10r3-am4.pdf

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1 2

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

AM-0004 20 Jul 10

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

Contracting Division USAED, Honolulu, Bldg 230 Ft Shafter, HI 96858-5440

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State, and Zip Code) (x) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

W9128A-10-R-0003 X

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

6/23/10

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

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 Offers [ ] is extended, [ X ] is not extended.

Offers 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 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 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.

(x) 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.)

FY09 Grow The Army Projects: PN 69308, PN 68786, PN 68821, PN 68822, South Range, Schofield Barracks, Oahu, Hawaii

See Page 2 of 2 Pages

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

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

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE

30-105 STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

RFP No. W9128A-10-R-0003 Standard Form 30 Amendment No. AM-0004 Page 2 of 2 Pages Item No. 14 (Continued)

CHANGES TO THE SOLICITATION. Attached hereto are new pages to the solicitation. The revision marked “(AM-0004)” is shown on each page.

1. Summary for Amendment 0004:

Submittal of Subcontracting Plan moved to Phase 2.

Clarified narrative submittal limitations

A. Section 00 22 10 Revised Table of Contents, paragraph 6.0 Revised table, paragraph 3.0 Revised paragraphs 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.4, 6.0, 6.1, 6.1.1, 6.1.1.1, 6.2, 6.2.1

B. Section 00 22 20

Revised table, paragraph 4.2 NEW paragraph 9.0 Renumbered paragraph 10.0 Revised paragraph 10.1.2

C. Pre-Proposal Conference Information and Sign-In Roster

D. 14 July 10 Site Visit Roster

E. 15 July 10 Site Visit Roster

2. DELETED PAGES: None

3. REVISED PAGE: Following are the revised Sections to the solicitation:

Section 00 22 10 Section 00 22 20

4. NEW PAGE: Following are the new pages to the solicitation:

Pre-Proposal Conference Information and Sign-In Roster 14 July 10 Site Visit Roster 15 July 10 Site Visit Roster

5. The proposal due date of August 5, 2010, 2:00 P.M., Hawaiian Standard Time, remains unchanged.

00 22 10 - 1 (Am-0004)

SECTION 00 22 10

PHASE 1 OF 2 PHASE DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.0 OVERVIEW

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

3.0 PHASE 1 PROPOSAL – PART B CONTENTS

4.0 TAB A – FACTOR 1 - EXPERIENCE

4.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

4.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.0 TAB B –FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

5.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

6.0 TAB C – FACTOR 3 – SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM, PAST PERFORMANCE IN COMPLYING

WITH SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING

6.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

6.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

7.0 PHASE 1 EVALUATION

7.1. EVALUATION PROCESS

7.2. TERMINOLOGY

7.3. RATINGS

7.4. RISK ASSESMENTS

PHASE ONE – ATTACHMENTS

PHASE ONE PROPOSAL - PART A, ATTACHMENT 1, PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

PHASE ONE PROPOSAL - PART B, TAB A, ATTACHMENT 2, COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE -

CONSTRUCTION OR PRIME CONTRACTOR

00 22 10 - 2

PHASE ONE PROPOSAL - PART B, TAB A, ATTACHMENT 3, COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE –

LEAD DESIGN FIRM OR IN-HOUSE DESIGN CAPABILITY

PHASE ONE PROPOSAL - PART B, TAB B, ATTACHMENT 4, PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

QUESTIONNAIRE

PHASE ONE PROPOSAL - PART B, TAB A, ATTACHMENT 5, LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR LEAD

DESIGN FIRM

00 22 10 - 3

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1. The Government is looking for ways to streamline construction, manage labor and other resource constraints in an effort to reduce costs and achieve an aggressive schedule in executing the Army’s Transformation program goals of faster contract execution at lower cost, while taking advantage of industry standards, means and methods. In Phase 1 of the 2 phase design-build selection procedure, interested firms or joint venture entities (referred to as “Offerors”) submit certain specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully execute the design-build construction contract resulting from this solicitation. The Government will evaluate the performance capability of the Offerors based on the submitted proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein. Approximately 3-6 of the most highly qualified Offerors in Phase 1 will be short-listed and offered the opportunity to compete for the design-build contract in Phase 2.

1.2. In Phase 2, the short-listed Offerors will submit proposals in accordance with Section 00 22 20.

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1. Any legally organized firm or entity may submit proposals. An Offeror may include the one or more of the following: a design build entity, design firm, construction contractor, consortia of firms or associations.

Associations may be formed specifically for this project and may be formed as joint ventures or key team subcontractors. All designs must be under the direct supervision of appropriately licensed professionals for each discipline involved.

2.2. Submit proposals in two (2) separate envelopes. All proposal revisions shall be submitted as page replacements with revised text readily identifiable, e.g. bold face print or underlining. Proposal replacement pages shall be clearly marked “REVISED,” shall show the date of revision, and shall be submitted in the appropriate number of copies (e.g., if four copies of the original page was required, then four copies of the revised page will also be required).

2.2.1 Volume I, Phase I Proposal - Part A: One envelope shall be clearly marked, “VOLUME I, PHASE I PROPOSAL – Part A, RFP NO. W9128A-10-R-0003.” Volume I shall include the following:

• Original and one copy of completed Standard Form (SF) 1442, using a printed copy of the SF 1442 included in this solicitation for the contract (NOT including the Proposal Schedule) completed and signed by a person authorized by the Offeror.

• Original and one copy of completed proposal data sheet (See Attachment 1, provided at the end of this

Section)

• One certified copy of the Offeror's executed joint venture agreement that holds all parties to the joint venture liable for all of its responsibilities as an Offeror (if the Offeror is a joint venture).

• Original and one copy of completed Section 00600, Representations and Certifications, using a printed copy of Section 00600 included in this solicitation. Please note that the representations and certifications must also be completed electronically via the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) website at http://orca.bpn.gov.

• Original of completed, if applicable, SF LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, using a printed copy of the

SF LLL included as Appendix A in Section 00600.

http://orca.bpn.gov/�

00 22 10 - 4

• Original letter from the Offeror’s surety stating that the Offeror has sufficient bonding capacity for performance and payment bonds in excess of $200 million and the surety’s assurance that it intends to provide such bonds if the Offeror is awarded the contract. FAILURE TO INCLUDE THIS LETTER IN

THE PROPOSAL MAY CAUSE THE OFFEROR TO BE INELIGIBLE TO PROCEED TO PHASE 2.

2.2.2 Volume 2, Phase 1 Proposal – Part B: One envelope shall be clearly marked, “VOLUME 2, PHASE 1 PROPOSAL – Part B, RFP NO. W9128A-10-R-0003.” Volume 2 shall include the following:

• Original and five copies of the Phase I Proposal - Part B described below. Submit the Phase 1 Proposal –

Part B in a tabbed, three-ring binder. Note that the Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits, indicated below. PHASE 1 DOES NOT INVOLVE A PRICING SUBMISSION.

3.0 PHASE 1 PROPOSAL – PART B CONTENTS

Location Factor Number Description Relative Importance

Tab A Factor 1 Experience 1st (Most Important Factor, equal in importance to Factor 2)

Tab B Factor 2 Past Performance 1st (Most Important Factor, equal in importance to Factor 1)

Tab C Factor 3 Small Business Program, Past Performance in complying with Small Business Subcontracting Plan

2nd (significantly less important than Factors 1 and 2)

4.0 TAB A – FACTOR 1 - EXPERIENCE

4.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

4.1.1. Prime Contractor and Lead Design Firm. Recent, relevant experience shall be demonstrated using the forms provided. Recent, relevant contracts submitted by the Prime Contractor shall be submitted using Attachment 2, Company Specialized Experience-Construction or Prime Contractor. The Lead Design Firm shall submit its recent, relevant experience using Attachment 3, Company Specialized Experience-Lead Design Firm or In-House Design Capability. Offerors may identify federal, state, and local government as well as private contracts. If the Offeror or any members of the JV has multiple functions or divisions, limit the submittal of contract examples to those performed by the division or unit submitting the offer. Identify design-build contracts. The Prime Contractor and the Lead Design Firm shall each submit no more than two (2) recent, relevant contracts (maximum of four (4) relevant contracts per Offeror).

4.1.2. Company Specialized Experience Narrative (5-page limit). In addition to the Company Specialized Experience data sheets (Attachment 2 or 3, as applicable), provide a narrative description of each relevant contract included in the proposal. The narrative shall clearly explain how the submitted contract fulfills the experience characteristics for which it is being submitted. No more than five (5) pages shall be submitted for each contract, 00 22 10 - 5 including the Company Specialized Experience data sheet and any continuation pages. Pages exceeding this 5-page limit will not be considered.

4.1.3. Letters of Commitment. Include a signed letter of commitment (Attachment 5) from the Lead Design Firm (if other than a member of a Joint Venture) stating that the firm intends to work on this contract if it is awarded to the Offeror.

4.1.4. Supplemental Narrative (1-page limit). A supplemental narrative may be included, not to exceed one page, that describes any previous Joint Venture, teaming, or prime/subcontractor experience. (This page does not count against the 5-page limit set in paragraph 4.1.2.)

4.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA:

4.2.1. Proposals will be evaluated to determine the extent of Prime Contractor’s and the Lead Design Firm’s experience on recent, relevant contracts consistent with their proposed roles on this contract. Recent is defined as a construction or design-build contract currently well underway (designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or completed and turned over no earlier than five (5) years preceding the date of this Solicitation.

4.2.2. Items in the table below identify criteria that define contract relevancy. For Prime Contractors and Lead Design Firms, a relevant contract shall demonstrate size, type of experience and complexity criteria. Failure to meet one or more elements under the size, type or experience, or complexity criteria will not automatically preclude a contract from being considered relevant.

Relevant Contract Definition

Team Member Size Type of Experience Complexity

Prime Contractor and Lead Design Firm

Construction or Design-build contract approximately $100 million or larger

Design-build

Site design and development of unimproved land

Coordination and management of a multi-disciplined design and/or construction team

Coordination with multiple government and other outside agencies

Design and/or construction in similar site conditions as the GTA site

Design/construction of a USGBC

A complex that includes: site design and development of raw land, infrastructure systems such as roads, communication, water and electrical distribution, and sewer collection;

administrative buildings and light industrial buildings

Fast-track construction

Phased completion dates and/or early partial turnover

00 22 10 - 6

LEED-certified project

Incorporated use of BIM during design/construction

4.2.3. Experience of the Lead Design Firm (if other than a member of a Joint Venture) that does not submit a letter of commitment will not be evaluated.

4.2.4. Design-build experience may be given more consideration than experience for only design or construction contracts.

4.2.5. Relevant contracts more closely matching the size comparable to the total available funding limit for this contract of approximately $208 million (see Section 00 11 00) may be given more consideration than relevant contracts of smaller sizes.

4.2.6. Federal Government experience will not be rated inherently more important than non-Federal Government experience.

4.2.7. The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record.

5.0 TAB B –FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

5.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

5.1 1. Past performance refers to the quality of performance on recent, relevant contracts from the owner's perspective. The information provided on the Company Specialized Experience forms submitted in Factor 1 will be used.

5.1.2. For each of the recent, relevant contracts identified in Factor 1, the Offeror and the Lead Design Firm shall complete and submit Part A of Attachment 4 with its proposal. In addition, submit EITHER an agency-generated performance evaluation, similar to DD Form 2626 or DD Form 2631, OR a completed Performance Evaluation Questionnaire (Attachment 4, Part B). If an agency-generated performance evaluation is not available for the submitted relevant contract(s), then the Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire found at the end of this section as Attachment 4, Part B must be completed and submitted. The Offeror is encouraged to provide information on problems encountered on identified contracts and the corrective action taken.

5.1.3. For those relevant contracts requiring submittal of the attached Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire, the Offeror shall complete Part A. Offeror shall then send the partially completed form to the reference (Administrative Contracting Officer/ Respondent or equivalent point of contact), for the identified contract for completion of Part B. The Offeror shall instruct the reference to submit the completed evaluation questionnaire (Parts A and B) directly to the person identified on the SF1442, Block 9 so the Government may solicit candid, unbiased interview comments. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that Respondents return their completed questionnaires (Part B) by the proposal due date. The Government may, but is not obligated to, contact and

00 22 10 - 7 interview the points of contact, and reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the listed reference, if the listed reference is not available. The Government may use personal knowledge or information from other sources such as agency performance databases in its evaluation of an Offeror’s past performance.

5.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.2.1. A risk assessment will be performed to ascertain the probability of the Offeror’s success on this contract, considering the degree of success of the Offeror’s and its Lead Design Firm’s experience on recent, relevant contracts (as defined in Factor 1.) Past Performance on recent, relevant contracts that are design-build may be given more weight than those that are not-design-build. Consideration will be given to the recency and relevancy of the information, source of the information, context of the data, relation of information to Offeror's proposed role on the contract and general trends in contractor performance.

5.2.2. The evaluation is not limited to past performance information on the contracts submitted by the Offeror and its Lead Design Firm. Personal knowledge or information from other sources such as agency performance databases may be used.

5.2.3. During the evaluation, points of contact may be contacted and interviewed. Other individuals acting for the listed reference may also be interviewed if the listed reference is not available. See Attachment 4 for the questions that will be asked. The names of references or individuals contacted will not be released to the Offeror at any time in order to solicit candid, unbiased interview comments.

5.2.4. If past performance information for the contracts identified by the Offeror or Lead Design Firm cannot be obtained or is not provided and a past performance record cannot be established through other sources, past performance will be rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The Offeror’s performance risk will be considered “unknown”.

5.2.5. For Joint Venture (or legally organized firm/entity) Offerors, the risk assessment will include an analysis of the JV (firm/entity)'s previous experience working together, the capacity in which the team members participated

(ex. Joint Venture, prime-sub, or teaming arrangement), and the success of the JV (firm/entity)’s performance, if applicable.

5.2.6. Past Performance for firms that do not submit letters of commitment in Factor 1 will not be evaluated. The lack of Past Performance information due to the failure to submit a letter of commitment will be part of the risk assessment.

6.0 TAB C – FACTOR 3 – SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM, PAST PERFORMANCE IN COMPLYING

WITH SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING

6.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

6.1.1. Submit SF 294s, "Subcontracting Report for Individual Contracts" for all contracts submitted by the prime contractor under Factor 1 above. Provide explanations for goals that were not met.

00 22 10 - 8

6.1.1.1. Offerors shall submit data that demonstrate its use of Small Business Concerns. Small Business Concerns include small businesses (SB), small disadvantaged businesses (SDB), women-owned small businesses (WOSB), service disabled veteran-owned small businesses (SDVOSB), HUBZone small businesses, veteran-owned small businesses (VOSB) and historically black colleges/universities or minority institutions (HBCU/MI). If the Offeror’s submitted contracts did not require the submission of SF 294s, provide SF 294s on any other contracts that were completed and turned over no earlier than three (3) years preceding the date of this Solicitation. If goals were not met on these contracts, provide explanations. If SF 294s were not required on any other contracts, state that in the proposal.

6.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA

6.2.1. Proposals will be evaluated to determine the extent that the Offeror’s Subcontracting Plan goals were met. If the goals were not met, the proposal will be evaluated to determine if the explanation for not meeting the goals were reasonable.

7.0 PHASE 1 EVALUATION

7.1. EVALUATION PROCESS

7.1.1. Each proposal will be rated against the evaluation criteria stated above by a source selection evaluation board (SSEB). After ratings for all factors in all proposals are determined, the ratings and relative advantages and disadvantages of proposals compared to each other will be examined and presented to the Source Selection Authority (SSA). Only proposals in which all factors are rated “Acceptable” and/or “Moderate Risk” or better will be eligible for consideration to short-list for Phase 2. Using this information, the SSA, independently exercising prudent business judgment, will select approximately 3-6 of the most highly qualified offerors to short-list for Phase 2.

7.1.2. Possible Ratings. Factors 1and 3 will be assigned one of the following ratings: “Excellent”, “Good”, “Acceptable”, “Marginal”, or “Unacceptable”. Factor 2 will be assigned one of the following risk assessments:

“Unknown Risk”, “Low Risk”, “Moderate Risk”, or “High Risk”.

7.2. TERMINOLOGY

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

7.2.2. Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

7.2.3. Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

7.2.4. Strength. Any aspect of a proposal that, when judged against a stated evaluation criteria, enhances the merit of the proposal or increases the probability of successful performance of the contract.

00 22 10 - 9

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

7.3. RATINGS

7.3.1. Excellent. Proposal has exceptional merit and reflects an excellent approach which will clearly result in the superior attainment of all requirements and objectives. This clearly achievable approach includes numerous advantageous characteristics of substance, and essentially no disadvantages, which can be expected to result in outstanding performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is very low as the proposal offers solutions which are unquestionably feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered very low risk in that they are exceptionally clear and precise, fully supported, and demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirements. Risk level: Very Low

7.3.2. Good. Proposal demonstrates a sound approach which is expected to meet all requirements and objectives.

This sound approach includes advantageous characteristics of substance, and few relatively minor disadvantages, which collectively can be expected to result in satisfactory performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is low as the proposal contains solutions which are considered feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered to be low risk in that they are clear and precise, supported, and demonstrate an understanding of the requirements. Risk level: Low.

7.3.3. Acceptable. Proposal demonstrates an approach which is capable of meeting all requirements and objectives.

The approach includes both advantageous and disadvantageous characteristics of substance, where the advantages are not outweighed by the disadvantages. Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages are likely to result in acceptable performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate, as the proposal solutions are generally feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered to reflect moderate risk in that they are somewhat clear and precise, partially supported, and demonstrate a general understanding of the requirements. Risk Level:

Moderate.

7.3.4. Marginal. The proposal demonstrates an approach which may not be capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. The approach has disadvantages of substance, and advantages, if they exist, are outweighed by the disadvantages. Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages are not likely to result in satisfactory performance.

The risk of unsuccessful performance is high as the proposal contains solutions which may not be feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered to reflect high risk in that that they lack clarity and precision, are generally unsupported, and do not demonstrate a complete understanding of the requirements. Risk Level: High.

7.3.5. Unacceptable. The proposal demonstrates an approach which, based on a very high risk, will very likely not be capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. This approach has numerous disadvantages of substance, and advantages, if they exist, are far outweighed by disadvantages. Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages will not result in satisfactory performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is very high as the proposal contains solutions which are not feasible and practical. The solutions are further considered to be very high risk in that they lack any clarity or precision, are unsupported, and do not demonstrate an understanding of the requirement. Risk Level: Very High.

00 22 10 - 10

7.4. RISK ASSESSMENTS

7.4.1. Unknown Risk. Offeror has no relevant performance record identifiable; equates to an unknown risk rating having no positive or negative evaluation significance.

7.4.2. Low Risk. Little doubt exists, based upon the Offeror’s performance record, that the Offeror can perform the proposed effort.

7.4.3. Moderate Risk. Some doubt exists, based on the Offeror's performance record, that the Offeror can successfully perform the proposed effort.

7.4.4. High Risk. Significant doubt exists, based on the Offeror's performance record, that the Offeror can successfully perform the proposed effort.

00 22 10 - 11

PHASE ONE PROPOSAL - PART A

ATTACHMENT 1

PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

1. Name of Solicitation: _______________________________________________________________________

2. Name of Firm: ____________________________________________________________________________

Address: ________________________________________________________________________________

Phone: __________________________________________________________________________________

Fax: ____________________________________________________________________________________

E-mail: _________________________________________________________________________________

DUNS # (used for accessing the Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS) or A-E Contractor Administration Support System (ACASS) Database) _____________________________________

Also provide any other assigned number that identifies the member firm(s) in the ACASS or CCASS databases. If a separate DUNS has been created for a joint venture (JV) it must also be submitted. If the firm is a joint venture or contractor-subcontractor association of firms, list the individual firms and briefly describe the nature of the association. Provide DUNS # for each.

DUNS #

Firm 1: __________________________________________________________________________________

Firm 2: __________________________________________________________________________________

Firm 3: __________________________________________________________________________________

Nature of Association: ______________________________________________________________________

3. AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATOR. FAR 52.215-11

The Offeror represents that the following persons are authorized to negotiate on its behalf with the Government in connection with this Request for Proposal (RFP).

Name of Person Authorized to Negotiate: _______________________________________________________

Negotiator's Address: ______________________________________________________________________

Negotiator's Telephone: _____________________________________________________________________

Negotiator’s E-mail: _______________________________________________________________________

00 22 10 - 12

PHASE ONE PROPOSAL - PART B, TAB A

ATTACHMENT 2

COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE - CONSTRUCTION OR PRIME CONTRACTOR

The data provided on this sheet will provide supporting information for the Offeror’s Experience and Past Performance (Factors 1 & 2). Use this form to document recent, relevant contracts. Use one form per contract.

(a) Your Firm’s Name: ________________________________________________________________________

(b) Contract Number: __________________________________________________________________________

(c) Contract Title: ____________________________________________________________________________

(d) Location of Contract: _______________________________________________________________________

(e) Owner: __________________________________________________________________________________

(f) General Scope of Contract (___Design-Build or ___Construction only): _______________________________

(g) Your Role (Prime, Joint Venture, or Subcontractor, etc.) and Work Your Company Self-Performed:

(h) Award Amount: __________________________ Final Contract Price: ____________________________

(j) Award Date: _____________________________ % Complete: __________________________________

(j) Original Completion Date: ___________________ Actual Completion Date: ________________________

(k) Your Final Performance Rating by Owner, if known _______________________________________________ (Attach copy of evaluation, if available)

(l) Were You Terminated or Assessed Liquidated Damages? ___________________________________________ (If either is “Yes”, attach an Explanation)

(m) Point of Contact for Reference (Name, Company, Position) _________________________________________

(n) Current Telephone Number of Reference POC ____________________________________________________

(o) Current E-mail Address of Reference POC: _____________________________________________________

00 22 10 - 13

PHASE ONE PROPOSAL - PART B, TAB A

ATTACHMENT 3

COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE – LEAD DESIGN FIRM OR IN-HOUSE DESIGN CAPABILITY

The data provided on this sheet will provide supporting information for the Offeror’s Experience and Past Performance (Factors 1 & 2). Use this form to document recent, relevant contracts. Use one form per contract.

(a) Your Firm’s Name _________________________________________________________________________

(b) Design Contract Number: ___________________________________________________________________

(c) Design Contract Title: ______________________________________________________________________

(d) Location of Construction: ___________________________________________________________________

(e) Owner: __________________________________________________________________________________

(f) General Scope of Contract (___Design-Build or ___Design only): ____________________________________

(g) Summary of Your Role in Design of this Contract, including implementing LEED: ______________________

(h) Dates Construction: Began ________________________ Completed ________________________________

(i) Construction Contract Award Amount: ______________ Final Construction Contract Price: ____________ (Indicate Estimated “E” or Actual “A”)

(j) Extent and Type of Design Subcontracted: _______________________________________________________

(k) Your Performance Evaluation, if known: _______________________________________________________

(l) Were You Terminated or Assessed Liquidated Damages? ___________________________________________ (If either is “Yes”, attach an Explanation)

(m) Point of Contact for Reference (Name and Company): ____________________________________________

(n) Current Telephone Number of Reference POC: __________________________________________________

(o) Current E-mail Address of Reference POC: _____________________________________________________

00 22 10 - 14

PHASE ONE PROPOSAL - PART B, TAB B

ATTACHMENT 4

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

PART A (to be completed by Offeror)

1. Contractor/Name & Address (City and State): ____________________________________________________

2. Type of Contract: Fixed Price ________ Cost Reimbursement ________ Other (Specify) __________________

3. Title of Contract/Contract Number: _____________________________________________________________

4. Description of Work (___Design-Build or ___Construction only or ___Design only): _____________________

5. Location of Work: __________________________________________________________________________

6. Date of Award: ___________________________ Completion Date: _______________________________

7. Complexity of Work: High ________ Mid _________ Routine __________

8. Status: Completed (Yes/No): ________________ In Progress, _________% complete

9 % of work and type of work performed by the Offeror: ______________________________________________

10. Name and telephone number of Owner’s Technical Representative: __________________________________

00 22 10 - 15

PART B (to be completed by Respondent) (NOTE: The names of references or individuals contacted will not be released to the Offeror at any time in order to solicit candid, unbiased interview comments.)

QUALITY OF PRODUCT/SERVICE:

11. Please evaluate the contractor's/designer’s performance in complying with contract requirements, quality achieved and overall technical expertise demonstrated.

Outstanding/Exceptional Above Average/Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory (contractor) (designer) (contractor) (designer) (contractor/designer) (contractor/designer) (contractor/designer)

Remarks ____________________________________________________________________________________

12. To what extent were the contractor’s/designer’s reports and documentation accurate, complete and submitted in a timely manner? Construction contractor examples: submittals, test reports, CQC plan, Accident Prevention Plan, etc. Designer examples: construction plans and specifications, design analysis, studies, etc.

Outstanding/Exceptional Above Average/Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory (contractor) (designer) (contractor) (designer) (contractor/designer) (contractor/designer) (contractor/designer)

Remarks ____________________________________________________________________________________

13. To what extent was the contractor/designer able to solve contract performance problems without extensive guidance from Owner counterparts?

Outstanding/Exceptional Above Average/Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory (contractor) (designer) (contractor) (designer) (contractor/designer) (contractor/designer) (contractor/designer)

Remarks ____________________________________________________________________________________

00 22 10 - 16

14. How well did the contractor/designer manage and coordinate subcontractors, subconsultants, suppliers, and the labor force?

Outstanding/Exceptional Above Average/Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory (contractor) (designer) (contractor) (designer) (contractor/designer) (contractor/designer) (contractor/designer)

Remarks ____________________________________________________________________________________

TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

15. To what extent did the contractor/designer succeed in developing, managing, and adhering to a performance schedule?

Outstanding/Exceptional Above Average/Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory (contractor) (designer) (contractor) (designer) (contractor/designer) (contractor/designer) (contractor/designer)

Remarks ____________________________________________________________________________________

00 22 10 - 17

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

16. To what extent were the end users satisfied with:

Quality? Cost? Schedule?

Exceptionally Satisfied

Highly Satisfied

Satisfied

Somewhat Dissatisfied

Highly Dissatisfied

Remarks ____________________________________________________________________________________

17. If given the opportunity, would you work with this contractor/designer again?

Yes ___________ No ____________ Not Sure ____________

OTHER REMARKS:

17. Please use the space below to provide other information related to the contractor's/designer’s performance. This may include the contractor's/designer’s selection and management of subcontractors, flexibility in dealing with contract challenges, their overall concern for the Owner’s interest, contract awards received, etc.

Remarks ____________________________________________________________________________________

END OF QUESTIONNAIRE

00 22 10 - 18

PHASE ONE PROPOSAL - PART B, TAB A

ATTACHMENT 5

LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR LEAD DESIGN FIRM

(USE COMPANY LETTERHEAD)

TO: Contracting Officer

SUBJECT: Letter of Commitment for Proposed Contract for ____________________

Dear Sir or Madam:

I hereby make the unequivocal commitment that, in the event of an award of a contract to (Fill in name of Proposer), that (insert name of design firm) will fulfill the duties of (state role on contract)

Sincerely, (Authorized Official)

Date: __________

00 22 20 - 1

SECTION 00 22 20

PHASE 2 DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES AND BASIS OF AWARD

1.1. Those Offerors short-listed in Phase 1 will be invited to submit a Phase 2 proposal, as indicated below.

1.2. The intent of this solicitation is to obtain the best-valued proposal within the funding limitations. The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed-price contract to that responsible Phase 2 Offeror whose proposal the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government. The Government will not award a contract to an Offeror whose proposal contains a deficiency, as defined in FAR 15.001. The Contract award will not exceed the funding limitations identified in Section 00 11 00.

1.3. During Phase 2, the Government intends to award without discussions.

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

2.1. In Phase 2, the evaluation will consider the preferences identified by the Government that the Offeror has incorporated into its proposal, the Offeror’s past performance (from Phase 1), and the Offeror’s Total FY09 Grow the Army Projects price and performance period.

2.2. Phase 2 proposals will be individually evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria described herein.

The Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority will compare proposals to determine the proposal that represents the best value. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest-priced offer or to reject all offers.

2.3. If there is a lower priced, conforming offer(s), the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority must determine that the added value of a more expensive proposal (within the funding limitation) would justify award to that Offeror.

3.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT

3.1. Submit proposals in one (1) envelope. All proposal revisions shall be submitted as page replacements with revised text readily identifiable, e.g. bold face print or underlining. Proposal replacement pages shall be clearly marked “REVISED,” shall show the date of revision, and shall be submitted in the appropriate number of copies (e.g., if four copies of the original page was required, then four copies of the revised page will also be required).

3.2. The envelope shall be clearly marked, “PHASE 2 PROPOSAL, RFP NO. W9128A-10-R-0003.” The proposal shall include the following:

• Original and one copy of completed Standard Form (SF) 1442, using a printed copy of the SF 1442 included in this solicitation for the contract, completed and signed by a person authorized by the Offeror.

• Original and one copy of Section 00 11 00, Proposal Schedule. Indicate whether or not Facilities Capital

Cost of Money is included in the Offeror’s costs of performing the work. Proposals that state that Facilities Capital Cost of Money is not included, or proposal that do not address Facilities Capital Cost of Money, will be deemed to have waived Facilities Capital Cost of Money.

• Original and one copy of the Government Preferences List.

• Original and six (6) copies of the Summary Schedule

00 22 20 - 2 (Am-0004)

4.0 EVALUATION FACTORS

4.1. All proposals will be evaluated on the factors listed below.

4.2. Factors 1 and 2 combined are significantly more important than price and contract duration (Factors 3 and 4).

See table below for the relative importance of the individual factors.

Location Factor Number Description Relative Importance

Tab B Factor 1 Government Preferences 1st (Most Important Factor, significantly more important than Factor 2)

(From Phase 1, Do not resubmit data) Factor 2 Past Performance (from Phase 1)

2nd (Significantly less important than Factor 1 and slightly more important than Factors 3 and 4)

Tab A Factor 3 Price (Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Schedule)

3rd (Slightly less important than Factor 2 and equally as important as Factor 4)

Tabs A and C Factor 4

Proposed Contract Duration and Summary Schedule (Proposal Schedule, Tab A), Summary Schedule (Tab C)

3rd (Slightly less important than Factor 2 and equally as important as Factor 3)

Tab D Factor 5 Subcontracting Plan 4th (Significantly less important than Factors 3 and 4)

.0 TAB B – Factor 1 – GOVERNMENT PREFERENCES

5.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

5.1.1. Submit the Proposal Schedule attachment, Government Preferences List. Place a check mark next to each item on the list identifying the preference(s) that the Offeror has incorporated into its proposed prices. If none of the preferences are included, check the item, “None of the above”. Only those items identified in the Government’s list of preferences will be given credit during the evaluation. A "Government Preference" is considered a "Betterment" for the purposes of Section 00 73 00, 1.2 DESIGN/BUILD CONTRACT - ORDER OF PRECEDENCE (AUG 97) and 1.3 PROPOSED BETTERMENTS (AUG 97).

5.1.2. The items that the Government has identified and described in the Government Preference List (sections 00 11 00 and 01 90 00) and paragraph 5.1.3 below will be considered during the evaluation process as described below provided that they are included within the funding limitations identified in the Solicitation.

5.1.3. Preferences. Following is the list of the government preferences.(see Section 01 90 00 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS, paragraph 1.13 GOVERNMENT PREFERENCES for a complete description of each preference.)

All preferences which the successful Offeror identifies as included in its proposal will be incorporated into the awarded scope of this contract.

5.1.3.1. Category A. Infrastructure Preferences

• Preference A1. Extend AC pavement on Road A Extension, from 23+00 to 40+50.

• Preference A2. Extend AC pavement on Mellichamp Extension Road, from 51+20 to 73+00.

• Preference A3. Provide underground storm water detention.

5.1.3.2. Category B. Campus Preferences

00 22 20 - 3 (Am-0004)

• Preference B1. Provision for Future Photovoltaic (PV) System.

• Preference B2. Provide one Central Plant.

• Preference B3. Provide fully ducted return air.

• Preference B4. Provide concrete slab suspended floors.

• Preference B5. Provide SSMR.

• Preference B6. Provide CMU or concrete exterior walls.

• Preference B7. Provide full height ceramic tile walls in restrooms.

• Preference B8. Provide Linoleum flooring.

• Preference B9. Provide CMU or concrete interior walls.

• Preference B10. Provide steel metal decks of roof diaphragm.

• Preference B11. Provide cast iron waste and vent piping.

5.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.2.1. Factor 1, Government Preferences, is divided into two categories. Both categories are equally important.

Items within each category are listed in priority order, i.e., the first item is the most important preference and each subsequent preference is less important than the one preceding it.

5.2.2. Factor 1 will not be adjectivally rated. For purposes of evaluating this factor, the Government will only evaluate Preferences in order beginning from the first preference in each category and proceeding numerically and consecutively through the list. Once a preference item is skipped, other checked preferences below it will not be evaluated. For example, if an Offeror checks Preferences B1, B2 and B4 on one list, the Government will only consider preferences B1 and B2, but NOT B4. Therefore there is no advantage for an Offeror to skip a preference in the sequence in order to provide more preferences.

5.2.3. The number of sequential preference items checked from both categories will be added to assign a total for each Offeror. For example, an Offeror that checks the first two (2) items in order, i.e., A1 and A2, from the Infrastructure category and the first three (3) items in order from the Campus category, i.e., B1, B2 and B3, will have five (5) total items. More consideration will be given to proposals offering a greater total of sequential preference items, i.e., five (5) total items – A1, A2, B1, B2, B3, is better than four (4) total items, A1, A2, B1, B2.

5.2.4. Proposals that include preferences from both categories may be given more consideration than proposals with the same total number of preferences from only one category. For example, a proposal that includes the first preference from each category may be given more consideration than a proposal that only includes the first two (2) preferences from one category and zero (0) preferences from the other category.

6.0 PAST PERFORMANCE (from Phase 1, Factor 2)

6.01. Offerors’ past performance risk assessment from Phase 1, Factor 2 will be included in the trade-off analysis;

7.0 TAB A – Factor 3 - PRICE

7.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

7.1.1. Submit the properly filled out and executed SF 1442 along with the completed Proposal Schedule containing proposed line item and total pricing, There is no obligation to approach or match the funding limitations in the offer.

7.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

7.2.1. Price will not be rated or scored, but will be evaluated for fairness, reasonableness and material unbalancing, through the use of a price analysis. Offerors are cautioned to distribute direct costs, such as material, labor, 00 22 20 - 4 (Am-0004) equipment, subcontracts, etc. and to evenly distribute indirect costs, such as job overhead, home office overhead, bond, etc., to the appropriate contract line items. Both parties shall presume that field overhead costs through the proposed contract duration are inclusive in the offered price for the contract.

7.2.2. Proposals that exceed one or more of the funding limitations identified in Section 00 11 00 will not be eligible for award.

8.0 TAB A – Factor 4 –PROPOSED CONTRACT DURATION AND SCHEDULE

8.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

8.1.1. Include the number of calendar days in which the total scope of work will be completed, including the items on the Preference List (Tab B) that the Offeror has incorporated into its proposed prices, on the line provided on the Proposal Schedule. There is no obligation to approach or match the maximum performance period limitation in the offer.

8.1.2. The proposed contract duration will become the contractually binding completion period. The maximum allowed duration is 1,640 calendar days. An offer with a proposed contract duration that is less than 1,460 calendar days shall include a Summary Schedule submission as described below. Offers that are equal to or greater than 1,460 and less than or equal to 1,640 calendar days shall not submit a Summary Schedule. Summary Schedules submitted for offers that are within this range will not be evaluated.

8.1.3. Summary Schedule: Submit a summary level schedule for integrated design and construction as set forth above. Schedules or diagrams may be provided separately in a size that is easily read, but shall be bound and clearly labeled as Tab C. This summary schedule will, after contract award, be replaced with a project schedule as required by Section 0I 32 00, Project Schedule. The summary schedule shall be task-oriented, indicating the number of calendar days, after notice to proceed, by which milestones are to be achieved. Offeror shall use a critical path method; schedules shall be graphically represented. The proposed summary schedule shall reflect the proposed contract duration. Give attention to the following features:

(a) Provide a narrative, describing the design packaging plan for separate design packages, based on the Offeror's plan for fast tracking. Describe all design and construction to be "fast-tracked" (See section 01 33 16: Design After Award). If long lead item equipment must be ordered prior to completion of a design phase, describe the requirement in the narrative and show the required ordering date in the schedule.

(b) Show the design phase, including events associated with coordinating the interim and final design submittals for each package and the proper handling of the review comments for each design package (See section 01 33 16).

(c) Show the overall construction phase for the infrastructure and campuses, each facility, site work, and utilities.

Show fast track starts for design packages but it is not required to show the detailed construction breakdown (e.g., by trades) of each facility, site work and utilities.

(d) Show turnover of each facility. Identify any proposed phased turnovers. The time to complete the facility and turnover to the Government must consider the requirement for the Contractor's CQC completion inspection and the subsequent joint Contractor-Government turnover inspection.

(e) Show as-built submissions (See section 01 78 02, Project Closeout).

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

8.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

00 22 20 - 5 (Am-0004)

8.2.1. The contract duration will…