Attachment_2_-_Section_00_22_20_-_Phase_2.pdf

W9128F-18-R-0015

$225M DB/DBB FSRM MATOC

SB set-aside

SECTION 00 22 20, PAGE - 0

SECTION 00 22 20

PHASE 2 OF 2 PHASE SELECTION PROCEDURES

INDEX

1. SELECTION PROCEDURE FOR PHASE 2

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 AMRDEC SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

2.1.2 File Names

3. PROPOSAL CHARACTERISTICS

4. INQUIRIES/QUESTIONS

5. BASIS FOR AWARD

6. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF EVALUATION FACTORS

7. SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS

7.1. TECHNICAL RATINGS

7.2. RATING DEFINITIONS

7.3. DEBRIEFING OFFERORS

8. FACTOR TO BE EVALUATED

8.1 VOLUME III, FACTOR 4 – MANAGEMENT APPROACH

8.1.1 Submission Requirements

8.1.2 Evaluation Criteria

9. PRICE

9.1 VOLUME IV- PRICE

9.1.1 Submission Requirements

9.1.2 Evaluation Criteria

SECTION 00 22 20, PAGE - 1

SECTION 00 22 20

PHASE 2 OF 2 PHASE SELECTION PROCEDURES

1. SELECTION PROCEDURE FOR PHASE 2

The Government will utilize the processes described in Section 00 22 20 to evaluate Phase 2 proposals. The

Government intends to award a target of five (5) contracts under this Small Business Multiple Award Task Order

Contract (MATOC). To be considered for award, short-listed Offerors shall submit complete and acceptable proposals prior to the date and time stated on the SF 1442.

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 AMRDEC SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

In an effort to reduce paperwork and reduce cost, all proposals shall be submitted electronically via the AMRDEC

SAFE website. All submissions shall be in Adobe PDF format with Optical Character Recognition (OCR) applied to all documents that will enable word searches to be conducted using Adobe-compatible PDF software. Offerors may use compression utilities such as 7-Zip, WinZip or PKZip to reduce file size and facilitate transmission when using

AMRDEC. Offerors are encouraged to send both files in the same AMRDEC transmission, if possible.

These proposals shall be submitted via the AMRDEC SAFE website. All submissions shall be in Adobe PDF format with Optical Character Recognition (OCR) applied to all compatible documents so that word searches can be conducted using Adobe-compatible PDF software. Offerors may use compressions utility software such as WinZip or

PKZip to reduce file size and facilitate transmission when using AMRDEC, if necessary

ONLY PHASE 2 REQUIREMENTS (VOLUMES III, IV, AND V) SHOULD BE SUBMITTED DURING

PHASE 2.

To submit proposals electronically via AMRDEC SAFE, go to the following website:

https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/SAFE/ At the AMRDEC SAFE website select “Non-CAC Users” in order to register, access the site and submit your proposal(s). When completing the information for transmittal at the AMRDEC SAFE website, you will be asked to enter e-mail addresses for the recipients. When your proposal is submitted via the

AMRDEC SAFE website, the website will provide notification of the submittal to the recipients. For this solicitation, the recipients will be:

1. Doug Hadley, whose e-mail address is doug.e.hadley@usace.army.mil and

2. Melissa Harlon, whose e-mail address is melissa.r.harlon@usace.army.mil

After submitting your information, you will receive one of these notifications:

A. “The files were successfully uploaded.”

B. “Your files cannot be downloaded by recipients until you verify your email address. Please check your email for further instructions.”

***OFFERORS MUST FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS SENT TO YOUR EMAIL TO COMPLETE

THE SUBMITTAL PROCESS***

For the purposes of determining whether the proposal was received “late” in accordance with FAR 15.208, the date and time the file(s) are uploaded into the AMRDEC SAFE website as identified in the AMRDEC e-mail sent to the

Contract Specialist(s)/Contracting Officer will be the time and date the Government received the proposal. Please note that the process involves two steps, after the proposal has been uploaded to the AMRDEC SAFE website the

Offerors must verify its email address in order for the Government to receive access to the proposal uploaded onto the

AMRDEC SAFE website. Do not assume that electronic communication is instantaneous. Please make allowances for delays in transmittal.

mailto:doug.e.hadley@usace.army.mil mailto:jessica.r.jackson@usace.army.mil

SECTION 00 22 20, PAGE - 2

NOTE: ONLY in the unusual case that the AMRDEC website is “down” (not operational), the Offeror should email their proposal to the following individuals prior to the proposal due date and time:

1. Doug Hadley, whose e-mail address is doug.e.hadley@usace.army.mil and

2. Melissa Harlon, whose e-mail address is melissa.r.harlon@usace.army.mil .

Electronic Proposals shall be received by the date and time indicated in Block 9 of the SF 33 for this solicitation or as identified in subsequent amendments.

2.1.2 File Names

For Phase 2 submission, submit the following three files, titled in the format shown below:

#1: W9128F-18-R-0015_COMPANY NAME_PHASE2_VOLUME_III_FACTOR_4

#2: W9128F-18-R-0015 _COMPANY NAME_PHASE2_VOLUME_IV_PRICE

#3: W9128F-18-R-0015_COMPANY NAME_PHASE2_VOLUME_V_REQD_DOCS

3. PROPOSAL CHARACTERISTICS

a) PHASE 2, VOLUME III, FACTOR 4 (File #1)

1) Page limitation for Factor 4 is shown below:

Volume Eval Factor Title Page Limitations

III Factor 4 Management Approach

2) Pages should be separately and sequentially numbered (i.e., the first page submitted for evaluation for each factor should be “1”). All text shall be at least 10 pt. font and easily read. All text shall be typed and single-spaced. Each page shall be 8-1/2 by 11 inches. This includes pages containing diagrams, charts and tables. Margins shall be no less than 1”

(right, left, top, and bottom).

3) Pages that exceed the page limitations will not be reviewed and the information contained on those pages will not be considered for evaluation.

b) PHASE 2, VOLUME IV, PRICE (File #2)

1) Page limitation for PRICE is shown below:

Volume Eval Factor Title Page Limitations

IV PRICE Price No Page Limitations for Price

b) Phase 2, VOLUME V, REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION (File #3) mailto:doug.e.hadley@usace.army.mil mailto:jessica.r.jackson@usace.army.mil

SECTION 00 22 20, PAGE - 3

1) Submit the following items in the sequence listed below:

Cover letter

Completed SF 1442 (if not submitted in Phase 1)

Completed SF 30

Joint Venture/Mentor-Protege Requirements

2) Component Requirements:

(a) Cover Letter: The cover letter shall contain:

Solicitation number

Name, title, address, email, and telephone number of the Offeror.

Names, titles, emails, and telephone numbers of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this RFP.

Name, title and signature of the person authorized to sign the proposal.

A statement specifying agreement with all terms, conditions and provisions included in the RFP.

(b) Completed SF 30: Offeror shall submit acknowledgement of all amendments to the

RFP issued prior to the close of Phase 1 in accordance with the instructions on the

Standard Form 30 (amendment form).

(c) Offeror’s tax identification number (TIN).

There is no page limit for Required Documents (File#3).

4. INQUIRIES/QUESTIONS

Prospective Offeror shall submit contracting and technical inquiries and questions concerning this solicitation document via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at www.projnet.org/projnet.

****Please Note: Offeror shall only submit one question per inquiry, i.e., each query should have a unique corresponding ProjNet query number assigned. All queries containing multiple questions shall be rejected.

5. BASIS FOR AWARD

The agency will use Two-Phase Design-Build Selection Procedures authorized by FAR 36.301.

The Two-Phase selections will be based on evaluation of technical (non-price) factors (submitted in Phase 1 and

Phase 2) and price. The Phase 1 evaluations will be carried forward into the Phase 2 evaluations. In Phase 2, there is no separate submission required or allowed for Phase 1 factors. See RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF

EVALUATION FACTORS below for additional information.

In Phase 2, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without conducting discussions with

Offeror. However, in the event the Source Selection Authority (SSA)/Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) concludes conducting discussions is in the best interest of the Government, the PCO, with approval from the SSA to enter discussions, will establish a competitive range.

If the PCO 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 PCO 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. Therefore, the Offeror initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint.

http://www.projnet.org/projnet

SECTION 00 22 20, PAGE - 4

The Government intends to award a target of five (5) contracts under this MATOC to the Offeror whose proposal offers the best value to the Government.

6. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF EVALUATION FACTORS

Evaluation Factors are listed below in descending order of importance:

Factor 1: Construction Experience (Phase 1 only)

Factor 2: Past Performance (Phase 1 only)

Factor 3: Technical Approach (Phase 1 only)

Factor 4: Management Approach

All Evaluation Factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price.

7. SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS

Refer to Section 00 22 10, SELECTON PROCEDURE FOR PHASE 1 and INVITATION TO PHASE 2, and

Section 00 22 20, SELECTION PROCEDURE FOR PHASE 2. The Government intends to award a target of five

(5) contracts to the Offeror(s) whose proposals offer the best value to the Government.

7.1. TECHNICAL RATINGS

The evaluation ratings for Technical Factors 1, 3, and 4 will be on an adjectival basis in conjunction with a narrative composed of the discussion of the particular strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies of the proposal. The SST will use a combined technical/risk rating system that includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in Table 7.1.1. The Combined technical/risk ratings will be used to evaluate

Phase 1 – Factor 1 Construction Experience, Phase 1 – Factor 3 Technical Approach and Phase 2 – Factor 4

Management Approach.

Table 7.1.1:

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength.

Green Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable.

7.2. RATING DEFINITIONS

Strength: is 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

Significant Strength: an aspect of an Offeror's proposal that has appreciable merit or appreciably exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

SECTION 00 22 20, PAGE - 5

Weakness: a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness: a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

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

7.3. DEBRIEFING OFFERORS

Offerors may request a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.506 Postaward Debriefing of Offeror provided the

Offeror has not already received a debriefing for this Solicitation.

8. FACTOR TO BE EVALUATED

8.1 VOLUME III, FACTOR 4 – MANAGEMENT APPROACH

8.1.1 Submission Requirements

8.1.1.1 Organizational Structure

Provide a hierarchical organization chart that shows your company’s primary divisions (branches, offices, sections, etc.). This organization chart should include divisions responsible for the following functions, at a minimum:

1) Program and Project Management

2) Construction Management

3) Design/AE Services

4) Quality Control (Design)

5) Quality Control

6) Safety and Health

7) Contracting and Finances

8) Administration

9) Flow of communication with Government

8.1.1.2 Roles and Responsibilities

Referencing your company’s hierarchical chart, describe how your organization will work together to ensure each project’s success.

8.1.1.3 Designer(s)/AE Service Capabilities

a. Identify how your company intends to execute the design effort for Design-Build projects.

b. If design will be accomplished by a company other than the Offeror’s, provide the following information for designer/AE firm that your company has a letter of commitment for on this contract:

i. Company’s name

ii. DUNS Number

c. Describe the capabilities and specialization (if any) of your in-house or teamed designer/AE

(for example, structural, mechanical, electrical, etc.), if any.

d. Describe how your company would coordinate design and construction efforts, to include design quality role, and the role of the Government in Design Build (DB) projects.

8.1.2 Evaluation Criteria

Strengths may be given for the following criteria:

SECTION 00 22 20, PAGE - 6

In-house design capability

Aspects of the management approach which the government believes demonstrate an exceptional understanding of the requirements of this anticipated contract, as described in Divisions 00 and 01.

Designer that can provide a full spectrum of AE/Design services.

Any other aspect of a proposal that the evaluators and/or the SSA believe enhances the merit of the proposal or increases the probability of successful performance of the contract.

Weaknesses may be given for the following criteria:

Omissions or incompleteness of any requested information that is not considered a deficiency.

Aspects of the Management Approach that are unclear or conflict with the requirements of Divisions 00 and 01, and are not considered a deficiency.

Any other aspect of a proposal that the evaluators and/or the SSA believe is a flaw that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiencies shall be given for each of the following criteria:

An organizational structure that does not clearly identify roles, responsibilities, hierarchies, or flows of communication with the Government.

Identification of an AE/Designer with limited technical capabilities (for example, the AE only designs mechanical systems).

Failure to address any of the requirements for this factor.

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.

9. PRICE

9.1 VOLUME IV- PRICE

9.1.1 Submission Requirements

IMPORTANT: The Offeror shall submit all price submission requirements for Price separately in Phase 2, Volume

IV. Do not submit Price in Phase 1, Volumes I or II, or Phase 2, Volumes III or V.

Volume II shall include the following information in order as stated below:

a. Binding Rate Schedule – Labor

b. Binding Cap Rates

c. Binding Profit Rate

d. Sample Project Pricing

Failure to include any submission requirement may render the proposal non-responsive and ineligible for award.

9.1.1.1 Binding Labor Rate Schedule

a. The Offeror shall complete Section 00 10 00, Table 1 “Binding Labor Rate Schedule” in its entirety. The

Offeror shall propose the hourly unburdened and burdened rates for the first one-year term of the base contract, and burdened labor rates for each subsequent contract term for all of the labor categories identified in Table 1.

Failure to complete Table 1 in its entirety may result in an Offeror being excluded from consideration for award.

b. The hourly burdened labor rates proposed by the Offeror shall include direct cost, payroll taxes, insurance, benefits, and any other applicable labor costs (not already included in either the Offeror’s field or home office overhead), but shall exclude profit. Offeror shall provide an example of how the mark-ups are applied to the unburdened labor rates.

SECTION 00 22 20, PAGE - 7

c. The hourly burdened labor rates proposed in Table 1 will be legally binding and will be the maximum rates that the Offeror shall use for all company-fixed-price task orders and task order modifications issued during the five

(5) year period of performance of the contract (base and option terms).

d. The Government reserves the right to request information other than certified cost or pricing data from the

Offeror in order to assess the reasonableness of the proposed labor rates.

9.1.1.2 Binding Cap Rate Schedule

a. The Offeror shall complete Section 00 10 00 Table 2 “Binding Cap Rate Schedule” in its entirety. The binding cap rates proposed in Table 2 will be legally binding and shall be the maximum rates that the Offeror will use on all task orders and modifications issued during the five (5) year ordering period of the contract (base and option terms). Depending on an Offeror's accounting structure, the Offeror may have either Home Office

Overhead/G&A or both. The intent is to provide Offeror the flexibility in proposing a rate for both if their accounting structure permits. Thus, if an Offeror only has one (e.g. Home Office Overhead) and not the other

(e.g. G&A), the Offeror can mark whichever one as not applicable in the Binding Cap Rate schedule.

b. The cost pools shall be in accordance with the Offeror’s most recent audited rates, if available.

1. If the Offeror has been audited within a year of the proposal submission date, the Offeror is instructed to provide a copy of the audit, to include, if available, any other rate information received from the Administrative PCO of the cognizant audit agency. The Offeror will not be required to provide the breakdown of each of their cost pools.

2. If the Offeror does not have a recent audit, the Offeror shall provide detailed information showing cost accounts included in each of their cost pools in order to explain all overhead rates, G&A markups, labor burden (fringes), and any other pools. The composition of the base on which the pool is distributed shall also be shown. An example of a G&A expense rate computation is listed below and may be used as a guide. Note that the list is not inclusive of all allowable or unallowable costs:

Indirect Salaries $100,000

Officers’ Salaries $85,000

Payroll Taxes $9,500

Insurance $14,500

Rent $35,000

Utilities $14,000

Repairs & Maintenance $6,500

Interest Expense -0- *

Advertising -0- *

Office Supplies $1,500

Personal Property Taxes $2,200

Contributions -0- *

Depreciation Office

Equipment

$ 8,500

Legal Fees $ 3,500

Bad Debts -0- *

State Income Taxes $7,500

TOTAL G&A EXPENSE $287,700

Total Direct Labor $3,000,000

Add Labor Burden @ 35% $1,050,000

Other Direct Costs $3,000,000

TOTAL BASE $7,050,000

SECTION 00 22 20, PAGE - 8

Percentage Computation

G&A

Expenses $ 287,700

-------------------------------- = 4.08%

Base $7,050,000

* Examples of unallowable costs in accordance with FAR Part 31. All costs unallowable per FAR Part 31 should be removed from overhead pools before computation of the submitted rate.

9.1.1.3 Binding Profit Rate

a. The Offeror shall complete Section 00 10 00 Table 3, “Binding Profit Rate” in its entirety.

b. The proposed maximum profit rate in Table 3 will be legally binding and shall be the maximum profit rate the

Offeror will be allowed to use on all task orders, modifications, and any other contract actions issued during the five (5) year ordering period of the contract (base and option terms). The maximum profit rate shall be binding even if the Weighted Guidelines Method would result in a higher profit. The maximum profit rate shall not be construed as a “fixed” profit percentage for all Task Order or Modification actions. If Weighted

Guidelines Method calculations indicate a lower profit is merited, the lower profit percentage shall be applied.

c. The Offeror shall propose a single rate for profit. The Offeror shall not propose separate maximum rates for subcontractors or Contractor Team Arrangement partners. The Offeror shall not submit different maximum rates for self-performed work and subcontracted work.

9.1.1.4 Sample Project Pricing

Reference Attachment 1, Sample Project.

a. The Offeror shall complete Section 00 22 20, Attachment 1, “Contract Line Item (CLIN) Pricing Schedule,” in its entirety.

b. Offeror shall propose a company, fixed price (to include, but not limited to, labor costs, other direct costs, indirect costs, profit, etc.) to complete all of the tasks described in the Sample project’s scope of work.

c. Offeror shall provide the following information (other than certified cost or pricing data) to substantiate the basis for the proposed lump sum price for each line item listed in the pricing schedule.

1. Direct Labor. Offeror shall use the proposed maximum binding hourly burdened labor rate caps from

Table 1 of Section 00 10 00 for the Sample Project. Offeror that fail to do so will not be considered for award.

2. Indirect Costs (other than Profit). Offeror shall utilize the proposed maximum binding cap rates in Table

2 of Section 00 10 00 for the Sample Project. Offeror that fail to do so will not be considered for award.

3. Profit: Offeror shall use the proposed maximum binding profit cap rates in Table 3 of Section 00 10 00.

Offeror that Offeror that fail to do so will not be considered for award.

4. For the purposes of the Sample Project, all other costs, to include materials, subcontractors, etc., are provided by the Government in the worksheet provided in Attachment 1.

9.1.2 Evaluation Criteria

a. The total evaluated price will be the company, fixed price proposed by the Offeror for the Sample Project.

b. The total evaluated price will not be scored or rated. Evaluation of price and analysis of the binding rates will be performed using one or more of the price analysis techniques described in FAR 15.404-1(b). Cost analysis techniques described in FAR 15.404-1(c) may also be used to evaluate data other than certified cost or pricing data to determine cost reasonableness when a fair and reasonable price cannot be determined through price analysis alone. Through these techniques, the Government will determine whether the price and rates proposed by the Offeror are reasonable.

SECTION 00 22 20, PAGE - 9

c. Award will not be made to Offeror who do not provide reasonable fully burdened rates for each the labor disciplines listed in Section 00 10 00 Table 1. Because the evaluation of the price proposal will represent a portion of the total evaluation, it is possible that an Offeror may not be selected because of an unreasonable price proposal.

d. The Government reserves the right to perform price realism analysis on the burdened hourly labor rates proposed in Section 00 10 00 Table 1 and/or the Sample Project in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(d). If realism analysis is conducted, an Offeror may be excluded from award for proposing unrealistic hourly burdened labor rates or an unrealistic price for the Sample project.

SECTION 00 22 20, PAGE - 10

Attachment 1: Sample/Seed Project (TBD)