items such as quality of design or construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and contractor, 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.

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. 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.

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

2. VOLUME 1, FACTOR 2 – TAB B, SCHEDULE SUMMARY

a. Submission Requirements:

1. Proposed Contract Duration and Phasing: The Offeror shall propose the overall contract duration in the appropriate Contract Line Item Number in the CLIN Schedule, not to exceed the maximum contract duration specified in Section 01 00 00.00 44.

2. Summary Schedule: The Offeror shall submit a summary level schedule for construction.

This summary schedule will, after contract award, be replaced with a project schedule as required by Section 01 32 01.00 10: Project Schedule. The summary 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 his choice; however, schedules shall be graphically represented and shall include, as a minimum, Activity ID, Activity Description, Original Duration, early start and early finish dates, and total float for each activity.

3. The proposed schedule shall include an activity that shows the proposed overall contract duration in calendar days. Give attention to the following features:

(a) Show the overall construction phase for each critical work breakdown structure, (i.e.

mobilization, demolition, etc.).

(b) Show as-built submissions and close-out processes.

(c) Constraints: Offeror must demonstrate the capability and flexibility to plan and schedule the complete project to meet the proposed contract completion period. Clearly identify any constraints on the schedules presented (e.g., labor or material availability, permits, weather, etc.). Indicate the anticipated overall critical path on the schedule.

4. The page limitation for Factor 2 is limited to two (2) pages (11x17) and 80 activities. Offers exceeding the page limitation for this factor will not be reviewed past the second page.

b. Evaluation Criteria:

1. Proposed Contract Duration and Phasing: This duration and phasing will become the contractually binding schedule. The Government will evaluate the contract duration, as proposed by the Offeror herein and also on the Price Proposal Schedule, not to exceed the maximum allowed duration listed. In assessing the reasonableness of the proposed contract duration, the Government may 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, or proposed phasing providing for early turnover of facility, 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.

2. Summary Schedule: The Government will evaluate the schedule to assess the strength of understanding of the project scope, restrictions which must be considered in the schedule e.g., sequencing of work, long lead items, etc. The Government will evaluate the strength of understanding of events associated with the Offeror's capability to schedule the complete project within the proposed contract duration and the realism of the schedule. The Government will evaluate for logic, reasonableness, how it facilitates meeting the proposed contract duration. The packaging plan should minimize risk to the Contractor and to the Government for tear-out and coordination. 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 various events that can affect start and completion of construction will receive additional consideration.

3. VOLUME 1, FACTOR 3 – TAB C, SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

GENERAL: All Offerors (both large and small businesses) will be evaluated on the extent of participation of small business concerns in performance of this contract opportunity.

Offeror’s proposal must meet the minimum mandatory Total Small Business participation goal of 25% (through collective small business participation from any type of small business or sub-category small business). The subcategory small business goals are NOT mandatory. However, the Government will evaluate the proposal to determine which Offeror(s) propose the best value in terms of meeting all the Small Business Participation goals herein. The work to be performed directly by a small business prime Offeror will also be evaluated as Small Business Participation.

a. Submission Requirements:

Offerors must complete and submit the Small Business Participation Plan form (See Appendix D, Attachment 3).

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

1. The extent to which Small Business firms are specifically identified in the proposal;

2. The extent of commitment to Small Business firms (for example, enforceable commitments are to be weighed more heavily than non-enforceable ones);

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

4. Past performance of the offerors in complying with requirement of the clauses at FAR

52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, and 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (large businesses only); and

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

4. DEFINITIONS

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

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

Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that significantly increases the risk of

Unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

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

Significant Strength. An aspect of an Offerors proposal that has appreciable merit or appreciably exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Uncertainty. Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offer is unclear (e.g. more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission, or mistake).

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

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

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

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

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

Proposal is un-awardable.

a. Performance Ratings. A single confidence rating shall be assigned to Past Performance.

The relevancy determination will assess the Offerors past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be acquired under this solicitation.

The confidence rating assesses the risks associated with each Offerors likelihood of success in performing the requirements stated in the RFP based on the Offerors demonstrated performance on recent contracts. SSEB members and the SSA may use personal knowledge or information from other sources in its evaluation of an Offerors past performance, provided such information is consistent with the established evaluation criteria of the RFP.

Offerors that have no relevant performance record will be given a neutral/unknown confidence rating.

b. Relevancy Determination Definitions

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

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

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

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

c. Confidence Rating System

Unknown Confidence (Neutral). No relevant performance record is identifiable upon which to base a meaningful performance risk prediction. A search was unable to identify any relevant past performance information for the Offeror or key team members/subcontractors.

This is neither a negative or positive assessment.

Substantial Confidence. Based on the Offerors recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence. Based on the Offerors recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Limited Confidence. Based on the Offerors recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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

d. Small Business Participation Plan Rating System:

Outstanding. Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives. SB firm(s) are specifically identified in the proposal; demonstrates substantive commitment to SB firm(s), for example, enforceable commitment with one (1) or more firms; identifies the complexity and variety of work small businesses are to perform; demonstrates commitment to meet a SB Participation goal. For prime contractors that are large business, the proposal displays past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9.

Good. Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives. SB firm(s) are specifically identified in the proposal; demonstrates substantive commitment to SB firm(s), for example, enforceable commitment with one (1) or more firms; identifies the complexity and variety of work small businesses are to perform;

demonstrates commitment to exceed the SB Participation goal. For prime contractors that are large business, the proposal displays past performance in complying with FAR 52.219- 8 and 52.219-9.

Acceptable. Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives. SB firm(s) are specifically identified in the proposal; demonstrates a commitment to SB firm(s); identifies the complexity and variety of work small businesses are to perform; demonstrates commitment to meet the SB Participation goal. For prime contractors that are large business, the proposal displays past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9.

Marginal. Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives. SB firm(s) are specifically identified in the proposal, but the Offeror does not fully demonstrate a commitment to SB firm(s); or does not fully identify a commitment to use SB firms or does not fully identify the work small businesses are to perform; or for prime contractors that are large business, the proposal does not fully display past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9 and/or does not explain or provide justification for the lack of substantive effort. The Offeror demonstrates a commitment to SB Participation goal.

Unacceptable. Proposal does not meet small business objectives and demonstrates commitment to meet less than SB Participation goal or does not identify SBs in the proposal; or does not fully identify a commitment to use SB firms; or does not identify the work small businesses are to perform; or for prime contractors that are large business, the proposal does not display past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9 and/or does not explain or provide justification for the lack of substantive effort.

D. VOLUME 2 – PRICE AND OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION

Submit the price proposal as one separate PDF file titled:

“W9126G20R0006_Firmname_Volume 2_Tab#_Description.pdf”

*Enter your firm’s name for Firmname. Enter applicable Tab number and description for Tab#_Description.

Location

Description

Vol. 2 TAB A

Proposal Cover Sheet

Vol. 2 TAB B

FACTOR 4 – Section 00 11 00, CLIN Schedule

Vol. 2 TAB C

SF 1442 and Acknowledgement of Amendments

Vol. 2 TAB D

Bid Guarantee (Bid Bond) Required.

Vol. 2 TAB E

Joint Venture (JV) Agreement and/or Articles of Organization for LLC, if applicable.

Vol. 2 TAB F

Section 00 45 00, Representations and Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors or Clause 52.204-8 if Offeror has electronic certifications in SAM

Vol. 2 TAB G

Subcontracting Plan

Vol. 2 TAB H

Required Pre-Award Information

Offeror proposal will be reviewed to ensure documentation is provided, as required.

1. GENERAL

Size Restrictions and Page Limits. Use only 8 ½” x 11” pages in PDF format. There are no page limits set for the price proposal. However, limit your response to information required by this solicitation. Excess information will not be considered in the Government’s evaluation.

Format and Contents of the Price Proposal and List of Tabs. The Price Proposal shall be appropriately labeled as such and shall be organized as indicated in the above chart. Note: If the

Offeror is not required to submit any information under a listed Tab in accordance with the instructions below, that tab can be omitted. However, do not renumber the subsequent tabs.

2. VOLUME 2, TAB A – Proposal Cover Sheet

The proposal cover sheet is required by…