Am-0004_W9128F-17-R-0078.pdf

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 or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

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

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

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

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

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

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.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER 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

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, 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)

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 (Number, 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)

Previous edition unusable

Amendment No. 0004

AUTOMATED INFANTRY PLATOON BATTLE COURSE (AIPBC), PN72176, FORT CARSON, COLORADO

See attached documentation for content of the amendment changes to RFP

Date for receipt of proposals is 21 NOV 2017 at 1400 hours

Government Point of Contact: MSG Glenda Canty, Contract Specialist (402) 995-2059

U.S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT

CONTRACTING OFFICE

1616 CAPITOL AVE.

OMAHA, NE 68102-4901

See Item 6

W9128F-17-R-0078

11/09/2017

10/16/2017

11/09/2017

Am #0004 - 1

Am #0004 - 2 (Continuation of SF30)

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Omaha District, Corps of Engineers

1616 Capitol Avenue Omaha, Nebraska 68102-4901

:NOTICE: Failure to acknowledge : Solicitation No. W9128F-17-R-0078 :all amendments may cause rejec-:

:tion of the offer. See FAR : Date of Issue: 16 OCT 2017 :52.215-1 of Section 00 21 00. : New Date of Receiving Proposals:

21 NOV 2017

Amendment No. 0004

9 NOV 2017

SUBJECT: Amendment No. 0004 to Request for Proposal Solicitation Package for Construction of Automated Infantry Platoon Battle Course (AIPBC).

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. (Descriptive Changes). NONE

b. 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. For convenience, on the revised specification pages, changes have been identified by highlighting text. (All portions of reissued specification pages shall apply whether or not changes thereon have been indicated.)

Pages Deleted Pages Substituted or Added 00 22 00 00 22 00 01 57 20.00 10 01 57 20.00 10 33 82 00 33 82 00

c. Drawings (Not Reissued). NONE

d. Drawings (Reissued). The following drawing(s) are revised with a revision date as indicated in the title block, and reissued with this amendment.

(1) Sheet ES101, ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN

(2) Sheet ES301, ELECTRICAL TRENCH DETAILS

(3) Sheet ES404, ROCA ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN

(4) Sheet ES404A, ROCA ONE LINE – OPTION

(5) Sheet E-101CT, CONTROL TOWER PLANS

(6) Sheet E-102CT, CONTROL TOWER PLANS

(7) Sheet E-101OS, OPERATIONS/STORAGE PLANS

Am #0004 - 3 (Continuation of SF30)

(8) Sheet EL501, LIGHTING SCHEDULE AND LIGHTING DETAILS

(9) Sheet EL501A, LIGHTING SCHEDULE AND LIGHTING DETAILS

(10) Sheet EL502, LIGHTING DETAILS

(11) Sheet EP602, PANEL SCHEDULES

(12) Sheet EP602A, PANEL SCHEDULES – OPTION

(13) Sheet TN502, TELECOMMUNICATIONS DETAILS

(14) Sheet TN601, TELECOMMUNICATIONS RISER DIAGRAM

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

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

b. Mailed Proposals shall be addressed as noted in Item 8 on Page 00 10 00-1 of Standard Form 1442.

3. Offers will be received until 2:00 p.m, local time at place of receiving proposals, 21 NOV 2017.

Attachments:

Specification Page(s) listed in 1.b., above Drawings listed in 1.d., above (Under Separate Cover)

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

9 NOV 2017

NEP/2160

This page was intentionally left blank for duplex printing.

Section 00 22 00 W9128F17R0078

Section 00 22 00 Page 1 Am #0004

SECTION 00 22 00 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, EVALUATION CRITERIA AND

BASIS OF AWARD

1.0 OVERVIEW

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

4.0 PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS

4.1. VOLUME 1 – TECHNICAL

4.2. VOLUME 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

4.3. VOLUME 3 – PRICE AND PRO-FORMA INFORMATION

5.0 VOLUME 1 –FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL

5.1. TAB A –SUBFACTOR 1 – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

5.2. TAB B –SUBFACTOR 2 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN

5.3. TAB C –SUBFACTOR 3 – KEY PERSONNEL CAPABILITIES AND EXPERIENCE

6.0 VOLUME 2 – FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

6.1 TAB A - FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

7.0 VOLUME 3 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

7.1. GENERAL

7.2. TAB A – FACTOR 3 – PRICE (STANDARD FORM 1442, PROPOSAL DATA SHEET AND

CONTRACT LINE ITEM SCHEDULE)

7.3. TAB B – EVIDENCE OF BONDABILITY

7.4. TAB C– REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

8.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

8.1. SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

8.2. EVALUATION

8.3. DEFINITIONS

8.4. EVALUATION RATING SYSTEM

8.5. PAST PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT RATING SYSTEM

Section 00 22 00 Page 2

ATTACHMENTS

1 – COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE CONSTRUCTION OR PRIME CONTRACTOR

2 – COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE KEY SUBCONTRACTOR (OR PRIME IF WORK

NOT TO BE SUBCONTRACTED)

3 – PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION TELEPHONE INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

4 – KEY PERSONNEL RESUME

5 – LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR KEY PERSONNEL

6 – LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR (DESIGN FIRM OR KEY SUBCONTRACTOR)

7 – PROPOSAL DATA SHEETS

Section 00 22 00 Page 3

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1. This is a “Best Value” solicitation for the Construction of Automated Infantry Platoon Battle Course in Ft. Carson, Colorado. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein. Award will be made to a single offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements, and whose proposal, judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria and other considerations specified in this solicitation, represents the Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable offer.

1.2. PROPOSAL FORMAT

The Packaging that contains the Proposals shall be sealed and marked:

“Proposals for Solicitation No. W9128F17R0078, to be opened by Contracting Personnel Only”

Written materials: 8 ½” x 11” format in bound volumes using 10 point or larger font size and using 3-ring binders. Combine Volumes 1 and 2 into a single binder. For each binder, provide a title sheet on the cover, table of contents and labeled tabs matching this documents’ Table of Contents. Provide a title sheet within each volume identifying the prime, consortium, or joint venture’s name, address, telephone, fax and email address and point of contact. Include the signature, title and contact information of the official that can bind the firm.

Volume number and tab section submitted shall appear in the bottom right corner of each page (along with the revision number and revision date for the amended page, if necessary)

Number of copies: Submit only one original and one copy of Volume 1 and 2 (in a single/shared binder) as well as one CD in read-only format, using .PDF files. Submit Volume 3 in a sealed envelope as well as one CD (with only Volume 3). It is imperative that none of the pricing or Volume 3 information show up in Volumes 1 or 2. The offeror has the option of excluding an electronic copy of only Section 00 10 00 (SF 1442 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.

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

2.1. The Contracting Officer will award a firm-fixed-price contract to that responsible Offeror whose proposal the Source Selection Authority has determined conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, considering all non-price factors described herein, and price using the lowest price technically acceptable evaluation methodology in accordance with the established criteria.

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

3.1. Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms from a price and technical standpoint. Do not assume that offerors will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss or revise their proposals.

3.2. The proposal shall describe the capability of the Offeror to perform the requirements of the RFP. The proposal should be specific and complete in every detail and should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the requirements. The proposal should be practical, legible, clear, and coherent.

Section 00 22 00 Page 4

3.3. In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information containing sufficient detail to allow review and evaluation by the Government. Proposal clarity, organization, and cross-referencing are mandatory. Failure to submit and organize proposals as requested may adversely affect an Offeror’s evaluation.

3.4. Firms formally organized as construction contractors that have associated specifically for this project, consortia of firms or any other interested parties may submit proposals. Associations may be as joint ventures or as key team subcontractors. Any legally organized Offeror may submit a proposal, provided that the Offeror or Offeror’s subcontractor has or will have professional architects and engineers, registered in the appropriate technical disciplines and provided that the requirements specified in Contract clause, “Requirements for Registration of Designers”, are met.

3.5. Submit proposals in tabbed, three-ring binders per paragraph 1.2 above. Note that the Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits, where indicated below.

4.0 PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS

4.1. VOLUME 1 –TECHNICAL

Factor/Sub Factor Location Description

FACTOR 1 TECHNICAL

Subfactor 1 Vol. 1 TAB A Specialized Experience

Subfactor 2 Vol. 1 TAB B Minimum Dollar Amount of Construction Projects.

Subfactor 3 Vol. 1 TAB C Project Management Plan

Subfactor 4 Vol. 1 TAB D Key Personnel Capabilities and Experience

4.2. VOLUME 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

Factor/Sub Factor Location Description

FACTOR 2 Vol. 2 TAB A Past Performance

4.3. VOLUME 3 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

Factor/Sub Factor Location Description

FACTOR 3 Vol. 3 TAB A Price (Standard Form 1442, Proposal Data Sheet And Contract Line Item Schedule)

N/A Vol. 3 TAB B Evidence of Bondability

Section 00 22 00 Page 5

Factor/Sub Factor Location Description

N/A Vol. 3 TAB C Required Pre-Award Information

NOTE: An 8(a) Joint Venture Offeror or an Offeror submitting a Proposal as HubZone Joint Venture shall submit evidence from Offerors SBA Servicing Agency that the Offeror has notified and discussed the proposed joint venture for this specific project with the appropriate SBA Representative or Business Opportunity Specialist.

5.0 VOLUME 1 –FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL

5.1. VOLUME 1 -TAB A – SUBFACTOR 1 - SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

5.1.1. Submission Requirements:

5.1.1.1. Construction Projects. The Offeror shall submit three (3) projects performed by the Prime Construction Entity. Projects previously performed by any of the joint venture partners as the Prime Construction Entity may be submitted for consideration if the Offeror is submitting as a Joint Venture. Limit one (1) page per project submitted, with one additional page allowed for describing past teaming experience between current team members (see below). Any information presented beyond the page limit will not be evaluated.

5.1.1.2. Teaming Experience. In one page, the Offeror shall demonstrate any previous teaming experience between current team members. Teaming experience information is limited to projects that are well underway or that have been completed and turned over no longer than the past five years preceding the issue date of this solicitation.

5.1.1.3. Project Information. All projects submitted should demonstrate experience on similar projects of value equal to or greater than $5,000,000. Submit projects that are currently well underway (at least 50% construction progress completed) or completed and turned over no longer than five (5) years preceding the issue date of this solicitation. The proposed prime Contractor shall have performed in the same role as the prime or lead entities on the projects submitted. Offerors may identify state and local government and private contracts that are similar to the Government’s requirements set forth in the RFP. If the Offeror is a joint venture, each firm shall provide information, demonstrating experience relevant to their role on this project. If the Offeror has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division or unit submitting the offer or by the team member. If projects were design-build, so identify them.

Project information shall CLEARLY include:

(a) Type of Facility Represented

(b) Name of Firm

(c) Name of Project

(d) Location of Project

(e) Owner, including reference POC with confirmed contact information

(f) General Scope of Construction Project

Section 00 22 00 Page 6

(g) Summary of Your Role in the Project

(h) Construction Cost at completion

(i) Extent and Type of Work Subcontracted Out

(j) Dates Construction Began and Completed

5.1.2. The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing DoD or Government appraisal systems, or through interviewing owners or references. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

5.1.3. A firm will not receive credit under this subfactor for the relevant experience of key personnel proposed for this project while employed at a different firm.

5.1.4. Evaluation Criteria:

5.1.4.1. Acceptable: Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

5.1.4.2. Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

5.2. VOLUME 1 - TAB B – SUBFACTOR 2 – MINIMUM DOLLAR AMOUNT OF

CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

5.2.1. Submission Requirements:

5.2.1.1. Minimum Dollar Amount: Construction projects cited in TAB A above shall have a minimum construction dollar value of $5,000,000 (final construction cost). Indefinite- Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts or similar, where numerous smaller Task/Delivery Orders or related projects are summed to meet the minimum construction dollar value identified herein, are not acceptable.

5.2.2. Evaluation Criteria:

5.2.2.1. Acceptable: Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

5.2.2.2. Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

5.3. VOLUME 1 - TAB C – SUBFACTOR 3 –PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN

5.3.1. Submission Requirements:

5.3.1.1. Project Management Approach. Provide information that describes the offeror’s Project Management approach to executing the contract per the detailed requirements herein.

Clearly and concisely describe the organizational and technical approaches to project management and execution, and proposed contract duration. Limit the information to five (5) pages or less. Information beyond the fifth page will not be evaluated.

5.3.1.2. Organization. List the construction entities and describe their resources and how their resources will be utilized, their roles and responsibilities and any contractual arrangements that have been established. Clearly describe any teaming or joint venture arrangements, including a clear description of each entity’s roles and responsibilities on the project. A copy of the teaming or joint venture agreement(s) shall be appended to the plan (not included in the page limitation). Include a simple organizational chart, illustrating the organization, Section 00 22 00 Page 7 including the proposed quality control group(s). Identify the firm(s) chosen for the project, if not to be self-performed. The Offeror shall document unequivocal teaming arrangements with its lead entity(ies) and key subcontractors (see attachment 2). Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing the how the construction process will be managed and the authorities and the delegations of authority within the team. Include a key personnel organization chart that clearly depicts the key positions and the names of the personnel, their firm affiliations and their job locations and their job/position title within the organization. The key personnel organization chart shall be consistent with the corporate organization chart, with the matrix of responsibilities assigned to the team entities, and with the list of key personnel to be provided under TAB D “KEY PERSONNEL CAPABILITIES AND EXPERIENCE”. The Government will evaluate the clarity and strength of the overall organization and how well it is organized, structured and staffed to execute the entire scope of work. This subfactor will be rated as unacceptable if the Offeror has not selected and committed to use its lead entity (ies). Joint venture participants’ contribution to the organization should be commensurate with their skills and background.

5.3.1.3. Technical Approach for Construction. Describe the technical approach to construction of the project. Include any considerations of fast-tracking construction, panelized construction, pre-engineered components, etc. The Government is looking for ways to streamline construction and manage labor and other resource constraints in an effort to reduce costs and achieve an aggressive schedule while minimizing impact to the base. The Government is looking for ways to minimize impacts of the construction.

5.3.1.4. Proposed Contract Duration: The offeror shall propose the contract duration in his tab of the proposal. Proposed contract duration shall not exceed the benchmark performance (also known as period of performance in section 00 10 00). Unless changed during negotiations, this duration will become the contractually binding performance period. The Government will rate the proposed duration matching or shorter than the benchmark duration as “acceptable”.

No advantage will be considered for proposals that provide a duration shorter than the proposed benchmark. A proposed duration that is longer than the proposed benchmark duration will be viewed as a deficiency. The Government will consider an unreasonably condensed contract duration, which places undue risk on the Government or which may create a risk of contract or performance failure, as a significant weakness or a deficiency, depending upon the evaluators' judgment.

5.3.2. Evaluation Criteria:

5.3.2.1. Acceptable: Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

5.3.2.2. Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

5.4. VOLUME 1 - TAB D – SUBFACTOR 4 - KEY PERSONNEL CAPABILITIES AND

EXPERIENCE

5.4.1. Submission Requirements:

5.4.1.1. For key personnel provide a brief resume using the Key Personnel Resume form (see attachment 4) . Indicate the position title on each project listed in the resumes. Provide the name, owner, dollar amount, date of completion, and brief scope of each resume project.

Include resumes for the following key personnel:

- Project Manager responsible for the overall project (Prime Construction Contractor Employee)

Section 00 22 00 Page 8

- Construction Quality Control System Manager (Prime Construction Contractor Employee)

- General Superintendent (Prime Construction Contractor Employee)

5.4.1.2. The minimum experience requirement for the Project Manager is 5 years of experience as a Project Manager, managing similar projects to this solicitation.

5.4.1.3. The minimum experience requirement for the Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System Manager is 5 years of experience as a Quality Control Manager on similar projects to this solicitation. CQC System Manager shall comply with personnel requirements listed in Section 01 45 00.

5.4.1.4. The minimum experience requirement for the Superintendent is 5 years’ experience as superintendent, managing multiple trades and subcontractors.

5.4.1.5. Offeror shall provide unequivocal letters of commitment from all proposed key personnel NOT currently employed by the Offeror. Use the form letter in attachment 5.

[*Am-4] <text deleted> [**Am-4]

5.4.2. Evaluation Criteria:

5.4.2.1. Acceptable: Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

5.4.2.2. Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

6.0 VOLUME 2 – FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

6.1. VOLUME 2 – TAB A – PAST PERFORMANCE

6.1.1. Submission Requirements:

Submit past performance evaluations and ratings for each project the Offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1 - Volume 1 - Tab A Specialized Experience.

If available, submit Construction Contract Administration Support System (CCASS) or Architect-Engineer Contract Administration Support System (ACASS) Performance Evaluations ratings. For projects which were designed and/or constructed for other government entities, submit the performance appraisal sheets used by that government entity if available. For projects cited in Volume 1 - Tab A Specialized Experience not covered in the CCASS / ACASS database or other Government Design Performance Rating System, submit a Past Performance Questionnaire (refer to attachment 3).

6.1.1.1. CPARS/CCASS/ACASS Evaluations

Firms are requested to retrieve their CPARS/CCASS/ACASS past performance information directly from the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) at http://www.ppirs.gov. 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 posted in red at the top, center portion, of the http://www.ppirs.gov web page. You will also need your DUNS number and Marketing

Section 00 22 00 Page 9

Partner Identification Number (MPIN) to log onto PPIRS. The MPIN number was selected by whoever registered your firm in the Central Contractor Registry at http://www.ccr.gov . If you do not know your MPIN number, you will need to contact the CCR help desk by emailing them from the email link on the http://www.ccr.gov/help.asp web page. Please be aware that they will only release the MPIN number to the person who originally registered your firm.

There are two other ways to obtain a copy of CCASS / ACASS evaluations as follows: (1) Contact your government point of contact for the project you mentioned, and ask them if they can send you a copy, or (2) Apply for “Contractor Corporate Senior Management Representative” access on the following CCASS / ACASS web page:

http://www.cpars.csd.disa.mil/. 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 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 CCASS / ACASS information, 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 CCASS / ACASS. Be aware that you will also need to have a PKI certificate to access the CCASS / ACASS system. This is a DOD requirement.

6.1.1.2. Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

The Past Performance Questionnaire is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client. The Past Performance Questionnaire should be completed by an owner or owner’s representative not affiliated with your firm. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact.

Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client Information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

6.1.1.3. Government Utilization of Alternate Information Sources for Past Performance

The Government will assess the past performance on projects submitted under the Specialized Experience Subfactor and reserves the right to conduct telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the proposal or to review personal knowledge. In addition, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance of the Offeror on the submitted projects and any other previous work. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror's proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

Section 00 22 00 Page 10

6.1.2. Evaluation Criteria:

6.1.2.1. The Government will perform a performance confidence assessment of the offeror’s probability of successfully meeting the contract requirements, considering the degree of success of the D-B team's recent, relevant experience. See explanation of “well underway” and relevancy under the Subfactor “Specialized Experience”.

6.1.2.2. Each offeror will receive a performance confidence assessment rating based on the Offeror’s recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the Contract requirements.

6.1.2.3. Recency Assessment. An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past 5 years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

6.1.2.4. Relevancy Assessment. To be relevant, the effort must be similar in nature of work, size, and complexity. The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine if it is the same or similar in nature of work and complexity to the work being procured under this solicitation. Recent past performance is defined as not more than 5 years from the RFP release date; relevant in terms of similar nature of work, size and complexity.

A relevancy determination of the offeror’s (including joint venture partner(s) and major and critical subcontractor(s)) past performance will be made. In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror, teaming partner, or subcontractor whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration should be given to what aspects of an offeror’s contract history would give the most confidence that the offeror will satisfy the current procurement. The past performance information provided in the proposal and obtained from other sources will be used to establish the relevancy of past performance.

6.1.2.5. Assigning Ratings. The Past Performance Factor will be assigned one of the ratings defined below.

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.

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.

6.1.2.5.1. Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor, if relevant.

An entity may not establish past performance based on the past performance of its proposed key personnel, apart from that of the entity. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, The Government will only evaluate past performance of the division or unit submitting the offer or by the team member. Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

7.0 VOLUME 3 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

Section 00 22 00 Page 11

7.1. GENERAL

Submit the Pro Forma information in a separate sealed envelope labeled: “Volume 2 – Price and Pro Forma Information.” Submit the original and one copy.

7.2. VOLUME 3 - TAB A – PRICE (STANDARD FORM 1442, PROPOSAL DATA SHEET AND

CONTRACT LINE ITEM SCHEDULE)

7.2.1. Submission Requirements:

7.2.1.1. Submit the properly filled out and executed SF 1442, along with the CLIN Schedule, containing proposed line item and total pricing, as well as the proposed performance duration. See instructions in Section 00 21 00, “Instructions to Offerors”. Submit the Proposal Data Sheet.

7.2.1.2. Supplemental Price Breakdown. If deemed necessary to evaluate the price proposals, the Government will request a price breakdown of the Contract Line Items in a sealed envelope marked “Price Breakdown Information”, in Excel format. The Government will provide details on where and how to send the breakdown. This information will not be needed sooner than three working days after the proposal submission due date. This information may be required for the initial proposal and, if requested, for any revised proposals. This information is not an opportunity for an offeror to revise its non-price or price proposal.

7.2.2. Evaluation Criteria:

Price will not be rated or scored, but will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness through the use of a price analysis. The price evaluators will also check for appearance of unbalanced line item prices. Offerors are cautioned to distribute direct costs, such as material, labor, equipment, subcontracts, etc. and to evenly distribute indirect costs, such as job overhead, home office overhead, bond, etc., to the appropriate contract line items. If deemed necessary, the supplemental price breakdown information will be used to assist the Government in performing the price evaluations described above. Unreasonably high, unbalanced, inaccurate or incomplete price proposals, may be the grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition.

7.3. VOLUME 3 - TAB B – EVIDENCE OF BONDABILITY

7.3.1. Submission Requirements: Submit information showing Offeror's bondability in the amount of the proposal. Include the name, address and telephone number of the prime contractor's bonding agent.

7.3.2. Evaluation Requirements: This item is not rated. Bonding information will be reviewed to determine the Offeror's ability to obtain the required Performance and Payment Bonds. The prime contractor is required to be able to obtain the level of bonding required by the solicitation from an acceptable surety.

7.4. VOLUME 3 - TAB C – REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

7.4.1. Submission Requirements:

7.4.1.1. Submit this information for the Contracting Officer’s determination of offeror responsibility, which includes, but is not limited to, the following:

7.4.1.1.1. A list of present commitments, including the dollar value thereof, and name of the organization under which the work is being performed. Include names and telephone

Section 00 22 00 Page 12 numbers of personnel within each organization who are familiar with the prospective contractor’s performance.

7.4.1.1.2. A certified statement listing; (1) each contract awarded within the preceding three month period exceeding $1,000,000.00 in value with a brief description of the contract; and (2) each contract awarded within the preceding three year period not already physically completed and exceeding $5,000,000.00 in value with a brief description of the contract.

7.4.1.1.3. If the prospective contractor is a joint venture, each joint venture member will be required to submit the above defined certification.

7.4.1.2. One copy of the following information shall be provided:

7.4.1.2.1. Proof of Financial Ability (Most recent financial statement covering assets and liabilities).

7.4.1.2.2. Number of years the firm has been in business.

7.4.1.2.3. Name, address and telephone number of firm’s bonding company.

7.4.1.2.4. Information showing offeror’s bondability for this project. Include the bond rate.

7.4.1.2.5. Name, address and telephone numbers of two credit/trade references.

7.4.2. Evaluation Criteria: In addition to the other proposal information, the Contracting Officer shall use this information in making an affirmative responsibility determination for award to the Successful Offeror, in accordance with FAR Part 9.

8.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

8.1. SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

8.1.1. The SSEB will be established to conduct the evaluation of proposals received in response to this solicitation. The evaluation will be based on the content of the proposal and any subsequent discussions required, as well as information obtained from other sources, e.g.

past performance information. The SSEB will not consider any information incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

8.2. EVALUATION

8.2.1. The SSEB will evaluate the proposals and determine if the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable each evaluation factor and subfactor.

8.2.2. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint.

The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. A “Competitive Range” is a subjective determination of the most highly rated proposals in the event that the Government decides that discussions with offerors are required or are considered to be in the Government’s best interests. In such an event, the Contracting Officer will establish a competitive range of all the most highly rated proposals.

Section 00 22 00 Page 13

8.2.3. If discussions are held, the Government may engage in a broad give-and-take with those offerors in the competitive range, in accordance with FAR 15.306 (d). The Government will provide the Offeror an advance agenda for the discussions. During discussions, the Government may ask the Offeror to further explain its proposal and to answer questions about it.

8.2.4. Upon conclusion of discussions, those offerors still considered the most highly rated will be afforded an opportunity to submit their proposal revisions for final evaluation and selection.

8.3. DEFINITIONS

8.3.1. Best Value

The expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement. See FAR 2.101.

8.3.2. Deficiency

A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

8.3.3. Weakness

A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

8.3.4. Strength

An aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

8.3.5. Deviation

Proposal implies or specifically offers a deviation below the specified criteria. The offeror may or may not have called the deviation to the Government’s attention. A deviation is a deficiency. The proposal must conform to the solicitation requirements for award.

8.3.6. Competitive Range

See FAR 15.306(c).

8.3.7. Clarifications

Clarifications are limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. See FAR 15.306(a)(1).

8.3.8. Communications

Communications are exchanges between the Government and offerors after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range. See FAR 15.306(b).

8.3.9. Discussions

Section 00 22 00 Page 14

Discussions are exchanges (i.e., negotiations) in a competitive environment and are undertaken with the intent of allowing the offeror to revise its proposal. Discussions take place after establishment of the competitive range. See FAR 15.306(d).

8.3.10. Neutral/Unknown Risk

No relevant performance record is identifiable upon which to base a meaningful performance risk prediction. A search was unable to identify any relevant past performance information for the entity being rated. This is neither a negative or positive assessment.

8.3.11. Evaluation Notice (EN)

Evaluation Notice (EN) is the PCO's written notification to the offeror for purposes of clarifications, communications, or in support of discussions.

8.3.12. Risk

As it pertains to source selection, is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor or subfactor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

8.3.13. Significant Weakness

A significant weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

8.3.14. Source Selection Authority (SSA)

The official designated to make the source selection decision.

8.3.15. Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD)

The document that reflects the SSA’s independent decision.

8.3.16. Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB)

A group of individuals representing the various functional disciplines relevant to the acquisition that is responsible for evaluating proposals against the solicitation criteria.

8.3.17. Source Selection Information

Information prepared for use by an agency for the purpose of evaluating a bid or proposal to enter into an agency procurement contract, if that information has not been previously made available to the public or disclosed publicly. See FAR 2.101 for a listing of source selection information.

8.4. EVALUATION RATING SYSTEM

8.4.1. General: The Government will review the proposals and rate the quality of each technical evaluation factor and subfactor. The SSEB will rate each proposal against the specified evaluation criteria in the Solicitation requirements.

8.4.2. Review Write-up: The Government will support each rating with a narrative, separately listing all strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and required clarifications.

Section 00 22 00 Page 15

SECTION 00 22 00 - ATTACHMENT 1

COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE - CONSTRUCTION OR PRIME CONTRACTOR

Provide the following information to show examples of projects your company constructed within the last five years indicating experience with projects of similar type and scope. Use one form per project.

(a) Type of Facility Represented

(b) Your Firm’s Name

(c) Name of Project__________________________________________________________________________

(d) Location of Project________________________________________________________________________

(e) Owner

(f) General Scope of Construction Project

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

(h) At Completion Construction Cost

(i) Extent and Type of Work You Subcontracted Out

(j) Dates Construction: Began___________________ Completed______________

(k) Your Performance Evaluation by Owner, if known

(l) Were You Terminated or Assessed Liquidated Damages?

(If either is “Yes”, attach an Explanation)

(m) Owner’s Point of Contact for Reference (Name and Company)

Section 00 22 00 Page 16

(n) Current Telephone Number of Reference

POC__________________________________________________

Section 00 22 00 Page 17

SECTION 00 22 00 - ATTACHMENT 2

COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

KEY SUBCONTRACTOR (OR PRIME IF WORK NOT TO BE SUBCONTRACTED)

Provide the following information to show examples of projects your company constructed within the last five years indicating experience with projects of similar type and scope. Use one form per project.

(a) Type of Facility Represented

(b) Your Firm’s Name

(c) Name of project

(d) Owner

(e) General Scope of Construction Project

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

(g) Your Contract or Subcontract Amount

(h) Detailed Description of Your Self-Performed Work

(i) Describe any Work You Subcontract to Others

(j) Dates Your (sub) contract: Started___________________ Completed______________

(k) Your Performance Evaluation by Owner, if any

By Prime:

Section 00 22 00 Page 18

(l) Were You Terminated or Assessed Liquidated Damages?

(If either is “Yes”, attach an Explanation)

(m) Name and Company of Point of Contact (POC) for reference (If you were a subcontractor, also list the firm you were hired by):

(n) Current Telephone Number of Reference POC

Section 00 22 00 Page 19

SECTION 00 22 00 - ATTACHMENT 3

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:

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

o o o 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

Section 00 22 00 Page 20

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.

Section 00 22 00 Page 21

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…