Am_0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

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

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

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICIATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, 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 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment your 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 APPROPIRATION DATA (If required)

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

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

CHECK ONE 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.

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

15C. DATE SIGNED

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

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

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

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

Amendment No. 0001 24-JUN-2015

U.S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT

CONTRACTING OFFICE

1616 CAPITOL AVE.

OMAHA, NE 68102-4901

See Item 6

W9128F-14-R-0052

11-JUN-2015

CENTRAL ENERGY PLANT (FY14), PN 80433

FORT CARSON, COLORADO

See attached documentation for content of the amendment revisions.

Date for receipt of Bids is 14 JUL 2015 at 1400 hours CST.

Government Point of Contact: Scott Hurst (402) 995-2075

24-JUN-2015

Am #0001 - 2 (Continuation of SF 30)

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Omaha District, Corps of Engineers 1616 Capitol Avenue Omaha, Nebraska 68102-4901

:NOTICE: Failure to acknowledge : Solicitation No. W9128F 14 R 0052 :all amendments may cause rejec- :

:tion of the bid. See FAR : Date of Issue: 11 JUN 2015 :52.214-3 of Section 00 21 00 : Date of Opening: 14 JUL 2015

Amendment No. 0001

24 JUN 2015

SUBJECT: Amendment No. 0001 to Request for Proposal Solicitation specifications and drawings for Construction of CENTRAL ENERGY PLANT, FORT

CARSON, COLORADO

Solicitation No. W9128F 14 R 0052

TO: Prospective Offerors and Others Concerned

1. The specifications and drawings for subject project are hereby modified as follows (revise all specification indices, attachment lists, and drawing indices accordingly).

a. Specifications (New and/or Revised and Reissued). Delete and substitute or add specification pages as noted below. The substituted pages are revised and reissued with this amendment.

Pages Deleted Pages Substituted or Added 00 22 11 00 22 11**

**NOTE: For ease of identification, changes from the previously issued specification have been highlighted. The Contractor is responsible for the entire contents of the specification regardless of the accuracy of the highlighting contained therein.

2. This amendment is a part of the bidding papers and its receipt shall be acknowledged on the Standard Form 1442. All other conditions and requirements of the specifications remain unchanged. If the bids have been mailed prior to receiving this amendment, you will notify the office where bids are opened, in the specified manner, immediately of its receipt and of any changes in your bid occasioned thereby.

a. Hand-Carried Bids shall be delivered to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District, Contracting Division, 1616 Capitol Avenue, Omaha, Nebraska 68102-4901.

b. Mailed Bids shall be addressed as noted in Item 8 on Page 00 11 00-1 of Standard Form 1442.

3. Offers will be received until 2:00 p.m., local time at place of receiving proposals, 14 JUL 2015.

Attachments:

Spec pages listed in 1.a. above

Am #0001 - 3 (Continuation of SF 30)

U.S. Army Engineer District, Omaha Corps of Engineers 1616 Capitol Avenue Omaha, Nebraska 68102-4901

24 JUN 2015

jlb/2099

Section 00 22 11-1

SECTION 00 22 11

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS,

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION

INDEX

Contents

1. WHO MAY SUBMIT

2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

3. SIZE OF PRINTED MATTER SUBMISSIONS

4. WHERE TO SUBMIT

5. SUBMISSION DEADLINE

6. SUBMITTALS

6.1 VOLUME 1, TAB A - CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE

a) FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Construction Experience

b) FACTOR 2: Minimum Dollar Amount of Construction Projects

6.2 VOLUME 1, TAB B - DESIGN EXPERIENCE

a) FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Design Experience

b) FACTOR 2: Minimum Construction Dollar Amount on Designed Projects

c) FACTOR 3: Design Personnel

6.3 VOLUME 2, TAB A - PAST PERFORMANCE, CONSTRUCTION FIRM

a) FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Past Construction Performance

6.4 VOLUME 2, TAB B - PAST PERFORMANCE, DESIGN FIRM

a) FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Past Design Performance

7. PRICING

8. EVALUATION FOR AWARD

8.1 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

9. CONTRACT AWARD

10. SELECTION AND AWARD WITHOUT EXCHANGES

11. SELECTION AND AWARD WITH EXCHANGES

Am_0001

Section 00 22 11-2

12. PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRECONTRACT COSTS

13. DEBRIEFINGS

ATTACHMENTS: NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (FORM PPQ-0)

Section 00 22 11-3

SECTION 00 22 11

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS,

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION

1. WHO MAY SUBMIT

This solicitation is unrestricted and open to both large and small business participation.

There will be no public opening. All proposals submitted will become, upon receipt, the property of the U.S. Government and will not be returned. After evaluation of proposals, the original will be retained for the official contract file. Extra copies of the awardee’s proposal will be submitted to the Field and Area Offices in support of their contract administration functions. Any extra copies of the proposals deemed unnecessary by the government will be destroyed.

2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information sufficiently detailed to clearly indicate compliance with the proposal submission requirements.

3. SIZE OF PRINTED MATTER SUBMISSIONS

All written portions (other than an organization chart (if provided)) shall be in 8-1/2" x 11" format.

4. WHERE TO SUBMIT

Offerors shall submit their proposal packages to the USACE Contracting Activity at the address shown in Block 8 of Standard Form 1442.

5. SUBMISSION DEADLINE

Proposals shall be received by the USACE Contracting Activity no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

Due to heightened security at Government installations, those offerors who have their proposals hand-delivered shall contact Scott Hurst, Contract Specialist at (402) 995-2075 prior to delivering to:

Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District 1616 Capitol Avenue Omaha, NE 68102-4901

On the date specified and for the thirty minutes prior to the time specified on the Standard Form SF 1442, Section 00 10 00, Page 1, Item 13A, a Contracting Representative will be in the lobby to accept proposals. At the time specified in Item 13A, it will be announced that receipt of proposals is closed.

Official time will be established by the clock located in the area where proposals are received, to be determined by a Contracting Representative.

6. SUBMITTALS

The requirements specified in the solicitation are considered minimum requirements. A proposal that fails to comply with the minimum technical requirements will not be eligible for award notwithstanding it may offer the lowest price. Submit original plus three (3) copies of Binder 1 material. Submit only the original for Binder 2 material.

Provide two (2) CDs with all materials contained in Binders 1 and 2 in read-only format, with all files in PDF format. The offeror has the option of excluding an electronic copy of only Section 00 10 00 (SF 1442

Section 00 22 11-4 and CLIN Pricing Schedule) from the CDs and submitting it only in hard copy format. The CDs shall contain the balance of the printed materials electronically in PDF file format.

SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

Cover Letter Para. 6.1 - Construction Experience (Volume 1, TAB A, Binder 1)

a) FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Construction Experience

b) FACTOR 2: Minimum Dollar Amount of Construction Projects Para. 6.2 - Design Experience (Volume 1, TAB B, Binder 1)

a) FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Design Experience

b) FACTOR 2: Minimum Construction Dollar Amount on Designed Projects

c) FACTOR 3: Design Personnel Para. 6.3 - Past Performance, Construction Firm (Volume 2, TAB A, Binder 1)

a) FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Past Construction Performance Para. 6.4 - Past Performance, Design Firm (Volume 2, TAB B, Binder 1)

a) FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Past Design Performance Para. 7 – Pricing (Volume 3, Binder 2)

7.1 a) Section 00 10 00, SF1442 Solicitation/Contract Form and Pricing Schedule

7.1 b) Section 00 45 00, Representations and Certifications

7.1 c) Pre-Award Survey Information (Local Provision) (Sep 93)

1) Financial i - Name, address, and telephone number of Financial Institution

ii. - Name, telephone number, and email address for the points of contact, primary and alternate, to be contacted for information.

2) Bonding Information i - Name, address, and telephone number of Surety Company

ii. - Name, telephone number, and email address for the points of contact, primary and alternate, to be contacted for information.

6.1 VOLUME 1, TAB A - CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE

a) FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Construction Experience - Offeror shall submit two (2) construction projects completed within the last six (6) years demonstrating past experience as the prime contractor, one (1) of those projects shall be constructed for the Federal Government. No more than two (2) projects are to be submitted. Project information shall consist of vertical facility construction (e.g., containing architectural, structural, mechanical, fire protection and electrical construction features). Project example information shall include: Summaries for each project submitted; picture/photo of the each project example; a description of the project; construction contract award amount; final construction cost; location; date when the project was started; original contract finish date and actual finish date. All summaries shall contain the name, address, telephone and email address of a representative of the owner (as well as one alternate individual not affiliated with your firm) familiar with your firm’s experience on the project that can verify the experience cited.

NOTE: "offeror" and "prime contractor" as used in the paragraph directly above (as well as the rest of this solicitation) shall both be taken to mean ONLY the named entity entered on SF1442 of Section 00 10 00 of the proposal submission. In the event the offeror is a Joint Venture (reference solicitation Section 00 21 00, for Joint Venture information and requirements), projects submitted for this evaluation factor shall be those completed by the Joint Venture offeror or any party to the Joint Venture. In the event the prime contractor intends to have contractor team arrangement(s) whereby a potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractor(s) under this Government contract, projects submitted for this evaluation factor shall be limited to projects completed by the offeror/prime contractor entity ONLY. The Government will not accept for evaluation projects completed by a potential prime contractor's prospective subcontractor(s).

Section 00 22 11-5

Evaluation of Offeror’s Construction Experience:

Acceptable: The proposal adheres to the requirements above and demonstrates that the offeror has the required construction experience.

Unacceptable: The proposal does not demonstrate that the construction experience cited meets the minimum requirements stated above. Any Factor receiving an “Unacceptable” will render the entire proposal as “Unacceptable”.

b.) FACTOR 2: Minimum Dollar Amount of Construction Projects - Construction projects cited in

a) above shall have a minimum construction dollar value of $5,000,000 and have completed construction within the last six (6) years from date proposals are due. Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts, where numerous Task Orders are summed to meet the minimum construction dollar value identified herein, are not acceptable.

Evaluation of Minimum Dollar Amount of Construction Projects:

Acceptable: The proposal demonstrates that the construction projects cited meet the minimum construction dollar value stated above.

Unacceptable: The proposal does not demonstrate that the construction projects cited meet the minimum construction dollar value stated above. Any Factor receiving an “Unacceptable” will render the entire proposal as “Unacceptable”.

6.2 VOLUME 1, TAB B - DESIGN EXPERIENCE

a) FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Design Experience - Offeror shall submit two (2) construction projects completed within the last six (6) years that were designed by the proposed design firm demonstrating past experience as the designer of record. No more than two (2) projects that were designed by the firm are to be submitted. One (1) such project shall include design of a district heating and cooling facility and piping distribution system and one (1) such project shall include a project designed for the Federal Government in a similar region to Ft Carson. Project information shall consist of vertical and horizontal facility construction (e.g., containing architectural, structural, mechanical, fire protection, communication, electrical, and site construction features). Project example information shall include: Summaries for each project submitted; picture/photo of the each project example; a description of the project; construction contract award amount; final construction cost; location; date when the project was started; original contract finish date and actual finish date. All summaries shall contain the name, address, telephone and fax number of a representative of the owner (as well as one alternate individual not affiliated with your firm) familiar with your firm’s experience on the project that can verify the experience cited.

Evaluation of Offeror’s Design Experience:

Acceptable: The proposal adheres to the requirements above and demonstrates that the offeror has the required design experience.

Unacceptable: The proposal does not demonstrate that the offeror has the required design experience stated above. Any Factor receiving an “Unacceptable” will render the entire proposal as “Unacceptable”.

b) FACTOR 2: Minimum Construction Dollar Amount on Designed Projects - Design projects cited in a) above shall have a minimum construction dollar value of $5,000,000 and have completed construction within the last six (6) years from date proposals are due. Indefinite- Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts, where numerous Task Orders are summed to meet the minimum construction dollar value identified herein, are not acceptable.

Section 00 22 11-6

Evaluation of Minimum Dollar Amount of Design Projects:

Acceptable: The proposal demonstrates that the design projects cited meet the minimum construction dollar value stated above.

Unacceptable: The proposal does not demonstrate that the design projects cited meet the minimum construction dollar value stated above. Any Factor receiving an “Unacceptable” will render the entire proposal as “Unacceptable”.

c) FACTOR 3: Design Personnel - Submit names of design personnel to perform as designer of record on this project. Required personnel by discipline are:

• Design Project Manager (Registered Architect or Engineer)

• Registered Architect

• Registered Civil Engineer

• Registered Structural Engineer

• Registered Mechanical Engineer

• Registered Electrical Engineer

• Registered Fire Protection Engineer

Designers shall be registered professional architects and engineers. Submit a one page resume for each of the design personnel listed showing each person’s State of professional registration and license number. Each of the required design personnel above (except the Design Project Manger) shall have completed at least one Federal Government project design as the designer of record in the discipline they are identified for within the last six (6) years. In addition, the Mechanical and Electrical Engineers of record shall have completed one (1) such project design of a district heating and cooling facility and piping distribution system within the last six (6) years.

Design Project Manager shall have completed at least one Federal Government project design and one district heating and cooling facility and piping distribution system project in the role of Design Project Manager within the last six (6) years. Resumes for each designer shall have dates (beginning and ending of design by month/year). Each required project design cited for each discipline shall have a minimum construction cost of $5,000,000. Resume information shall be listed in reverse chronological order with the latest design experience listed first and work back until the Federal Government design experience is identified within the six (6) year period from the date proposals are due and then the district heating and cooling facility and distribution system is identified where applicable. If the successful Offeror needs to replace a named design individual, replacement personnel having education and experience meeting or exceeding those identified in the proposal shall be presented for acceptance and approval by the Contracting Officer.

Evaluation of Design Personnel:

Acceptable: The proposal demonstrates that the design personnel cited meet the minimum requirements stated above.

Unacceptable: The proposal does not demonstrate that the design personnel cited does not meet the minimum requirements stated above. Any design personnel receiving an “Unacceptable” will render the entire proposal as “Unacceptable”.

6.3 VOLUME 2, TAB A - PAST PERFORMANCE, CONSTRUCTION FIRM

a) FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Past Construction Performance - The Offeror shall submit past construction performance evaluations on the two (2) projects submitted under Paragraph 6.1, above. The Government reserves the right to contact the evaluator of those projects to verify the

Designers shall be registered professional architects and engineers. Submit a one page resume g g p g p g for each of the design personnel listed showing each person’s State of professional registrationg p g p p g and license number. Each of the required design personnel above (except the Design Projectq g p ( p g j Manger) shall have completed at least one Federal Government project design as the designer g ) p p j g g of record in the discipline they are identified for within the last six (6) years. In addition, thep y ( ) y Mechanical and Electrical Engineers of record shall have completed one (1) such project design g p ( ) p j g of a district heating and cooling facility and piping distribution system within the last six (6) years. g g y p p g y ( ) y Design Project Manager shall have completed at least one Federal Government project designg j g p p j g and one district heating and cooling facility and piping distribution system project in the role of g g y p p g y p j Design Project Manager within the last six (6) years. Resumes for each designer shall have g j g ( ) y g dates (beginning and ending of design by month/year). Each required project design cited for ( g g g g y y ) q p j g each discipline shall have a minimum construction cost of $5,000,000. Resume information shall p be listed in reverse chronological order with the latest design experience listed first and work g g p back until the Federal Government design experience is identified within the six (6) year period g p ( ) y p from the date proposals are due and then the district heating and cooling facility and distributionp p g g y system is identified where applicable. If the successful Offeror needs to replace a named design y pp p g individual, replacement personnel having education and experience meeting or exceeding those, p p g p g g identified in the proposal shall be presented for acceptance and approval by the Contracting Officer.

Section 00 22 11-7 firm’s construction performance and performance rating. Federal Government projects presented in Paragraph 6.1 should be in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS) database. In the event a project listed in Paragraph 6.1 is not contained in CPARS or CCASS, the firm shall submit a NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ-0) (a blank copy is attached to this section) or other completed performance appraisal form/format that rates you past construction performance.

The Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) available at:

http://www.cpars.gov and Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) available at http://www.ppirs.gov will be used for construction acquisitions, if available, for the primary offeror in performance of construction for Paragraph 6.1 projects and evaluated (by the government).

This includes previously completed evaluation ratings (before 27 June 2014) for the CCASS and evaluation ratings completed after 27 June 2014 under the merged CPARS/ CCASS system. If evaluations are not available or have not been completed in CPARS and PPIRS, the Contractor shall use Form PPQ-0 (See Attachment) for the performance of the construction. For projects cited in Paragrah 6.1 which were constructed for other government entities, submit the performance appraisal sheets used by that government entity. Form PPQ-0 shall be completed by an owner or owner’s representative and not affiliated with the offeror. If an offeror has no past performance ratings for performance of construction for both government and non-government work, a unknown/acceptle rating will be given.

The government reserves the right to obtain copies of all CPARS and/or CCASS records contained in the CPARS and PPIRS databases.

Copies of records contained in the CPARS/CCASS database may be requested by offerors by:

(1) Accessing past performance information directly from Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) available at: http://www.cpars.gov or the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) at http://www.ppirs.gov for CCASS completed before 27 June 2014 and for merged CPARS/ACASS/CCASS completed after 27 June 2014. PPIRS is an electronic repository of performance information collected by all the major federal performance reporting systems. Logging onto PPIRS will require the following:

All firms must have purchased and installed a Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) certificate. If you do not have this certificate, you cannot access your information. Additional information about the PKI certificate is at http://www.ppirs.gov web page.

You will also need your DUNS number and Marketing Partner Identification Number (MPIN) to log onto PPIRS. The MPIN number was selected by whoever registered your firm in the System for Award Management (SAM) Registry at https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/. If you do not know your MPIN number, you will need to contact the SAM help desk by emailing them from the email link on the https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/ web page. Please be aware that they will only release the MPIN number to the person who originally registered your firm.

(2) Contact your government point of contact for the project you mentioned, and ask them if they can send you a copy, or

(3) Apply for “Contractor/ Senior Contractor Representative” access on PPIRS web page http://www.ppirs.gov and CPARS web page: http://www.cpars.gov.. This type of access is issued to only one person within the firm, typically a member of senior management. In addition to accessing your completed CCASS/CPARS performance evaluations, you will also be able to view the status of evaluations which have not yet been completed. Following receipt of your faxed application request, you will be emailed a logon and access instructions. This type of access will only let you see merged CPARS/ CCASS information for all government projects evaluated after 27 June 2014 or CCASS information for projects evaluated before 27 June 2014, so it is not as complete as PPIRS access which allows access to evaluations prepared by non-

Section 00 22 11-8

DOD federal agencies, as well as the DOD agencies which use CCASS. Be aware that you will also need to have a PKI certificate to access the PPIRS system. This is a DOD requirement.

Evaluation of Construction Past Performance:

There are two aspects to the construction past performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate whether the offeror’s present/past performance is relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. The criteria to establish what is recent and relevant are unique to this LPTA source selection. Therefore, the solicitation establishes the criteria for recency and relevancy in relation to the specific requirement being procured. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration was given to what aspects of an offeror’s contract history would give the most confidence that the offeror will satisfy the current procurement. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

Acceptable: The proposal demonstrates that a final project performance rating of “Satisfactory” or above for work performed on each of the two (2) construction projects cited in Paragraph 6.1 was received by the construction entity.

Unacceptable: The proposal does not demonstrate a final project performance rating of “Satisfactory” or above for work performed on each of the two (2) construction projects cited in Paragraph 6.1 was received by the construction entity. Any personnel receiving an “Unacceptable” will render the entire proposal as “Unacceptable”.

6.4 VOLUME 2, TAB B - PAST PERFORMANCE, DESIGN FIRM

a) FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Past Design Performance - The Offeror shall submit past design performance evaluations on the two projects submitted under Paragraph 6.2, above. The Government reserves the right to contact the evaluator of those projects to verify the firm’s design performance and performance rating. Projects presented in Paragraph 6.2 may be in the CPARS or Architect Contractor Appraisal Support System (ACASS) database. In the event a design project listed in Paragraph 6.2 is not contained in CPARS or ACASS, the firm shall submit a Form PPQ-0 (a blank copy is attached to this section) or other completed performance appraisal form/format that rates your past design performance.

The Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) available at:

http://www.cpars.gov and Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) available at http://www.ppirs.gov will be used for architect-engineer acquisitions, if available. This includes previously completed evaluation ratings (before 27 June 2014) for the Architect-Engineer Contract Administration Support System (ACASS) and evaluation ratings completed after 27 June 2014 under the merged CPARS/ACASS system. If evaluations are not available or have not been completed in CPARS and PPIRS, the Contractor shall use Form PPQ-0 for both the performance of the design. For projects cited in Paragraph 6.2 which were performed for other government entities, submit the performance appraisal sheets used by that government entity.

Form PPQ-0 shall be completed by an owner or owner’s representative and not affiliated with the offeror. If an offeror has no past performance ratings for performance of the design for both government and non-government work, a neutral rating will be given.

The government reserves the right to obtain copies of all CPARS and ACASS records contained in the CPARS and PPIRS databases.

Copies of records contained in the CPARS/ACASS database may be requested by offerors by:

Section 00 22 11-9

(1) Accessing past performance information directly from Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) available at: http://www.cpars.gov or the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) at http://www.ppirs.gov for ACASS completed before 27 June 2014 and for merged CPARS/ACASS/CCASS completed after 27 June 2014. PPIRS is an electronic repository of performance information collected by all the major federal performance reporting systems. Logging onto PPIRS will require the following:

All firms must have purchased and installed a Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) certificate. If you do not have this certificate, you cannot access your information. Additional information about the PKI certificate is at http://www.ppirs.gov web page.

You will also need your DUNS number and Marketing Partner Identification Number (MPIN) to log onto PPIRS. The MPIN number was selected by whoever registered your firm in the System for Award Management (SAM) Registry at https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/. If you do not know your MPIN number, you will need to contact the SAM help desk by emailing them from the email link on the https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/ web page. Please be aware that they will only release the MPIN number to the person who originally registered your firm.

(2) Contact your government point of contact for the project you mentioned, and ask them if they can send you a copy, or

(3) Apply for “Contractor/ Senior Contractor Representative” access on PPIRS web page http://www.ppirs.gov and CPARS web page: http://www.cpars.gov.. This type of access is issued to only one person within the firm, typically a member of senior management. In addition to access to your completed CCASS/ACASS/CPARS performance evaluations, you will also be able to view status of evaluations which have not yet been completed. Following receipt of your faxed application request, you will be emailed a logon and access instructions. This type of access will only let you see merged CPARS/ ACASS/ CCASS information for all government projects evaluated after 27 June 2014 or ACASS information for projects evaluated before 27 June 2014, so it is not as complete as PPIRS access which allows access to evaluations prepared by non-DOD federal agencies, as well as the DOD agencies which use ACASS. Be aware that you will also need to have a PKI certificate to access the PPIRS system. This is a DOD requirement.

Evaluation of Design Past Performance: The minimum requirement that must be demonstrated in order for past performance to be declared acceptable requires a final project performance rating of “Satisfactory” or above for work performed on each of the two (2) design projects presented in Paragraph 6.2.

There are two aspects to the design past performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate whether the offeror’s present/past performance is relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. The criteria to establish what is recent and relevant are unique to this LPTA source selection. Therefore, the solicitation establishes the criteria for recency and relevancy in relation to the specific requirement being procured. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration was given to what aspects of an offeror’s contract history would give the most confidence that the offeror will satisfy the current procurement. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the designer performed on the contracts. The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

Acceptable: The proposal demonstrates that a final project performance rating of “Satisfactory” or above for work performed on each of the two (2) design projects cited in Paragraph 6.2 was received by the design entity.

Section 00 22 11-10

Unacceptable: The proposal does not demonstrate a final project performance rating of “Satisfactory” or above for work performed on each of the two (2) design projects cited in Paragraph 6.2 was received by the design entity. Any design personnel receiving an “Unacceptable” will render the entire proposal as “Unacceptable”.

7. PRICING

7.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

The offeror should submit only an original (along with two CDs) of the following information in a separate binder. Hard copy duplicates of the information in this Tab are not required and should not be submitted. The binder shall contain the following information:

a) Section 00 10 00, Solicitation/Contract Form and Pricing Schedule: The total combined cost for the construction will be considered for award. The offeror has the option of excluding an electronic copy of Section 00 10 00 (SF 1442 and CLIN Pricing Schedule) and submitting it in hard copy format ONLY. The CDs shall contain the balance of the printed materials in electronic format in the form of PDF files.

b) Section 00 45 00, Representations and Certifications: This item will not be considered for evaluation purposes, but is required to be completed and submitted with your offer.

c) Pre-Award Survey Information (Local Provision) (Sep 93): The following information shall be submitted with the offer. This facilitates the award process.

i. Financial:

1. Name, address, and telephone number of the Financial Institution utilized by the

Offeror.

2. Name, telephone number, and email address for the points of contact, primary and alternate, to be contacted for information.

ii. Bonding Information:

1. Name, address, telephone number of the Surety Company utilized by the Offeror.

2. Name, telephone number, and email address for the points of contact, primary and alternate, to be contacted for information.

8. EVALUATION FOR AWARD

Evaluation for Award will be according to the Lowest-Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection process. Uniformity of all proposals is essential to assure accurate evaluation. All proposals must comply with the instructions in the solicitation. Those proposals, which are properly submitted, will be evaluated to determine technically acceptable contractor(s). A proposal that fails to comply with any minimum technical requirements will not be eligible for award regardless that it may offer the lowest price.

8.1 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

Proposals will be evaluated by a Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). Pricing data will not be part of the technical evaluation. Criteria for the technical evaluation as set forth in the solicitation will be the sole basis for determining the technical merit of proposals. Factors listed below will be assigned a technical evaluation of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”. Any Factor receiving an “Unacceptable” will render the entire proposal as “Unacceptable” regardless of the price. No further evaluation will be made on the Offeror’s proposal, including price.

Section 00 22 11-11

Volume 1, TAB A, Binder 1 FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Construction Experience FACTOR 2: Minimum Dollar Amount of Construction Projects

Volume 1, TAB B, Binder 1 FACTOR 1: Offeror’s Design Experience FACTOR 2: Minimum Construction Dollar Amount on Designed Projects FACTOR 3: Design Personnel

Volume 2, TAB A, Binder 1 FACTOR 1: Past Performance, Construction Firm

Volume 2, TAB B, Binder 1 FACTOR 1: Past Performance, Design Firm

The following ratings and descriptions apply for Volume 1 evaluation criteria:

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings for Volume 1

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation

The following ratings and descriptions apply for Volume 2 evaluation criteria:

Past Performance Evaluation Ratings for Volume 2

Rating Description

Acceptable

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

Unacceptable

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

Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be

Section 00 22 11-12 reasonable assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

9. CONTRACT AWARD

Subject to provisions contained herein, award will be made to one Offeror. The Government will select for award the responsible Offeror providing a technically acceptable proposal with the lowest price. To be considered for award, proposals shall conform to the terms and conditions contained in the solicitation.

No proposal shall be accepted that does not comply with all technical requirements specified in this solicitation or which includes stipulations or qualifying conditions.

10. SELECTION AND AWARD WITHOUT EXCHANGES

It is the intent of the Government to evaluate proposals and make award based upon initial offers received, without further exchanges (clarifications, communications, discussions; reference FAR 15.306 concerning exchanges with offerors after receipt of proposals) or additional information. Therefore, proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms of price and technical requirements.

Do not assume an opportunity will be afforded to clarify, discuss, or revise proposals. If award is not made on initial offers, exchanges will be conducted as needed.

11. SELECTION AND AWARD WITH EXCHANGES

If exchanges are conducted, the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will evaluate supplemental information provided by the Offeror and may adjust a proposal’s acceptability as required. The SSEB will provide a list of the technically acceptable offers to the Source Selection Authority.

12. PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRECONTRACT COSTS

This solicitation does not commit the Government to pay costs incurred in preparation and submission of proposals or for any other costs incurred prior to execution of a formal contract.

13. DEBRIEFINGS

Debriefings will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.505 and 15.506.

Attachment - Past Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ-0)

PPQ-0 (9/30/11)

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

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

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

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

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

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

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

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

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

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

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

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

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

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO USACE. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR USACE POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL

INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

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

Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

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

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

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

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

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

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

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

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

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

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

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

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

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

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

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

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

responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer? E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force? E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program) E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client E VG S M U N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E VG S M U N

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section. Yes No

e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below. Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues?

(Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements. E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

E VG S M U N

b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues) E VG S M U N

c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below) Yes No

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor. E VG S M U N

Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks. Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary):