AMD 0001_W9126G21R0013_VA NCA DFW_22Jan2021.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 DFW Columbarium, Committal Shelter, and Cortege Lane; Dallas-Fort Worth National Cemetery, Dallas, Texas is amended as follows.

See SF30 Continuation Sheet(s)

NOTE: Proposal Receipt will be 29 January 2021; at 1:00 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 AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

W9126G21R0013

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

16-Dec-2020

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.

A00001

5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

22 -Jan-2021

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:

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 work required at the prices specified below in strict accordance with the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in writing within ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

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 offer on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to furnish and deliver all items or perform all work, requisitions identified summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Government solicitation and on this form and any continuation sheets for the consideration stated in this your offer, and (b) this contract award. No further contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary.

governed by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certifications, and specifications or incorporated by refer-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

(Must be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

W9126G21R0013 Amendment No. A00001

M2CT9RMD

Typewritten Text

W9126G21R0013

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

CHANGES TO SOLICITATION W9126G21R0013

CHANGES TO PROPOSAL RECEIPT DATE

CHANGES TO DIVISION 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

1. Section 00 21 00 INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS: Section 00 21 00 has been updated and replaced bearing the notation W9126G21R0013-0001.

2. Section 00 22 11 EVALUATION CRITERIA TRADEOFF PROCESS PROPOSAL PREPARATION: Section 00 22 11 has been updated and replaced bearing the notation W9126G21R0013-0001.

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 W9126G21R0013-0001:

01 45 00.00 10 QUALITY CONTROL

CHANGES TO THE DRAWINGS

4. Replacement Drawings.- Replace the drawings listed below with the attached new drawings(s) of the same number W9126G21R0013-0001:

G-101 – PROJECT LOCATION MAP AND HAUL ROUTE

AE501 – COMMITTAL SHELTER WALL DETAILS

EP-101 – COMMITTAL SERVICE SHELTER ELECTRICAL POWER PLAN

I-101 – IRRIGATION PLAN I COLUMBARIUM

I-102 – IRRIGATION PLAN II COLUMBARIUM

I-104 – IRRIGATION PLAN CORTEGE LANE (BID OPTION 2)

I-201 – TREE BUBBLER PLAN I COLUMBARIUM

LP-101 – LANDSCAPE PLAN I COLUMBARIUM

LP-102 – LANDSCAPE PLAN II COLUMBARIUM

L-501 – LANDSCAPE DETAILS AND PLANTING SCHEUDLE - BID OPTION

L-501A – LANDSCAPE DETAILS AND PLANTING SCHEUDLE

L-502 – LANDSCAPE DETAILS II

End of Summary of Changes

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

<AMD0001> 22 JAN 2021 </AMD0001>

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1.2 OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

1.3. SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD/NAICS CODE

1.4 PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS

1.5 ACCURACY IN PROPOSALS

1.6 PROPOSAL FORMAT

1.7 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.8 PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL

1.9 BID GUARANTEE

1.10 CONTRACT PRICES - BIDDING SCHEDULE

W9126G21R0013-0001

1.0 PART I – GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK

The scope of the Design-Bid-Build (DBB) construction project includes all work required for the DFW Columbaria, Committal Shelter, & Cortege Lane at Dallas Fort Worth National Cemetery, Dallas, Texas, consisting of (3) Base CLINs and (2) Option CLINs. The Base CLINs include the construction of a Columbarium F (North) and retaining wall, committal shelter, and drilled caissons, including site work and improvements, irrigation, landscaping and all incidentals and related work per the drawings and specifications. The Option CLINs includes Construction of Columbarium G (South Court) and Cortege Lane including site work, irrigation, signage, and all other incidentals per the drawings and specifications. The work shall be in accordance with the Request for Proposal documents.

Proposed project will be a competitive, firm-fixed price contract, procured in accordance with fair opportunity process using FAR Part 15 "Trade-off Process".

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

1.1.2. COPIES OF SOLICITATION DOCUMENTS AND AMENDMENTS

Copies of the solicitation and all amendments are available by INTERNET ACCESS ONLY. All solicitation documents and amendments will be posted on beta.SAM.GOV website at https://beta.SAM.gov/ and Offeror can access solicitation documents by solicitation number without dashes (W9126G21R0013).

1.1.3. It is solely the Contractor’s responsibility to check the https://beta.SAM.gov/ website for the solicitation and any amendments prior to the RFP closing date. The Offeror shall submit in its proposal all requested information as specified in Section 00 22 11 below of this solicitation. There will be no public opening of the proposals received as a result of this solicitation.

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

1.2. OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

1.2.1 Bidder Inquiry

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

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

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

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

1.2.6. The Solicitation Number is: W9126G21R0013

1.2.7. The Bidder Inquiry Key is: R98SRK-3F8PEW

1.2.8. The Bidder Inquiry System will be closed to new inquiries <AMD0001>seven (7) three (3) </AMD0001>calendar days prior to proposal submission in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation, if necessary. If the System is not closed in a timely manner, an inquiry posted within seven calendar days of the receipt of proposals will still be regarding as untimely and will not afforded a substantive response.

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

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

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

1.3. SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD/NAICS CODE

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

1.4. PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS

This Request for Proposal (RFP) does not commit the Government to pay as a direct charge any costs incurred by the Offeror in the preparation and submission of its proposal or revisions.

1.5. ACCURACY IN PROPOSALS

Proposals must set forth with full, accurate, and complete information as required by this RFP, (including attachments). The penalty for making false statements is prescribed in 18U.S.C.1001.

In accordance with the FAR, no award shall be entered into unless the contracting officer ensures that all requirements of law, executive orders, regulations, and all other applicable procedures have been met.

1.6. PROPOSAL FORMAT

1.6.1. REQUIREMENT FOR SEPARATE PRICE AND TECHNICAL PROPOSALS

1.6.1.1. The Price Proposal and the Technical Proposal must be submitted electronically as separate electronic files.

Ensure that each separate electronic file is clearly marked Price Proposal” and “Technical Proposal” with the name of the offeror and the date specified for receipt of proposals. Information within each file shall be organized sequentially under the specified Tabs to facilitate evaluation.

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

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

1.6.1.4. All information intended to be evaluated as part of the Technical Proposal must be submitted within the Technical Proposal file. Do not cross-reference similar material in the Price Proposal, or vice versa. Do not include links to websites in lieu of incorporating information into your proposal. Do not submit excess information, to include audio- visual materials, electronic media, etc.

1.7. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.7.1. All pages must be numbered.

1.7.1.2. Submit only the information/documents specifically required.

1.7.1.3. 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.

1.7.1.4. The proposals must be organized by the Tabs indicated in this section.

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

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

1.7.1.7. For submissions with page limitations, the pages furnished for organizational purposes only, such as a “Table of Contents” or divider tabs, are not included in the page limitation.

1.8. DIRECTIONS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS

1.8.1. Proposals and an electronic copy of the Bid Bond MUST be received via email to the Contract Specialist at clyde.l.gardner@usace.army.mil, and the Contracting Officer at Robert.m.duran@usace.army.mil and Not Later Than Friday, 29 JAN 2021 at 1:00 PM (CT). LATE PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

1.8.1.2. Electronically submitted offers must include the completed SF 1442 (in accordance with FAR 52.214-18.

Acknowledgement of all amendments, completed CLIN schedule, and a copy of the original Bid Bond.

1.9. BID GUARANTEE

Provide a fully executed Bid Bond as required by FAR Clause 52.228-1(c), Bid Guarantee. Facsimile Bonds are not acceptable.

1.10. CONTRACT PRICES - BIDDING SCHEDULE

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

Section 00 22 11 - Proposal Submission Requirements, Evaluation Criteria, and Basis of Award One Step - Best Value, Design-Bid-Build (Single Award)

Section 00 22 11 SELECTION PROCEDURES

<AMD0001> 22 JAN 2021 </AMD0001>

1.0 PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND EVALUATION

2.0 TAB A – FACTOR 1 – ORGANIZATION AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

2.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

2.1.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

3.0 TAB B – FACTOR 2 – SUMMARY SCHEDULE

3.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

3.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

4.0 TAB C – FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

4.3 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

4.4 RELEVANCY DETERMINATION CRITERIA

4.5 CONFIDENCE EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.0 PRICE AND OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION, VOLUME

2, PRICE Table 2 - Volume 2 – PRICE AND OTHER

REQUIRED INFORMATION

5.1 GENERAL

5.2 Volume 2 -TAB A – PRICE:

5.2.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.3 EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.4 TAB B – BID GUARANTEE

5.4.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.4.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.5 TAB C – REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

5.5.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.6 EVALUATION CRITERIA

6.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

6.1 GENERAL

6.2 DISCUSISONS (If Necessary)

7.0 EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

7.1 GENERAL

7.2 RATING SYSTEM

8.0 DEFINITIONS

Evaluation Criteria

TRADEOFF PROCESS

Proposal Preparation

<AMD0001> 22 JAN 2021 </AMD0001>

1.0 PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND EVALUATION

T ECHNICAL PROPOSALS

a. EVALUATION FACTORS AND WEIGHTING, VOLUME 1, TECHNICAL

GENERAL: Offerors are invited to submit a proposal, as indicated below:

b. 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 ORGANIZATION AND

TECHNICAL

APPROACH

Most Important

TAB B Factor 2 SUMMARY

SCHEDULE

Less Important than Factor 1 and more important than Factor 3

TAB C Factor 3 PAST PERFORMANCE Least Important

2.0 TAB A – FACTOR 1 – ORGANIZATION AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

2.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

2.1.1 Identify your proposed <AMD0001> onsite </AMD0001> project staffing by position, to include, as a minimum: project manager, superintendent, site safety and health officer, quality control manager, quality control organization, and scheduler. Refer to the following Specification Sections for requirements: 01 32

01.00 10 Project Schedule; 01 35 26 Governmental Safety Requirements; 01 45

00.00 10 Quality Control. Information can be provided in narrative format, table(s), and/or organizational chart(s). Identification of specific individuals and/or resumes is not required nor desired as part of this submission. This information is to be submitted after award as required by the specifications.

2.1.1.1 Provide a general description of the work the Offeror will self-perform to be compliant with the requirements of set-aside subcontracting limitations. Under set-aside award conditions, small businesses are required to perform minimum levels of work when they receive a federal contract. These subcontracting limitations apply to contract set-asides for small businesses when the contract amount exceeds $150,000, and all other set-aside or sole- source contracts under the 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSB, and WOSB programs. General construction contracts:

The small business prime contractor must perform at least 15% of the cost of the contract with it’s owns employees, not including the cost of materials.

Discuss your understanding of the work restrictions, coordination requirements, and rules of behavior for working in the DFW National Cemetery, and your plan to execute the contract under these working conditions. Discuss your staffing plan in reference to addressing the phasing requirement of this contract. Refer to Section 01 00 00.00 44 Construction Schedule.

2.1.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

2.1.2.1 The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the proposed staffing for the project. The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the staffing plan to cover all required work in the contract.

2.1.2.1.1 The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding and compliance with the requirements for self-performance of work by the prime contractor.

2.1.2.1.2 The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the work restrictions, coordination requirement and rules of behavior for working in the Dallas Fort Worth National Cemetery and their plan to execute the contract under these working conditions.

3.0 TAB B – FACTOR 2 – SUMMARY SCHEDULE

3.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

3.1.1 Proposed Contract Duration: The Offeror shall propose the overall contract duration in the CLIN Schedule for each Item of Work, not to exceed the maximum duration specified in Section 01 00 00.00 44.

3.1.1.1. Summary Schedule: Submit a summary level schedule for construction. This schedule will, after 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, as a minimum, Activity ID, Activity Description, Original Duration, early start and early finish dates, and total float for each activity. The proposed schedule shall address the phasing requirements specified in Section 01 00

00.00 44- 1.3 Construction Phasing. Give attention to the following items:

3.1.1.2. Show activities for each feature of work, including base CLINs and all options, in sufficient detail to demonstrate an understanding of the scope of work and to substantiate the reasonableness and realism of the proposed duration.

3.1.1.3. 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.)

3.1.1.4. Show turnover of the completed facilities. 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.

3.1.1.5. Show closeout activities, to include the Red Zone meeting, record drawings, and O&M manuals, to demonstrate your understanding of the closeout requirements for the contract. (See section 01 78 00 Closeout Submittals).

3.1.1.6. Indicate the anticipated overall critical path on the schedule.

3.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

3.2.1 Proposed Contract Duration: The proposed duration will become the contractually binding schedule for each Item of Work. The Government will evaluate the duration, as proposed by the Offeror herein, not to exceed the maximum allowed duration listed in Section 01 00 00.00 44. This duration shall also include all CLIN options. 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 award duration shorter than the duration will receive additional rating consideration, provided the schedule is realistic and deemed to be achievable. The Government may consider an unreasonably condensed contract duration, which places additional cost or schedule risk on the Government or which may create a risk of award or performance failure, as a significant weakness or a deficiency, depending upon the evaluators' judgment.

3.2.2 Summary Schedule: 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 (see section 01 00 00.00 44), long lead items, 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.

4.0 TAB C – FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

4.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

4.1.1

4.1.2

4.1.3

4.1.4

The Offerors shall demonstrate past performance through the submission of similar projects, using the Construction – Past Performance Assessment Worksheet (Attachment 1). If the Offeror is a Joint Venture, Limited Liability Corporation (LLC), 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. Submit no more than three (3) projects completed or substantially completed within 6 years from the date of this solicitation that best represent the experience similar to the scope of work for this solicitation. One (1) of the three (3) 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), LLC, Partnership 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.

The Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation (Attachment 2) is provided for the Offeror to submit to the client for each project the Offeror included for Factor <AMD0001> 1 3 </AMD0001>, Past Performance that does not have an interim or final CPARS evaluation or is a non- Federal Government project. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQ 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, Clyde L. Gardner, via e-mail at: clyde.l.gardner@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.

Do not request past performance questionnaires (PPQ) on projects that have interim or final CPARS evaluations. If an interim or final CPARS evaluation exists and a PPQ is provided for the same project, the CPARS evaluation will be reviewed as the official past performance record for the project, and the PPQ will not be considered by the Source Selection Board or the Source Selection Authority.

W9126G21R0013-0001 m2ct9cg9 Cross-Out

4.1.5 For USACE or other DoD projects which are underway but do not yet have an interim or final CPARS evaluation, one PPQ per contract may be submitted; to be considered, the PPQ shall be signed by the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) for the contract.

4.1.6 Offerors are not required to submit any additional past performance information.

The Government will utilize CPARS and any other information deemed relevant to assess confidence in the Offeror’s ability to perform.

4.1.7 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.

4.1.8 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.

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

(a) New construction project at a cemetery (can be major or minor cemetery expansion project), heavy horizontal project, or similar commercial work.

(b) Columbarium construction

(c) Construction projects with values ranging from $5 million to $10 million

4.1.10 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.

4.2 RELEVANCY DETERMINATION CRITERIA:

4.2.1. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant the past performance is to the project under consideration. Past performance on the projects identified in the project forms will receive more consideration than past performance provided in the supplemental narrative.

The Government will place greater value on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor, depending upon overall role and relevancy considerations. Federal Government project past performance will not be rated inherently more important than non-Federal Government project past performance.

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

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

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

4.2.5. 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. An overall determination of “very relevant” can only be achieved if a single project meets all three of the relevancy criteria. If all three relevancy criteria are met through a combination of two or more projects; then the overall relevancy determination will be no higher than “relevant”.

4.3 CONFIDENCE EVALUATION CRITERIA:

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

CPARS and other past performance information deemed relevant, to determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment.

If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, the Government will only evaluate past performance of the division or unit submitting the offer. If the Government cannot establish the Offeror’s relevant past performance, it reserves the right to utilize the Past Performance Questionnaire to conduct telephone interviews on any source it deems relevant to the evaluation. 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.

4.3.2 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.

4.3.3 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.

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

INTENTIONALLY BLANK

5.0 PRICE AND OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION, VOLUME 2, PRICE Table 2 - Volume

2 – PRICE AND OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION

Factor

Location

Description

Relative Importance

N/A

Vol. 2, TAB A

PRICE and Other Required Information

All evaluation factors, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price.

Not rated.

Vol. 2, TAB B

BID GUARANTEE

Acceptable/Unacceptable

Not rated.

Vol. 2, TAB C

REQUIRED PRE-AWARD

INFORMATION

Acceptable/Unacceptable

Not rated

5.1 GENERAL

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

5.2 Volume 2 -TAB A – PRICE:

5.2.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

5.2.1.1 Submit a signed SF1442 and all acknowledgements of Amendments and a properly filled out CLIN 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”.

5.2.1.2 Supplemental Price Breakdown. If deemed necessary to evaluate the price proposals, the Government will request a price breakdown of the 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.

5.3 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.3.1 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 award line items. Both parties shall presume that field overhead costs through the proposed contract duration are inclusive in the offered price for the award.

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

5.4 TAB B – BID GUARANTEE

5.4.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

5.4.1.1 Submit the Bid Guarantee in accordance with the Instructions in Section 00 21 00, Provision 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee.

5.4.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.4.2.1 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.

5.5 TAB C – REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

5.5.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

5.5.1.1 Submit this information for the Contracting Officer’s determination of Offeror responsibility, which includes, but not limited to the following:

5.5.1.1.1 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.

5.5.1.1.2 A certified statement listing; (1) each award within the preceding three month period exceeding $1,000,000.00 in value with a brief description of the award;

and (2) each 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 award.

5.6 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.

6.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

6.1 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.

Volume 2, Tabs A, B, and C 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.

6.2 Discussions (If necessary)

The Government intends to award without discussions. 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.

7.0 EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

7.1 GENERAL:

The Government will review the proposals and rate the quality of each evaluation factor. The SSEB will rate each proposal against the specified evaluation criteria in the Solicitation requirements. They will not compare proposals. After all proposals are rated, the Source Selection Authority will compare the ratings and relative advantages and disadvantages of proposals against each other in order to determine which Offerors are the most highly qualified.

Review Write-up:

The Government will support each rating with a narrative, separately listing all strengths or advantages, weaknesses or disadvantages, deficiencies, and required clarifications. The Government will assess the Offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be acquired under this solicitation.

7.2 Rating System:

After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies, the SSEB will assign an adjectival rating of ““Outstanding”, “Good”, “Acceptable”, “Marginal”, or

“Unacceptable” to each factor. The rating will reflect the Government’s confidence in each Offeror’s technical ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the RFP.

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

8.0 DEFINITIONS

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

FAR 15.001.

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

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

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

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

8.6 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).

8.7 Outstanding. Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

8.8 Good. Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

8.9 Acceptable. Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

8.10 Marginal. Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and /or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

8.11 Unacceptable. Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is not awardable.

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

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

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

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

8.16 Unknown Confidence (Neutral). No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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

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

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

8.20 No Confidence. Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

End of Section 00 22 11

DFW Columbaria, Committal Shelter, and Cortege Lane VADFW9000

SECTION 01 45 00.00 10

QUALITY CONTROL

AMENDMENT NO. 0001

PART 1 GENERAL

1.1 REFERENCES

The publications listed below form a part of this specification to the extent referenced. The publications are referred to within the text by the basic designation only.

ASTM INTERNATIONAL (ASTM)

ASTM D3740 (2012a) Minimum Requirements for Agencies Engaged in the Testing and/or Inspection of Soil and Rock as Used in Engineering Design and Construction

ASTM E329 (2018) Standard Specification for Agencies Engaged in Construction Inspection, Testing, or Special Inspection

1.2 PAYMENT

Separate payment will not be made for providing and maintaining an effective Quality Control program. Include all associated costs in the applicable CLIN Schedule item.

1.3 SUBMITTALS

Government approval is required for submittals with a "G" designation;

submittals not having a "G" designation are for information only. When used, a designation following the "G" designation identifies the office that will review the submittal for the Government. Submit the following in accordance with Section 01 33 00 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES:

SD-01 Preconstruction Submittals

Contractor Quality Control (CQC) Plan; G

Compliant Random Sampling Plan; G

SD-06 Test Reports

Verification Statement

PART 2 PRODUCTS

Not Used

SECTION 01 45 00.00 10 Page 1

PART 3 EXECUTION

3.1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

Establish and maintain an effective quality control (QC) system that complies with FAR 52.246-12 Inspection of Construction. QC consist of plans, procedures, and organization necessary to produce an end product which complies with the Contract requirements. The QC system covers all construction operations, both onsite and offsite, and be keyed to the proposed construction sequence. The project superintendent will be held responsible for the quality of work and is subject to removal by the Contracting Officer for non-compliance with the quality requirements specified in the Contract. In this context the highest level manager responsible for the overall construction activities at the site, including quality and production is the project superintendent. The project superintendent maintains a physical presence at the site at all times and is responsible for all construction and related activities at the site, except as otherwise acceptable to the Contracting Officer. The superintendent shall be assigned no other duties.

3.2 CONTRACTOR QUALITY CONTROL (CQC) PLAN

Submit no later than 10 days after receipt of notice to proceed, the Contractor Quality Control (CQC) Plan proposed to implement the requirements FAR 52.246-12 Inspection of Construction. The Government will consider an interim plan for the first 60 days of operation. Construction will be permitted to begin only after acceptance of the CQC Plan or acceptance of an interim plan applicable to the particular feature of work to be started. Work outside of the accepted interim plan will not be permitted to begin until acceptance of a CQC Plan or another interim plan containing the additional work. All sampling of materials for testing shall be executed per the contractor's accepted compliant random sampling plan and in accordance with ASTM D 3665.

3.2.1 Content of the CQC Plan

Include, as a minimum, the following to cover all construction-operations, both onsite and offsite, including work by subcontractors fabricators, suppliers and purchasing agents:

a. A description of the quality control organization, including a chart showing lines of authority and acknowledgment that the CQC staff will implement the three phase control system for all aspects of the work specified. Include a CQC System Manager that reports to the project superintendent.

b. The name,…