19r2-sf30-am3.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-0003 11 Oct 2019

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

CECT – Contracting Division USACE, Honolulu District Bldg 252 (CECT-POH) 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-19-R-0002 X

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

08/23/2019

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.)

$300M Small Business Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) For Design-Bid-Build Construction Services for the State of 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

Am-0003 Standard Form 30

RFP No. W9128A-19-R-0002 Page 2 of 2 Pages

Item No. 14 (Continued)

1. CHANGES TO SPECIFICATIONS. Attached hereto are new, revised and delected sections to the specifications. Revised pages replace like-numbered pages. The revision mark (Am-0003) is shown on each revised page.

A. REVISED SECTIONS. The following sections were revised and changes are in bold.

Section 00 22 16, paragraph 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.2.1.1, 5.3.1, and 6.0

Section 01 45 04, paragraph 3.2.3

B. ADDITIONS TO SECTION: The following were added to a section:

Section 00 60 00, Requests for Information, #19 to 70

C. REPLACED SECTION: The following section is to be replaced in its entirety:

Section 00 72 00, Appendix A, Davis Bacon Wage Determination dated 07/26/2019 with 10/04/2019

D. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS / CLAUSES: The following provisions / clauses were added to the following sections:

Section 00 22 16, provision 52.225-10, Notice of Buy American Requirement -- Construction Materials (May

2014)

Section 00 72 00, clause 52.225-9, Buy American Construction Materials (May 2014)

E. REVISED PROVISIONS / CLAUSES: The following provisions / clauses were revised and changes are in bold and red colored font.

Section 00 72 00, provision 52.225-12, Notice to Buy American Requirement – Construction Materials

Under Trade Agreements (May 2014)

Section 00 72 00, clause 52.225-11, Buy American – Construction Materials Under Trade Agreements (Oct

2016)

2. The proposal due date remains changed. See Am-0002, SF 1442, Block 13.

POHMATOC

3.2.3 Content of the CQC Plan

Include, as a minimum, the following to cover all operations, both onsite and offsite, including work by :

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

b. A copy of the letter to the CQC System Manager signed by an authorized official of the firm which describes the responsibilities and delegates sufficient authorities to adequately perform the functions of the CQC System Manager, including authority to stop work which is not in compliance with the contract/task order. Letters of direction to all other various quality control representatives outlining duties, authorities, and responsibilities will be issued by the CQC System Manager. Copies of these letters must be furnished to the Government. Include a CQC System Manager who is a member of the Company's corporate executive board or reports to a Corporate executive.

c. Procedures for scheduling, reviewing, certifying, and managing submittals, including those of . These procedures must be in accordance with Section 01 33 00 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES.

d. For all proposed QC materials testing laboratories the contractor must submit the current Certificate of Accreditation and Scope of Accreditation (Test Procedures/Methods Approved) from one of the nationally recognized accreditation authority listed in paragraph 3.7.2.1.a(1). The submitted accreditations shall include the test methods required by the Contract, and must be less than 2 years old.

e. Procedures for tracking preparatory, initial, and follow-up control phases and control, verification, and acceptance tests including documentation.

f. Procedures for tracking deficiencies from identification through acceptable corrective action. Establish verification procedures that identified deficiencies have been corrected.

g. Reporting procedures, including proposed reporting formats.

3.2.4 Content of the Task Order-Specific Quality Control Plan

The Task Order-Specific Quality Control Plan shall include, as a minimum, the following to cover all task order operations, both onsite and offsite, including work by .

a. The name, qualifications (in resume format), duties, responsibilities, and authorities of each person assigned a CQC function. Technicians responsible for sampling and testing of concrete shall be certified by the American Concrete Institute (ACI) or the Concrete Technicians Association of Hawaii (CTAH). Proof of certification shall be included in the task specific-Quality Control Plan. Personnel qualification may be furnished incrementally as the work progresses, but in no case, less than fourteen (14) calendar days before personnel are required on the job.

SECTION 01 45 04 Page 5

(Am-0003)

W9128A-19-R-0002

Section 00 22 16 – Page 8

5.0 VOLUME 1 – TAB B: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

5.1 FACTOR 1: CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE

5.1.1 Submission Requirements

a. The Offeror shall submit a minimum of three (3) contracts and no more than five (5) contracts. No more than five (5) contracts shall be submitted. If more than five (5) contracts are submitted, only the first five (5) contracts will be evaluated.

The Offeror may submit a maximum of two (2) Design-Build (DB) contracts that meet the evaluation criteria in paragraph 5.1.2(a) through (d). If more than two (2) DB contracts are submitted, only the first two (2) contracts will be considered.

A “contract” is defined as a single contract or a single task order or an order performed under a MATOC

(Multiple Award Task Order Contract) or a SATOC (Single Award Task Order Contract)/IDIQ (Indefinite

Delivery Indefinite Quantity Contract) or JOC (Job Order Contract) wherein the scope of work is same or similar to the scope of work for this DBB construction MATOC.

b. Attachment A Contract Data

The Offeror shall submit a completed Attachment A “Experience Information” form for EACH submitted contract not to exceed the page limitation in Paragraph 3.4.4, Page Limitation. All blocks must be filled in and all data should be accurate, current and complete. Failure to provide accurate, current or complete information may be cause to eliminate a contract from consideration in the evaluation.

Any pages that exceed this limitation will not be considered.

c. Narrative Description Criteria

In addition to Attachment A, the Offeror shall provide a narrative description of each contract included in its proposal within the page limitation per paragraph 3.4.4. Each narrative shall contain a clear explanation of how the contract is similar in size, scope, and complexity to that outlined in the solicitation. At a minimum, each Offeror shall clearly demonstrate how the Offeror’s experience demonstrates the following:

1. Construction contracts involving new vertical construction of a new facility.

2. New and/or repair/renovation construction contracts demonstrating experience with sustainment, renovation, or modernization projects.

3. New and/or repair/renovation construction contracts located within the State of Hawaii.

d. Joint Ventures

PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

1. Solicitation Number

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

3. 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.

4. Name, title, and signature of the person who is 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.

Section 00 22 16 – Page 9

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV) and the JV does not have experience working as a JV, the members of the

JV may submit experience on behalf of the Offeror. All references herein to “the Offeror” include all proposed joint venture members. Submitted contracts by members of a joint-venture or from the joint-venture itself will be considered and evaluated as long as the member or joint-venture itself was the prime contractor. Information provided from potential sub-contractors (not included in the joint venture) will not be considered or evaluated.

The JV shall submit a minimum of three (3) and no more than five (5) contracts, but each respective JV member must submit at least one (1) contract under this Factor.

Contracts in which an Offeror or a JV member performed the work as a subcontractor will not count as construction experience as a prime contractor.

5.1.2 Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate the extent of relevant experience of the prime contractor. If an Offeror submits a proposal as a joint venture, the Government will evaluate the experience of its proposed JV team and the roles each member of the JV team will have in performing this contract. The extent of relevant experience will be determined based on the similarity of the submitted contracts to the size, scope, and complexity of the construction required by the solicitation. For the purposes of this solicitation, a recent contract is defined as at least 80% complete or turned over within the last five (5) years of the issuance of this solicitation.

Only relevant construction contracts will be considered for evaluation. In order to be considered relevant, a contract must possess the following:

a. The contract was a Design-Build or Design-Bid-Build construction project.

b. It was substantially complete or at least 80% complete within five (5) years before the date the this solicitation was issued. Substantially complete means a contract administrator or equivalent determined that the terms of the contract were fulfilled to the extent that the constructed product can be occupied or used for its intended purposes. Evidence provided by the owner / contracting agency or CPARS documentation must be included in the proposal to demonstrate the date the contract was substantially complete or at least 80% complete.

Documentation in regards to substantially complete does not count against the page limitations in Paragraph

3.4.4.

c. New and/or repair/renovation construction contracts with an award amount between $4,000,000 to $25,000,000.

d. The work was performed by the contractor Offeror as a prime contractor and not a subcontractor.

If an Offeror presents a contract that is less than 80% complete, the proposal must include an explanation why that contract should be considered substantially complete. The Government will determine whether the explanation is sufficient to consider the contract substantially complete.

When assessing an Offeror’s relevant experience, the Government intends to give greater weight to each of the following:

a. Proposals that include a higher number of relevant contracts, up to a maximum of five as the prime contractor.

b. New and/or repair/renovation construction contracts with diverse type of work, such as site preparation, utility work, pavement, HVAC, refrigeration, fuel systems, building renovation, vertical construction, painting, electrical distribution, lighting, telephone systems, security systems, plumbing, fire protection, interior renovation, anti-terrorism / force protection, landscaping, and irrigation.

c. New and/or repair/renovation construction contracts demonstrating experience located in the State of

Hawaii, Island of Hawaii and within the geographical scope of this MATOC.

d. New and/or repair/renovation construction contracts performed on a U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) installation.

e. New and/or repair/renovation construction contracts simultaneously performed at multiple locations.

f. New and/or repair/renovation construction experience performing the Quality Control Process, a three phase inspection.

Section 00 22 16 – Page 10

(Am-0003)

g. New and/or repair/renovation construction demonstrating experience utilizing the Quality Control System

(QCS).

See paragraph 7.0.d for the evaluation rating system for Factor 1, Construction Experience.

5.2 VOLUME 1 – TAB C: FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

5.2.1 Submission Requirements

a. For the contracts listed under Factor 1 – Construction Experience, the Government will query the Offeror’s

Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) to validate past performance ratings on

Department of Defense contracts and any other past performance information the Government deems necessary to evaluate an Offeror’s past performance.

b. For each contract that does not have a CPARS evaluation, the Offeror shall send a copy of the Past Performance

Questionnaire (PPQ-0) which is included in Attachment B to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance under such contracts. The Past Performance Questionnaire included in the solicitation is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each contract the Offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1 – Construction Experience. Ensure the name, phone numbers, and e-mail addresses are provided for the clients’ point of contact. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with the

Offeror’s proposal. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ-0 from a client for a contract(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ-0

(Attachment B) which will provide contact and client information for the respective contract(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. The Offeror should explain problems encountered and actions taken for any submitted contract. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, via email at

W9128A-19-R-0002@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into its proposal PPQs previously submitted for other solicitations. However, this does not preclude the

Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

c. 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 Offeror will be given an opportunity to provide a rebuttal. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring it submits a copy of past performance assessments (CPARS or

PPQs) or notifies the Government and ensures that an assessment is already in CPARS. Offerors that have no past performance ratings shall indicate it in its proposal, that it has no previous clients and that the questionnaires cannot be provided. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure the referenced documentation is provided, as the Government may not make additional request for past performance from the references. The evaluation form shall be provided to the Government’s point of contact in paragraph 1.3. Offerors are not to request past performance questionnaires on contracts that have final CPARS evaluation. If a past performance questionnaire is received on a contract where a final CPARS evaluation exists, the CPARS evaluation will serve as the official rating of record for evaluation purposes.

d. The Government may contact references provided as part of Factor 1 – Construction Experience, for information regarding the Offeror’s past performance on the contract, and for the purposes of assessing and verifying the scope of work performed. Offerors should provide accurate, current, and complete contact information for references provided in the contract descriptions.

e. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the

Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS), Contractor Performance Assessment

Reporting System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency, and any other sources not provided by the Offeror.

f. 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.

mailto:W9128A-19-R-0002@usace.army.mil

Section 00 22 16 – Page 11

g. Verification. The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited contracts or other recent and relevant contracts not submitted by the Offerors by reviewing Past Performance Information

Retrieval System (PPIRS), or other Government appraisal systems, or by contacting owner or references. The

Government may verify any or all cited references and supplied information. An Offeror will be afforded the opportunity to reply to or explain adverse past performance information which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to address.

5.2.1.1 Joint Venture Submission Requirements

Offerors submitting a proposal as a Joint Venture (JV) shall obtain a DUNS number and be registered in SAM.gov as the offering Joint Venture. If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV) and it does not have the SAM Representations and Certifications as a JV, all participants of the JV must separately complete the SAM Representations and

Certification. The Offeror must provide a minimum of two (2) to no more than five (5) “recent” and “relevant” contracts performed by the JV that reflect the JV’s ability to perform the work required in this solicitation as required by paragraph 5.1.1, Submission Requirements.

a. If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV) and the JV does not have experience working as a JV, the members of the

JV may submit experience on behalf of the Offeror. The JV may submit no more than five (5) contracts, but each respective JV member must submit at least one (1) contract under Factor 1.

b. In addition to the submission requirement for Factor 1 – Construction Experience, the Joint Venture shall provide a brief narrative (not to exceed 1 single-sided page) stating the roles that each member of the Joint

Venture will perform on the IDC MATOC. The attached “Experience Information” (see Attachment A) form and PPQ-0 (see Attachment B) shall be used by the Joint Venture or the JV members. The JV and/or JV members shall explain how it is structured.

5.2.2 Evaluation Criteria

a. Past Performance Evaluation includes two aspects that results in the assessment of the Offeror’s probability of performing requirements stated in the Request for Proposal (RFP) based on the Offeror’s demonstrated performance on recent, and relevant contracts. (For the purpose of this solicitation, a recent contract is defined as at least 80% complete or turned over within the last five (5) years of the issuance of this solicitation).

b. First, an Offeror’s past performance will be evaluated to determine how relevant a recent contract is to the requirements of the RFP. The relevancy determination will be based on the submitted contracts for Factor 1 –

Construction Experience, Evaluation Criteria (paragraph 5.1.2).

c. Second, the Offeror’s past performance shall be given a Performance Confidence Assessment based on how well the contractor performed on recent and relevant past contracts. When evaluating relevant past performance and assigning a Performance Confidence rating, the Government will consider if the information is recent and relevant, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor performance. If any

Offeror has multiple functions or divisions, the Government will only evaluate past performance of the division or unit submitting the proposal. Owners/references may be asked to comment on items such as quality of construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management, including timely payment to subcontractors or suppliers, small business participation, safety, relations between owner and contractor, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, Operations and Maintenance (O&M) manuals, training, correcting construction errors, warranty work, etc. The Government will target areas covered in the requirements of this proposal including records of conforming to quality, schedule, cost control, customer satisfaction, level of support for items such as, as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, resolution of problems for construction errors, warranty work, and safety. The Government will not release the interview forms to the Offeror at any time, in order for the Government to solicit candid, unbiased interview comments.

d. The Government intends to place a higher value on contracts that document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation, for example, but not limited to, telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the proposal, PPIRS, CCASS/ACASS or other agency performance databases, Offeror furnished references, or personal knowledge. The Government also places a higher value on recent relevant

Section 00 22 16 – Page 12

(Am-0003) contracts and contracts that provided particularly difficult or unique challenges, and illustrate the innovative methods that the contractor used to successfully resolve problems. The Government’s evaluation is not limited to past performance information on the cited example contracts. Offerors without a history of past performance will receive a “neutral” rating.

e. Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor, if relevant, except as described in paragraph 5.1.1. An entity may not establish past performance based on the past performance of its proposed key personnel, apart from that of the entity. If the Government does not obtain past performance information for the contracts identified by the Offeror and cannot establish a past performance record for the

Offeror through other sources, past performance will be rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The performance risk will be considered “unknown”.

Note: In the case of an Offeror without a record of past performance of 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 a “neutral” past performance with a performance risk of “unknown”.

For Factor 2, the Government will assign each proposal a Past Performance Relevancy Rating under the rating system in paragraph 7.0.e and a Past Performance Confidence Rating under the rating system in paragraph 7.0.f.

5.3 VOLUME 1 – TAB D, FACTOR 3: ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN

5.3.1 Submission Requirements

a. Organization. Provide an organizational chart that clearly identifies the management and construction teams to be utilized in executing task order under the contract. Arrange the chart by organizational levels and locations, depicting lines of authority. The chart should show the interrelationship between the contract management team and on-site project teams. Include a clear description of each firm’s roles and responsibilities for any teaming or joint venture arrangements. Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing how the task order will be managed and the authorities and delegations of authority within the team. The hierarchy of the organization chart shall show the Project Manager as the highest level of authority for key personnel on the task order and shall be subordinate to an officer of the Prime Contractor. The Contractor Quality Control

(CQC) System Manager shall be the highest level of authority for all CQC matters on the Multiple-Award Task

Order Contract and shall be subordinate to an officer of the Prime Contractor. The Project Superintendent shall be subordinate to the Project Manager and the CQC System Manager on each task order. The Quality Control

Representative (QCR) shall be subordinate to the CQC System Manager and the Project Superintendent on each task order. The Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO) shall be subordinate to the QCR and the CQC System

Manager on each task order. The Offeror shall submit the resumes of the organization's key personnel responsible for executing the task orders under this contract.

At a minimum, the Offeror shall submit resumes of the Prime Contractor's Project Manager(s), Project

Superintendent(s), CQC System Manager(s), Quality Control Representative(s) and Site Safety and Health

Officer(s). Up to four (4) resumes for each key personnel category may be submitted if different personnel will be performing the work. The resume shall clearly display name, employer, proposed job title, education, special qualifications and experience record showing title, specific duties, responsibilities, assignments and the dates these were held within the last five (5) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Each resume may not exceed a total of two (2) double sided pages.

Project Manager:

The Project Manager shall have a bachelor's degree from a U.S. accredited university or college with a major in engineering, architecture, or related technical field, and at least five (5) years experience in managing and supervising construction projects of similar size and scope. The Project Manager shall be employed by the

Prime Contractor.

Project Superintendent:

The Project Superintendent shall have a minimum of five (5) years experience as a superintendent on construction projects similar in size and scope to the assigned task order. The project superintendent shall be

Section 00 22 16 – Page 13

(Am-0003) employed by the Prime Contractor. The project superintendent shall have overall responsibility for all operations on the jobsite. The superintendent shall be assigned no other duties, unless otherwise allowed in

Section 01 45 04 CONTRACTOR QUALITY CONTROL, paragraph CQC System Manager.

Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO):

The SSHO shall meet the requirements of EM 385-1-1 Section 1. The SSHO must ensure that the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.16 are met for each task order. The Contractor shall provide a Safety oversight team that includes a minimum of one (1) person at each project site to function as the Site Safety and Health Officer

(SSHO). The SSHO or an equally-qualified Alternate SSHO must be at the work site at all times during construction to implement and administer the Contractor's safety program and government-accepted Accident

Prevention Plan. The SSHO and Alternate SSHO must have the required training, experience, and qualifications in accordance with EM 385-1-1 Section 01.A.17, and all associated sub-paragraphs.

CQC System Manager:

The CQC System Manager is an individual within the work organization who is responsible for overall management of CQC program on the Multiple-Award Task Order contract and has the authority to act in all

CQC matters for the Contractor. The CQC System Manager shall have a bachelor's degree from a U.S.

accredited university or college in engineering, architecture, or construction management, with a minimum of 5 years construction experience in quality control. This CQC System Manager must be employed by the Prime

Contractor. The CQC System Manager must be assigned no other duties. Identify in the plan an alternate to serve in the event of the CQC System Manager's absence. The requirements for the alternate CQC System

Manager are the same as the CQC System Manager.

Quality Control Representative:

The Quality Control Representative (QCR) is an individual within the onsite work organization who shall be responsible for management of CQC on the task order and have the authority to act in all CQC matters on the task order for the Contractor. The QCR shall have a bachelor's degree from a U.S. accredited university or college in engineering, architecture, or construction management with a minimum of three (3) years experience in quality control on construction projects similar in size and scope to the task order. The QCR shall be onsite at all times during construction and shall be employed by the Prime Contractor. The QCR may have duties as task order superintendent in addition to quality control only if specifically allowed in the task order (see Section 01

90 10 TASK ORDER PROVISIONS). Otherwise, the QCR shall have no other duties. An alternate for each

QCR shall be identified in the plan to serve in the event of the QCR's absence. The requirement for the alternate shall be the same as for the designated QCR

b. Describe any previous teaming experience between the proposed prime contractor and each proposed key subcontracting team (identify specific projects). Describe the authorities delegated to project managers and field personnel. Include a general description of the work the Offeror will self-perform.

c. Describe the prime contractor’s resources available and its capabilities to support this contract concurrently with other projected on-going or new work. The Offeror shall describe the resources available and its capabilities to manage and execute several (anticipated 2 to 5) concurrent task orders, which may be located at various locations in the State of Hawaii. The Offeror shall describe why it is qualified to undertake this contract and include information to demonstrate the ability to hire, maintain, and replace if necessary, qualified personnel during the contract period.

Note: The organization and management plan will be incorporated into the contract and the Offeror will be expected to follow it. After contract award, any changes to the organization and management plan shall be subject to Contracting Officer approval and any substitution for key personnel shall have of equivalent or greater qualifications to be determined by Contracting Officer review of the substitutes resume.

5.3.2 Evaluation

a. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposal to determine how well it is organized, structured, and staffed to execute the scope of work. The Government will evaluate the extent to which the Offeror proposes an organizational structure that shows clear roles and responsibilities and demonstrates appropriate lines of authority. The Government will evaluate the proposed organization, its hierarchy, functions, and

Section 00 22 16 – Page 14

(Am-0003) responsibilities and how well it clearly demonstrates an understanding of the organizational structure and relationships required for successful execution of the contract, and execution of simultaneous task order requirements within the scope of the MATOC.

b. Multiple projects The Government will evaluate how well the Offeror will manage and administer resources required to perform multiple task orders under the contract at the same time.

When assessing an Offeror’s relevant experience, the Government intends to give greater weight to the following:

Contractor’s staff that have on-site decision making authority to include, but not limited to, negotiations, resolution of issues, resources, and the level of authority delegated to address issues.

Organizational relationships which have been used on other projects (such as those presented in Factor 1) that are same or similar to the scope of this MATOC.

Proposals that provide a description of relationship/contractual agreement with proposed subcontractors.

Depth and breadth of technical experience and training as it relates to the responsibilities of proposed key personnel.

Key personnel experience working for the Prime contractor and with other key personnel

Prime Contractor Key personnel and key subcontracting team experience working in the area of responsibility covered under the RFP.

See paragraph 7.0.d for the evaluation rating system for Volume 1, Factor 3, Organization and Management Plan.

5.4 VOLUME 1 – TAB E, FACTOR 4: TECHNICAL APPROACH

5.4.1 Submission Requirements

a. The Offeror shall describe the resources and teaming arrangements that will be utilized specifically for the sample project. The Offeror shall explain how resources will be utilized and any contractual teaming arrangements that have been established. Resources include, but are not limited to: personnel, equipment, and any other resources necessary to execute the sample project. The Offeror shall describe how it will manage the sample project, how it will mobilize to prepare for and execute the sample project, and the authorities and delegations of authorities within the team. The Offeror shall describe its management process and how the process will lead to the successful execution of the sample project. The Offeror shall explain how it will address logistical, personnel, material sourcing, and transportation challenges of executing the sample project.

b. For execution of the sample project, any subcontractors and outside associates or consultants will be limited to the firms that were identified under paragraph 5.3.

5.4.2 Evaluation

The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, and any deficiencies in the technical approach. The

Government will evaluate the Offeror’s resources and teaming arrangements proposed for the sample project to determine how well the Offeror demonstrates and understanding of the resources and relationships requirements required for successful execution of the sample project. The Government will evaluate how well the Offeror demonstrates a thorough understanding of the management processes required for successful execution and quality of the contractor’s plan to overcome the logistical, personnel, material sourcing, and transportation challenges to execute the sample project.

See paragraph 7.0.d for the evaluation rating system for Volume 1, Factor 4, Technical Approach.

6.0 VOLUME 2 - FACTOR 5: PRICE

Adjectival rating shall not be used of the Offeror’s price proposal. The Government will fully evaluate and negotiate (if applicable) all priced Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) for the proposal schedule and for the sample task order. The evaluation of all option ordering period CLINs will not obligate the Government to exercise any option nor place more than the minimum guarantee of the IDC MATOC. The Offeror’s Price proposal will be evaluated as follows:

Section 00 22 16 – Page 15

(Am-0003)

The solicitation has two (2) price subfactors (Subfactor 1 - proposal schedule and Subfactor 2 - sample project) which will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness as described herein. Also the sample project price will be evaluated of whether or not the price is too low (price realism analysis) and represent a risk for successful performance.

The contract will be a firm fixed priced construction MATOC. The Price Factor includes both solicitation Proposal

Schedule and the Sample Project Proposal Schedule.

The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition.

Upon examination of the initial offers, the Contracting Officer will review this determination and if, in the

Contracting Officer's opinion, adequate price competition exists, no additional cost information will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition, the

Contracting Officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, Offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the Contracting Officer to determine the reasonableness of the price.

6.1 Subfactor 1 – Proposal Schedule

The Proposal Schedule requires an Offeror to propose daily rates for 5 disciplines (Project Manager, Project

Superintendent, CQC System Manager, Quality Control Representative, and Site Safety and Health Officer) and the Home Office Overhead Rate. Daily rates will remain in effect through the current ordering period of the contract and will be applied to any contract changes unless the contractor request for an equitable adjustment is approved by the Contracting Officer.

6.2 Subfactor 2 – Sample Project

The Offeror will be required to provide a price proposal for the Sample Project. The proposed daily rates must be used when pricing the sample task order.

Using the drawings and specifications provided as a Sample Project, complete the Sample Project Proposal

Schedule in Section 00 10 00. Instructions are provided in the notes to the Sample Project Proposal Schedule. A price analysis will be performed on the lump sum price for the Contract Line item (CLIN).

6.2.1 Basis for Evaluation

The Government’s price evaluation will be an integrated price analysis, as further detailed below, which will require complete information. Failure to provide all information requested may be cause to eliminate an

Offeror from consideration in the evaluation.

The information provided in the Price Proposal will be used in the tradeoff analysis. For purposes of award, a determination will be made on the reasonableness of the Price Proposal.

The RFP requires firm-fixed price contract line items. A price reasonableness approach will be utilized by the Government to determine that the proposed prices offered are fair and reasonable. Offers found to be unreasonably high or unbalanced, may be considered unacceptable and may be rejected on that basis.

The Sample Project Proposal Schedule may be subject to Proposal Analysis techniques in accordance with

FAR 15.404 to determine fairness and reasonableness of prices contained in the Sample Project Proposal

Schedule. A price realism analysis will be applied in order to measure the Offeror’s understanding of the requirements and/or to assess the risk inherent in an Offeror’s proposal. This includes the comparison of cost/price information from other proposals, information relative to market research, historical procurement data, and/or the Independent Government Estimate and, if necessary, further evaluation to determine fairness and reasonableness.

6.2.2 Evaluation Criteria

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/15.htm#P429_79027

Section 00 22 16 – Page 16

(Am-0003)

In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b), a price analysis will be performed to determine that the proposed price is fair and reasonable. The Price Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure the prices are fair and reasonable:

- Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation

- Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information

- Comparison of proposed prices with the Government Estimate

Evaluation criteria for this price factor will include data from the Sample Project Proposal Schedule. If deemed necessary, the Government will request price breakdown information to assist in price evaluation.

The Sample Project Proposal Schedule shall be provided as if it were a real project. A price analysis and/or price realism will be conducted and Offerors should be prepared to provide price breakdown information upon Contracting Officer’s request.

The Offeror’s Cost / Price proposal will be reviewed for errors. The Offeror may be given an opportunity to clarify certain aspects of its proposal at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer.

Any tradeoffs among price and technical will be based on the total price proposed for the sample project.

6.3 SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PRICE PROPOSAL (VOLUME 2)

6.3.1 Price Proposal.

Submit the Price Proposal in read-only PDF format. The only documents that can be scanned are the

SF1442, acknowledgement of amendments, and a letter from the surety for bonding capability. Sections of the proposal shall be bookmarked (linked to the index) in logical order.

Offerors shall submit the price proposal in a second envelope that is clearly marked, “PRICE

PROPOSAL, VOLUME 2, RFP NO. W9128A-19-R-0002.”

Offerors shall submit the price proposal documentation on:

Five (5) hard copies (1 original and 4 copies) One (1) hard copy; and

One (1) CD ROM as one separate PDF file titled:

W9128A-19-R-0002_COMPANY NAME_PRICE PROPOSAL

6.3.1.1 Size Restrictions and Page Limits. The following are established for each factor:

Factor 5 Price: Proposal Schedule and Sample Project (no page limit)

Proposal material shall be submitted in PDF format. Do not use a font size smaller than 10 pitch, an unusual font style such as script, or condensed print for any submission. Each page shall be identified with the appropriate page number centered at the bottom of the page. Sheet size of the proposal contents shall be 8-

1/2 inches x 11 inches.

6.3.1.2 Format and Contents of the Price Proposal and List of Tabs.

The Price Proposal shall be tabbed and labeled in a manner to afford easy identification from a Table of

Contents, as indicated in the following chart below.

$300M Small Business (SB) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) for Design-Bid-Build Construction Services for the State of Hawaii

W9128A-19-R-0002

RFI # Question Government Response

Section 00 22 16, paragraph 5.1.2 Evaluation Criteria. Item ‘a.’ indicates relevance includes Design-Bid-Build construction projects. As Design-Build construction projects are typically more complex with an overall higher degree of coordination than Design-Bid-Build construction projects, please confirm that Design-Build construction projects can be included as a relevant project to demonstrate contractor capabilities.

See Am-0003, Section 00 22 16, paragraph 5.1.1, and 5.1.2.

Volume 1, Technical Proposal, Factor 1. Requesting the ability to submit Design- Build projects. In the past five (5) years, DOD projects in the $4-$25 million range in Hawaii have been Design-Build projects.

See Am-0003, Answer to RFI 19

21 The only mentions/suggestions of the anticipated task order magnitude appears first to be at Section 00 22 16 Para 5.1.2.c. Here offerors are directed to submit past experience for projects in the $4M to $25M range. Then at Section 00 22 16 Para

6.3.1.2 we are instructed that we must provide a surety letter indicating a single project limit of $25M. Is this the anticipated range for the resulting task orders $4- 25M?

See Section 00 72 00, clause 52.216-19, Order Limitations.

Based on the RFP language, the only size requirement for the 3-5 projects is that they each have a magnitude greater than $4M. Is this correct?

See Section 00 22 16, paragraph 5.1.2.

Section 00 22 16, Factor 3: Organization and Management Plan, Key Personnel.

The Project Manager, CQC Systems Manager, and QC representative all note that they must have a Bachelor's Degree from a US accredited university or college.

Hawaii is a diverse culture with qualified individuals from many different countries that have been approved by the USACE to work in these positions on previous USACE projects. We request that the position qualifications be revised to include accredited degrees from countries other than the United States.

Bachelor's Degree shall be from a U.S. accredited university or college.

24 Section 00 22 16, Factor 3: Organization and Management Plan, Key Personnel.

The qualifications for Project Manager note a bachelor's degree with a major in engineering, architecture or related technical field. Please advise is a Bachelor's Degree in Environmental Science would be acceptable for the Project Manager Position.

No, See Section 00 22 16, paragraph 5.3.1.

25 According to Drawing Sheet ID G-002, drawings and bid items for Volumes 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are not included and are not part of this solicitation/contract work. Is this correct?

Yes

Section 00 60 00, Attachment A - Page 1

W9128A-19-R-0002

RFI # Question Government Response 26 We only use one combined indirect mark-up for construction home office OH and

G&A. We call this mark-up G&A. Can we have zero home office OH and have a single indirect mark-up for G&A in the Proposal Schedule we submit?

Each Offeror is responsible for its Overhead (OH) and G&A rate.

A “contract” is defined as a single contract or a single task order performed under a MATOC (Multiple Award Task Order Contract) or a SATOC (Single Award Task Order Contract)/IDIQ (Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity Contract) wherein the scope of work is same or similar to the scope of work for this DBB construction MATOC. We have a SATOC/IDIQ that is a JOC (Job Ordering Contract). Does the JOC qualify as a “contract” under this solicitation?

See Am-0003, Section 00 22 16, paragraph 5.1.1.

28 Please clarify what the RFP means by “The work was self-performed by the contractor Offeror and not a subcontractor.” Does it mean that the contracts need to be performed as a Prime Contractor by the Offeror?

See Am-0003, Section 00 22 16, paragraph 5.1.2.

Please clarify what the RFP means by “The work was self-performed by the contractor Offeror and not a subcontractor.” Or, does it mean that the Offeror needs to self-perform all the trades under each contract submitted?

See Am-0003, Section 00 22 16, paragraph 5.1.2.

Page 1 of SF1442 states “Sealed offers in original and 4 copies to perform the work required are due at the place specified in Item 8...”

Page 30 of the RFP states “Offerors shall submit all price proposal documentation in Adobe PDF format on: One (1) CD ROM; and Five (5) hard copies each for each proposal (1 original and 4 copies)” Page 41 of the RFP states “Offerors shall submit the price proposal documentation on: One (1) hard copy; and One (1) CD ROM as one separate PDF file

Please confirm how many copies of the price proposal are required.

See Am-0001, Answer to RFI #7

The RFP states that the price proposal, in addition to hard copy, is to be submitted on a CD ROM. We intend to hand-carry the proposal for delivery and the price information typically is not available until the day of the bid, sometimes minutes prior to the bid deadline. Would USACE consider allowing the price volume on the CD ROM to be submitted via overnight delivery the day following the bid date?

The price proposal is due on the proposal due date.

32 Will the Government rate Design-Build projects more favorably than Design-Bid-Build projects?

See Section 00 22 16, paragraph 5.1.2

Section 00 60 00, Attachment A - Page 2

W9128A-19-R-0002

RFI # Question Government Response

2. Section 00 22 16 – Page 12, 5.3 VOLUME 1 – TAB D, FACTOR 3:

ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT PLAN, 5.3.1 Submission Requirements, para.

a:

Regarding the submission of resumes of the organization's key personnel responsible for executing the task orders under this contract:

The instructions state that we are to submit up to four resumes per each key personnel category; however, three of the position descriptions mention an Alternate.

Will the government please confirm that they are only expecting to see resumes for five positions and no alternates, as follows: Project Manager, Project Superintendent, CQC System Manger, Quality Control Representative, and SSHO?

See Section 00 22 16, paragraph 5.3.1.

34 For the position descriptions that include an accredited degree, would the government confirm that additional years of experience would be considered acceptable in lieu of a degree, per typical RFP requirements?

See Section 00 22 16, paragraph 5.3.1.

Would the government please clarify the evaluation…