A.2.11_Amendment1_Solicitation_W9127S16R6001.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 purpose of this amendment is to:

(1) include revised Volumes I and II of the Table of Contents (as a separate document);

(2) include revised Specification 32 92 19 "Sodding" w hich is to be inserted in the specifications (as a separate document);

(3) extend the date for the receipt of proposals to 19 January 2016;

(4) extend the date for the receipt of RFI's via ProjNet to 11 January 2016;

(5) increase the Page Limit for the Technical Proposal - Factor 1 from 3 pages to 12 pages Limit; Factor 2 from 5 pages to 8 pages Limit; and Factor 3 from 8 pages to 10 pages Limit.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 22

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 30-Dec-2015

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 W9127S-16-R-6001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

08-Dec-2015

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

30-Dec-2015

CODE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

USACE, LITTLE ROCK (W9127S)

700 W. CAPITOL AVE, RM 7315

LITTLE ROCK AR 72201-3225

W9127S 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9127S-16-R-6001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SECTION 00 11 00 - SF1442 AND CLIN SCHEDULE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 11 00 - SF1442 AND CLIN SCHEDULE

The required response date/time has changed from 11-Jan-2016 09:00 AM to 19-Jan-2016 02:00 PM.

The required performance has changed from Project Title: Refueling Vehicle Repair Shop, Little Rock Air Force Base.Location: Little Rock Air Force Base, Jacksonville, Pulaski County, ArkansasSet Aside: 100% Small Business NAICS Code: 236220---Commercial and Institutional Building ConstructionFSC: Y1BZSIC Code:

1542--General Contractors, Non-residential Buidlings, Other than Industrial Buidlings and WarehouseMagnitude of Construction project is between $1,000,000.00 and $5,000,000.00.Site Visit Information: See 00 22 11, Part 1, Paragraph 3All Requests for Information shall be submitted and answered via the ProjNet Site:

www.projnet.org.ProjNet Project Key: SHMQHM-44JDN7The Review is open from 8 December 2015 to 30 December 2015.The Government reserves the right NOT to answer any questions after the close of business on 30 December 2015.NOTE1: Item 13 - ADDITIONAL SOLICATION REQUIREMENTS: See Page 25 for Specific Insturctions for the Price Proposal SubmissionSee Page 28 for Specific Instructions for the Technical Proposal SubmissonNOTE 2: Drawings and Specifications will be uploaded to FBO.gov as separate documents. to Project Title: Refueling Vehicle Repair Shop, Little Rock Air Force Base.Location: Little Rock Air Force Base, Jacksonville, Pulaski County, ArkansasSet Aside: 100% Small Business NAICS Code: 236220---Commercial and Institutional Building ConstructionFSC: Y1BZSIC Code: 1542--General Contractors, Non-residential Buidlings, Other than Industrial Buidlings and WarehouseMagnitude of Construction project is between $1,000,000.00 and $5,000,000.00.Site Visit Information: See 00 22 11, Part 1, Paragraph 3All Requests for Information shall be submitted and answered via the ProjNet Site: www.projnet.org.ProjNet Project Key: SHMQHM-44JDN7The Review is open from 8 December 2015 to 11 January 2016.The Government reserves the right NOT to answer any questions after the close of business on 30 December 2015.NOTE1: Item 13 - ADDITIONAL SOLICATION REQUIREMENTS: See Page 25 for Specific Insturctions for the Price Proposal SubmissionSee Page 28 for Specific Instructions for the Technical Proposal SubmissonNOTE 2: Drawings and Specifications will be uploaded to FBO.gov as separate documents..

SECTION 00 22 11 - PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, EVALUATION CRITERIA, BASIS OF

AWARD ONE-STEP-BEST VALUE, DESIGN-BUILD (SINGLE AWARD)

The following have been modified:

PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

OVERVIEW

This Source Selection Plan (SSP) defines the criteria, organization, and policies to be used in selecting a contractor to provide construction services for the FY16 Refueling Vehicle Repair Shop, LRAFB, AR in support of the Little Rock AFB (LRAFB) Program.

A. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Contracting Division Division-SWL has a requirement from the Little Rock AFB (LRAFB) Program to provide the Refueling Vehicle Repair Shop. The evaluation Board (SSEB) and the development of the Best Value Decision by the Source Selection Authority (SSA) using the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Source Selection Process (See Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.101-2)) for the award of a Contract.

B. ACQUISITION STRATEGY

This is a competitive acquisition for the single award of a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) construction contract.

This is a competitive 100% Small Business Set-Aside. Award will be made to the best overall proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government. The solicitation will be issued as a one-step Design-Bid-Build. The anticipated period of performance is 365 calendar days from issuance of the Notice to Proceed (NTP). Evaluation methodology for the instant procurement consists of three (3) Non- Priced Factors: Factor 1-Past Performance, Factor-2 Overall Construction Approach, and Factor-3 Relevant Project Experience.

00 22 11 THE SOLICITATION BIDDING/SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTION TO BIDDERS)

LOWEST PRICED TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE (LPTA) SUPPLEMENTARY

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

GENERAL INFORMATION

***Funds are not presently available for this acquisition. No contract award will be made until appropriated funds are made available. The Government’s obligation under this acquisition is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds from which an award can be made. No legal liability on the part of the Government for any pending obligation may arise until funds are made available to the Contracting Officer for this acquisition and until award is made***

1. INQUIRIES

OFFEROR’S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

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

ATTN: Darrell L. Montgomery

Email: darrell.l.montgomery@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 identified above, click Bid tab and 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 the information on next screen is correct, click and continue.

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: W9127S-16-R-6001.

The Bidder Inquiry Key is: SHMQHM-44JDN7 The Review is open from December 8, 2015 to January 11, 2016.

The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable after January 11, 2016 for new inquires in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the solicitation, if necessary.

Offerors are requested to review the specification in it’s entirely, review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry.

Oral explanations or instruction 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.

2. DIRECTIONS FOR SUBMITTING PROPOSALS:

1. Proposal Submittals:

Submit proposals to: CONTRACTING DIVISION USACE, LITTLE ROCK (W9127S)

700 W. CAPITOL AVE, RM 7315

LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201-3225

2. The Packaging:

The Proposals shall be marked:

“Proposals for Solicitation Number: W9127S-16-R-6001 Refueling Vehicle Repair Shop, Little Rock

AFB, AR “DO NOT OPEN”

Offer Closing Date: 19 January 2016 Offer Closing Time: 02:00 PM CST.

3. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE/SITE VISIT

WHEN: Tuesday December 15, 2015, at 10:00 am CST WHERE: CMSgt Williams Drive, LRAFB AR 72099, Demo existing Building 552:

Intersection of Avenue C West & Fourth Street.

Please provide the Contract Specialist (Darrell Montgomery) via email at Darrell.L.Montgomery@usace.army.mil, the following information if your company will be attending the site visit:

a. Names and Titles of those attending

b. Driver’s License State and Number

c. Contact Information (Emails and phone numbers)

****Items a-c is due to the Contract Specialist NLT 14 December 2015 @ 10:00 am CST. ****

IMPORTANT NOTES. (1) There will be NO Remarks, questions or explanations addressed during the preproposal conference/site visit. Please submit all inquires through the Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet. This ensures all participants have access to all questions and answers equally and fairly.

(2) The terms and conditions of the solicitation remain unchanged unless the solicitation is formally amended in writing.

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

1. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS

a. REQUIREMENT FOR SEPARATE PRICE AND TECHNICAL (CONSTRUCTION)

PROPOSALS.

(1) Each Offeror must submit a Price Proposal and a Technical Proposal. The Price Proposal and Technical Proposals 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. Additionally, clearly identify the “original” cost/price proposal and the construction technical proposal on the outside cover.

(2) Both the Price Proposal and the Technical Proposals must be received by the closing date and time set for receipt of proposals.

(3) No dollar amounts from the Price Proposal are to be included in the Technical Proposals.

(4) All information intended to be evaluated as part of the Technical Proposal must be submitted as part of the Technical Proposals. 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.

(5) The Offeror shall clearly communicate and summarize any and all scope exceptions and deviations.

The Government reserves the right to reject any proposal that does not meet ALL the requirements of the RFP or deviates in any way from the requirements of the RFP. Any exceptions to the SOW noted in the Technical Proposal shall be summarized and explained here. The Contractor shall note the benefits to the Government of or the purpose for the exceptions. The Government will evaluate all identified exceptions and deviations and determine technical acceptability and benefit to the project. The Government reserves the right to enter into discussions concerning deviations/exceptions or may amend the solicitation to allow all Offerors to submit revised proposals based on the revised requirements. Any exception not included in the Scope Exception section will be deemed not accepted and will not constitute part of the contract. Any exceptions listed that would violate any law, criteria, code or standard in the SOW will be disregarded and deemed not accepted even if included as an exception. The contractor is not at liberty to change definitions as currently stated in the SOW. Those deviations not accepted by the Government will not become a part of the contract. Unless specifically noted in the award, all exclusions are not accepted by the government and do not become a part of the contract.

b. DISCUSSIONS. The Government does not intend to enter into discussions with offerors prior to determining those contractors within the competitive range, in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors—Competitive Acquisitions.

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

d. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS.

(1) Submit only the hard-copy paper documents and 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.

(2) Use only 8 ½ by 11 inch paper for hard copy submissions, unless another paper size is specifically authorized elsewhere in this section for a particular submission. Do not use fold- outs (e.g., 11” x 14” or 11” x 17” sheets) unless specifically authorized in this section for a particular submission.

Do not use a font size smaller than 10, an unusual font style such as script, or condensed print for any submission. All page margins must be at least 1 inch wide, but may include headers and footers.

(3) The preferred method for assembling your proposals is to use three-ring binders; however, the use of pressboard or other report covers with compression or other type fasteners is acceptable. Do not use spring clamps or exceed the recommended capacity of the fastener or binder. Do not use plastic multi-hole/spiral binding systems, heat binding systems, or other systems which do not facilitate the ready insertion of additional pages.

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

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

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

e. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PRICE PROPOSAL

(1) Number of Sets of the Price Proposal. Submit the ORIGINAL PRINT COPY and ONE CD- ROM Copy of the Price Proposal.

(2) Size Restrictions and Page Limits. Use only 8 ½” x 11” pages. 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.

(3) 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 following 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.

TAB

CONTENTS OF THE PRICE PROPOSAL

#1

The Proposal Cover Sheet

#2

The SF 1442 and Acknowledgement of Amendments

#3

Section 00 11 00, Pricing Schedule

#4

Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors (if the offeror does not have electronic certifications in SAM)

#5

JV Agreement, if applicable.

#6

Pre-Award Survey

#7

Offer Guarantee

(4) Detailed Submission Instructions for the Price Proposal

TAB 1: The proposal cover sheet is required by FAR 52.215-1(2) (c) (i)-(v) and must be submitted by all offerors. This provision, titled “Instructions to Offerors—Competitive Acquisition,” and the format for the proposal cover sheet as shown here:

PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

1. Solicitation Number:

2. The name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the Offeror (and electronic address if available):

3. A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item. Additionally, provide a statement to include any exceptions in the technical or cost/price proposal or exceptions inherent in Offeror’s standard terms and conditions.

4. Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation:

5. Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

TAB 2: The SF 1442, Solicitation, Offer, and Award is to be completed by all Offerors and duly executed with an original signature by an official authorized to bind the company in accordance with FAR 4.102. All amendments must be acknowledged by all Offerors in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30, Amendment of Solicitation.

TAB 3: Pricing Schedule is to be completed in its entirety by all Offerors. See Instruction to Offerors for further instructions.

TAB 4: All Offerors must have electronically completed the annual representations and certifications on the “System for Administration Management” (SAM) website or respond with the completed representations / certifications found in the solicitation. The offerors are responsible for ensuring that these on-line Representations and Certifications are updated as necessary to reflect changes, but at least annually to ensure that they are kept current, accurate and complete.

Additionally, the offeror must also complete and return the “Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors” included in the solicitation. If the offeror is a Joint Venture, all participants must separately complete both the SAM Representations and Certifications.

TAB 5: If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), include a copy of the JV Agreement. If a JV

Agreement has not yet been finalized/approved, indicate its status. JV Agreements must clearly indicate the percentages of the JV participants, in particular the percent of the controlling party, and a clear delineation of responsibilities and authorities between the JV parties.

TAB 6: The Pre-Award Survey (found on the following pages) must be completed by all offerors and submitted as part of their price proposal. This document will be used by the Contracting Officer for the Contracting Officer’s Determination of Responsibility done prior to contract award in accordance with FAR Part 9.

TAB 7: Offer Guarantee must be provided in accordance with FAR 52.228-1.

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET DATE:

Firm Name and Telephone Number Main Office Address (Street, City, and State)

Branch Offices Services Rendered Construction Design Consultant

Organization Individual Joint Venture Partnership Corporation

Date Organized Date Incorporated:

State:

Names of Officers and Other Key Personnel

I – PRESENT PAYROLL PERSONNEL (List Number of Each Category Below)

Partners:

Officers: Other Key:

Remainder: Subtotal Permanent:

Maximum Personnel at Any Time:

Date:

Total:

II—EQUIPMENT OWNED III—FINANCIAL DATA AS

OF (DATE): Present Value ($) Current Assets:

Acquisition Cost ($) Current Liabilities:

Net Worth:

IV—TOTAL VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION

WORK IN PAST 5 YRS EXCLUSIVE OF JOINT VENTURE

(LIST MOST RECENT FIRST)

V—LARGEST JOB EVER

CONTRACTED

(If Other Than in Past Five Years)

$ LARGEST JOB IN PAST 5 YRS Contract Amount:

Date:

Description:

Owner:

$ Contract Amount:

Date:

Description:

Owner:

Avg. Annual Income

VI—TYPE OF WORK IN WHICH FIRM SPECIALIZES

NAME AND POSITION/TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING SIGNATURE

NOTE: Use reverse side for explanations or detailed description of item(s) reported above.

SCHEDULE 1 EXISTING COMMITMENTS

Contract Number and Total Value

Description of the Work Project Owner*

Performance Period

% of work Subcontracted

* PLEASE PROVIDE NAME OF ORGANIZATION, POINT OF CONTACT, AND TELEPHONE NUMBER

FOR CONTACT

(f). SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

(1) Number of Sets of the Technical Proposal. Submit the ORIGINAL PRINT COPY and FOUR CD-ROM COPIES of the Technical Proposal.

(2) Format and Contents of the Technical Proposal and List of Tabs. The original and all copies of the technical proposal will be appropriately labeled as such. Each set shall be organized using the tabs specified in the following chart.

TAB CONTENTS OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Factor 1 Past Performance

Factor 2 Overall Construction Approach

Factor 3 Relevant Project Experience

3) Page Limitations. See paragraphs 1.d.(2) and 1.d.(6) above for format and page count instructions. The following page limitations are established for each factor described above:

- Factor 1, Past Performance – Twelve (12) pages Limit – Six (6) pages for the three (3) ratings and six (6) pages for performance recognition documents.

- Factor 2, Overall Construction Approach – Eight (8) Pages Limit

- Factor 3, Relevant Project Experience – Ten (10) pages Limit - not to exceed two

(2) page narrative each for at least three (3) project experience overviews, but no more than five (5) project experience overviews

Tables of content, proposal cover letters, and tabs between proposal information do not count toward any page limitations in the proposal.

EVALUATION OF OFFEROR PROPOSALS

ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD. In accordance with the FAR 1.602-1(b), no contract shall be entered into unless the contracting officer ensures that all requirements of law, executive orders, regulations, and all other applicable procedures, including clearances and approvals, have been met. This includes FAR 9.103 requirement that no award shall be made unless the contracting officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must meet the general standards in FAR Part 9 and any special standards set forth in the solicitation.

SOURCE SELECTION USING THE LOWEST-PRICE, TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE PROCESS.

An evaluation for acceptability will be performed on each proposal in accordance with FAR 15.101- 2(b)(3). The proposal that provides the lowest price and is otherwise technically acceptable in all factors will be selected for award. To be considered technically acceptable, no technical factor in the proposal may be determined to be unacceptable. The failure of a proposal to meet any of the factors will result in a technically unacceptable rating and preclude award.

BASIS OF AWARD. Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. Tradeoffs are not permitted. Proposals are evaluated for acceptability but not ranked using non-cost/price factors. Technical acceptability will be determined first. Then, only the technically acceptable offers will be evaluated for price and an award made.

EVALUATION OF THE PRICE PROPOSALS

a. Price will be evaluated and considered but will not be scored or combined with other aspects of the proposal evaluation. The proposed prices will be analyzed for reasonableness. They may also be analyzed to determine whether they are realistic for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirements, and are consistent with the information provided by the Offeror.

Additionally, all offers will be analyzed for unbalanced pricing.

b. The otherwise technically-acceptable, lowest-price offeror may be required to confirm its price on a CLIN, element, or total price basis, and/or provide additional information in support of their price, prior to contract award at the Government’s request and discretion.

c. Other Award Factors: The Contracting Officer shall consider several factors in the selection process which are important, but not quantified, such as:

1) Agreement by the offeror to all general and special contract provisions and clauses.

2) Determination of responsibility of the contractor by the Contracting Officer in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Part 9.1. In order to be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must:

(a) Have adequate financial resources to perform the contract or the ability to obtain

(b) Be able to comply with the required or proposed delivery or performance schedule taking into consideration all existing commercial and Governmental business commitments

(c) Have a satisfactory performance record.

(d) Have a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics.

(e) Have the necessary organization, experience, accounting and operational controls, and technical skills, or the ability to obtain them.

(f) Have the necessary production, construction, and technical equipment and facilities, or the ability to obtain them.

(g) Be otherwise qualified and eligible to receive an award under applicable laws and regulations.

EVALUATION OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL. The Technical Proposal will be evaluated based on the following evaluation criteria:

FACTOR 1

Vol. 1, Tab 1 PAST PERFORMANCE

For the projects listed under the factor for Relevant Project Experience, the Government will query the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) to validate past performance ratings on Department of Defense contracts and any other past performance information the Government deems necessary to evaluate a contractor’s past performance. Firms without a history of past performance will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

For each project that does not have a PPIRS evaluation, Offerors shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire (attached) to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance under such contracts. These questionnaires shall be returned directly to, Darrell Montgomery via email at Darrell.L.Montgomery@usace.army.mil. Any questionnaires not returned directly to the specialist will not be reviewed and evaluated. The information contained in the questionnaires will be used to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance. If any negative past performance information is received, the contractor will be given an opportunity to provide rebuttal.

CPARS evaluations that are part of the official record will be utilized as if the Offeror has already had an opportunity to respond.

Do not request past performance questionnaires on projects that have final PPIRS evaluations. If a past performance questionnaire is received on a project where a final PPIRS evaluation exists, the PPIRS evaluation will serve as the official rating of record for evaluation purposes.

Each contractor shall provide at least three (3) past performance ratings. Any rating an offeror has in PPIRS will count toward this requirement. The offeror is responsible for ensuring that the Contracting Officer has received a minimum of three (3) questionnaires prior to that date/time or has provided written notification to the Contracting Officer that they have current ratings in PPIRS. New entities that have no past customers shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing, prior to the date and time established for the RFP closing, that they have had no previous clients and that the minimum number of questionnaires cannot be provided. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure that the reference documentation is provided, as the Government may not make additional requests for past performance information from the references. This does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) information in the past performance evaluation.

The Government may contact references provided as part of the Factor for Experience, for information regarding the Offeror’s past performance on the project and for the purposes of assessing and verifying the scope of the work performed. Offerors should provide accurate, current, and complete contact information for references provided in the project descriptions.

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. 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 designer or contractor, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting design or construction errors, warranty work, etc. If the Government cannot establish the Offeror’s relevant past performance, it reserves the right to contact the points of contact on the information sheets. 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.

PAST PERFORMANCE WILL BE EVALUATED BASED ON THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:

1. The past performance evaluation is an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum past performance solicitation requirements. This will be based on the Offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertains to the products and/or services outlined in these solicitation requirements. The Government will place greater value on contracts 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.

This factor will be rated as acceptable or unacceptable in accordance with the definitions contained in the below table:

Past Performance Evaluation Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note below.)

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, "unknown" shall be considered "acceptable."

2. ASPECTS OF PAST PERFORMANCE:

a. Past/Present performance information shall be recent and relevant to the requirement being offered. To be determined recent for the purpose of this evaluation, projects must be at least 50% complete or completed within the last 5 years. Projects will be considered relevant to this procurement if they are similar in complexity, in type, scope, or magnitude. Relevancy is further described as projects having comparable overall complexity, operational constraints, and value. Relevant value is an overall project equal to or greater than $2M for the Prime Contractor

b. The Government’s evaluation team will gather information on how well the offeror performed on past contracts. FAR 15.101-2(b)(1), requires if the Contracting Officer determines that a small business' past performance is not acceptable, the matter is referred to the SBA for a Certificate of Competency (COC) determination.

The Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1 Past Performance for the Prime Contractor. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires shall be returned directly to, Darrell L. Montgomery via email at Darrell.L.Montgomery@usace.army.mil. 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 the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Darrell Montgomery prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other solicitations/RFPs.

However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

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

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating 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 numbers 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 Awardee 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

FACTOR 2

Vol. 1, Tab 2 OVERALL CONSTRUCTION APPROACH

General: The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the Offerors have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the solicitation and whether the Offeror’s methods and approach meet the solicitation requirements to provide the Government with a high level of confidence of successful completion within the required specifications.

Submission Requirements:

The Offeror shall fully describe the project management approach and ability to execute the full scope of the award within the limits of the phasing as specified in the RFP requirements in the Specifications and Drawings. The Offeror shall provide, at a minimum, the following:

• WBS– The proposal shall include a comprehensive Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) including the construction activities as they relate to the primary construction work elements. The proposed WBS must be organized by the most current Construction Specification Institute (CSI) MasterFormat structure.

• Project Management approach - A supporting narrative that addresses the Offeror’s project management approach. The narrative shall address the following elements at a minimum:

a. Construction Safety with an emphasis on building construction

b. Construction Quality Control (CQC)

c. Reporting

d. Meetings

e. Resolution of contract Requests for Information (RFIs)

f. Coordination and supervision of work activities

g. Challenges that the Offeror foresees and plans for overcoming these challenges

h. Minimizing impact to cost and schedule in support of project objectives

• Organizational Chart - An organizational management chart. The chart shall address the following elements at a minimum:

a. Management structure/chains of communication

b. Execution structure

c. Subcontractor tiers

d. Onsite project management controls and execution approach (placement, inspection and supply)

e. Management of staff and coordination among labor, subcontractors, and suppliers

Minimally acceptability standards:

• The proposed WBS must be organized by the most current Construction Specification Institute (CSI) MasterFormat structure

• The Project Management approach addressing at a minimum elements a-h

• Organizational Chart addressing at a minimum elements a-e

Failure to demonstrate the minimally acceptability standards under this factor will result in an “UNACCEPTABLE” rating and possible elimination from further consideration for contract award.

Consensus Rating: Acceptable/ Unacceptable

FACTOR 3

Vol. 1. Tab 3-Relevant Project Experience

General:

The Offeror shall submit a Project Information Sheet (see above) depicting at least three (3) but not more than 5 projects. Each project must be recent, that is, have been substantially complete (at least 50% complete) or completed within five years of the issue date of this solicitation. Additionally, each project submitted must be relevant, that is similar in size, scope and complexity to the project solicited herein.

The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, relevant and similar project experience. For evaluation purposes, “similar” is defined as sharing the following characteristics with the construction of military and/or commercial vehicle operations and vehicle maintenance facilities consisting of steel framed buildings with metal panels and brick veneer, high bay structures (>25 feet high), maintenance pit, fire pump, and traveling overhead bridge crane systems. In addition for evaluation purposes “recent” is defined as either projects completed within the last five (5) years of this RFP release or currently with construction at least 50% complete. Finally for evaluation purposes “relevant” is defined as projects having comparable overall complexity, operational constraints, and value. Relevant value is an overall project equal to or greater than $2M for the Prime Contractor. The Offeror’s will provide:

Submission Requirements:

• The Offeror shall submit at least three (3) project experience overviews.

• The project experience overview, not to exceed a two (2) page narrative, of the project for the Prime Contractor that provides recent, relevant experience on similar projects demonstrating the Offeror’s technical experience and performance in the same role proposed.

• A scope for each project submitted shall address at a minimum three (3 ) of the seven (7) following recent, relevant and similar project experience elements:

1. Steel framed buildings.

2. Buildings with metal panels and masonry veneers.

3. High bay structures with heights greater than 25 feet.

4. Maintenance pits.

5. Traveling bridge crane systems.

6. Fire Pumps.

7. Project with comparable function, size, local conditions, applicable codes to the RFP Requirements.

• Each project summary submitted shall address at a minimum the following information:

1. Project title and location.

2. Description of project scope, including a brief overview of the project which discusses major features of the construction and identifies the project’s relevance/similarities to this solicitation.

3. Original contract award amount and final construction cost.

4. Original contract finish date and actual finish date.

5. Offeror’s point of contact (name, job title, address, telephone, and e-mail address). The POC shall be familiar with the construction performance of the Offeror, Role of the Offeror on the project, including a clear designation of whether or not the Offeror was the prime contractor.

6. List of key subcontractors and key personnel.

Minimally acceptability standards:

• At least three (3) project experience summaries.

• A brief overview narrative, not to exceed two (2) page.

• A scope addressing at a minimum three (3) of the seven (7) recent, relevant and similar project experience elements.

• Each project summary addressing at a minimum elements 1-6.

Failure to demonstrate the minimally acceptability standards under this factor will result in an “UNACCEPTABLE” rating and possible elimination from further consideration for contract award.

Consensus Rating: Acceptable/ Unacceptable

GENERAL TECHNICAL CRITERIA

a. Material omission(s) may cause the technical proposal to be rejected as unacceptable.

b. Proposals which are generic, vague, or lacking in detail may be considered unacceptable. The offeror’s failure to include information that the Government has indicated should be included may result in the proposal being found deficient if inadequate detail is provided.

c. The Government cannot make award based on a deficient offer. Therefore, receipt of an “UNACCEPTABLE” determination of acceptability for any factor will make the offer ineligible for award, unless the Government elects to enter into discussions with that Offeror and all deficiencies are remedied in a revised proposal.

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0) CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS.

CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO USACE. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR USACE POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating.

Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract.

There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not Applicable No information or did not apply to your contract Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

TO BE COMPLETED

BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts E VG S M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E VG S M U N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes;…