Am-0003_W9128F-18-R-0018.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. 0003

REPAIR BIGGS AAF, PN 85772, FORT BLISS, TEXAS

See attached documentation for content of the amendment changes to RFP

Date for receipt of proposals is 08 JUN 2018 at 1200 hours

Government Point of Contact: Donna Larson, Contract Specialist (402) 290-3692

U.S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT

CONTRACTING OFFICE

1616 CAPITOL AVE.

OMAHA, NE 68102-4901

See Item 6

W9128F-18-R-0018

06/01/2018

05/09/2018

06/01/2018

Am #0003 - 1

Am #0003 - 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-18-R-0018 :all amendments may cause rejec-:

:tion of the offer. See FAR : Date of Issue: 09 MAY 2018 :52.215-1 of Section 00 21 00. : Date of Receiving Proposals:

08 JUN 2018

Amendment No. 0003

01 JUN 2018

SUBJECT: Amendment No. 0003 to Request for Proposal Solicitation Package for Design and Construction of REPAIR BIGGS AAF, PN 85772.

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)

(1) Section 32 12 15.13 Page 16, paragraph 2.3, delete second sentence “For taxiway and...Performance Grade (PG) 70-28” and substitute the following:

“For taxiway and overrun pavements, provide asphalt cement binder that conforms to AASHTO M 320 Performance Grade (PG) 70-22’’

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

2. This amendment is a part of the proposing papers and its receipt shall be acknowledged on the Standard Form 1442. All other conditions and requirements of the request for proposal remain unchanged.

Electronic Proposals shall be delivered via AMRDEC Safe Access File Exchange (SAFE), https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/, to the USACE Contracting Activity at the following email addresses:

Donna.R.Larson@usace.army.mil and Cheryl.A.Bunting@usace.army.mil

3. Offers will be received until 12:00 p.m, local time at place of receiving proposals, 08 JUN 2018.

Attachments:

Specification Pages listed in 1.b., above

Am #0003 - 3 (Continuation of SF30)

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

01 JUN 2018

nep/2160

This page was intentionally left blank for duplex printing.

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 1

SECTION 00 22 00

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS,

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION

INDEX

1. WHO MAY SUBMIT

2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

3. FORMAT OF SUBMISSIONS

4. HOW TO SUBMIT

5. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

6. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

7. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

7.1. PREFACE

7.2. TAB A - FACTOR 1 - CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS ... 9

7.3. TAB B - FACTOR 2 TECHNICAL APPROACH

7.4. TAB C – FACTOR 3 - OFFEROR’S KEY PERSONNEL

7.5. TAB D - FACTOR 4 - PAST PERFORMANCE, CONSTRUCTION

7.6. TAB E - FACTOR 5 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION

8. PRICE

8.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

8.2. EVALUATION OF PRICE

9. COMPETITIVE RANGE

10. CLARIFICATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS

11. FINAL PROPOSAL REVISIONS

12. SMALL BUSINESS SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

13. AWARD OF CONTRACT

14. DEBRIEFING

Attachments:

Attachment A - NAVFAC USACE PPQ Form Sep 2011 SF294 - Subcontracting Report For Individual Contracts Attachment B - Individual Subcontract Form

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 2

SECTION 00 22 00

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS,

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION

1. WHO MAY SUBMIT

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

All offerors, including joint ventures, must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) and have completed their Representations and Certification through SAM.

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 proposals will be retained for the official contract file.

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. FORMAT OF SUBMISSIONS

All written portions (other than the organization chart and bar chart schedule, which can be 11” x 17”) shall be in 8-1/2" x 11" format, unless indicated otherwise. The proposal shall be submitted in two separate volumes: Volume 1 (Technical) and Volume 2 (Price) as separate Adobe PDF files. Volume 1 shall have bookmarks, at a minimum, corresponding to each tab/factor and sub-factor. See Section 8.1 for additional information related to submission of Volume 2, Price.

4. HOW TO SUBMIT

In an effort to reduce paperwork and reduce cost, all proposals shall be submitted electronically via the AMRDEC SAFE website, https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/SAFE/. 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. The two (2) volumes listed below shall be submitted as “SEPARATE” single files via AMRDEC. 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.

Volume 1: Technical Volume 2: Price

Title the single files in the following format:

W9128F18R0018_Company Name_Volume_1_Technical W9128F18R0018_Company Name_Volume_2_Price (Note: Company name may be abbreviated)

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 3

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:

Ms. Donna Larson, donna.r.larson@usace.army.mil Ms. Cheryl Bunting, cheryl.a.bunting@usace.army.mil

After submitting your information, you will receive two (2) disclaimers:

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 Offeror 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.

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. Donna Larson whose email address is donna.r.larson@usace.army.mil and

2. Cheryl Bunting whose e-mail address is cheryl.a.bunting@usace.army.mil.

Electronic Proposals shall be received by the date and time indicated in Block 13A of the SF 1442 for this solicitation or as identified in subsequent amendments.

5. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

a. All proposals and documentation which have been properly submitted will be evaluated. Proposals will be evaluated on the basis of the factors stated in the solicitation to select the responsible offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government. Uniformity of all proposals is essential to assure fair and accurate evaluation. All proposals must comply with the instructions in the solicitation. If a proposal is suspected of having a deficiency, it will be brought to the immediate attention of the appropriate authority who will determine if there is a deficiency. If the determination is made that a deficiency exists, the proposal will not be

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 4 evaluated further and will be eliminated from further consideration. The affected offeror shall be promptly notified of the decision. Properly conforming proposals will be forwarded to the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) for evaluation. If, after award, the contractor wishes to replace key personnel or sub-contractors identified in the proposal, a formal request for substitution shall be presented to the Contracting Officer for approval. The Contracting Officer’s written consent shall be obtained before making any substitutions for these designated personnel or sub-contractors. The request shall clearly show the qualifications of the replacement personnel or sub-contractors and shall illustrate that the replacements have skills, experience, and capacity to accomplish the work equal to or better than those personnel or sub-contractors identified in the proposal.

b. Information obtained from owners, contract administrators, or other points of contact provided by the offeror may affect the evaluation rating given for the factors being evaluated by those discussions.

c. Evaluations will be conducted in accordance with the Best Value Tradeoff Process, FAR 15.101-1. This process allows for a tradeoff between non-cost factors and cost/price and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest-priced proposal or other than the highest technically-rated proposal to achieve a best–value contract award. Proposal evaluation is an assessment of the proposal and the offeror's ability to perform the resultant contract successfully.

Proposals will be evaluated to determine ratings, supported by narratives, and to identify strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies of the proposed approach in each proposal.

d. Evaluation Definitions.

(1) 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.

(2) Weakness means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

(3) Deficiency is 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.

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

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

(6) Discussions are exchanges (i.e., negotiations) in a competitive environment that 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).

e. Technical Rating Evaluation Process.

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 5

(1) For purposes of this solicitation, technical and risk ratings for non-cost Evaluation Factors other than Past Performance and Small Business Participation will utilize a scale of colors and words used in conjunction with narrative to evaluate the quality of the offeror’s technical solution for meeting the Government’s requirement and the associated degree of risk.

Ratings will be applied at the factor (tab) and sub-factor level. If at any level of indentation an Offeror’s proposal is evaluated as not meeting a minimum requirement (that is, below the level of yellow (marginal)), this fact must be included in the rating and narrative assessment at that level and each higher level of indentation. Therefore, a red - unacceptable rating at any level must be carried to the factor (tab) level. The following ratings will be used to evaluate Factors 1 (Tab A) through 3 (Tab C). See paragraph 5 for Evaluation Factors:

Color Rating Description Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

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

(2) Factor 4 (Tab D) Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered.

The Government will first assess and rate the relevancy of recent projects accomplished by the offeror to the scope of this contract for overall application to the Performance Confidence Assessment ratings described hereinafter. Relevancy shall be determined utilizing the similarity definition found in Paragraph 7.2.1, based on size, relevance, and complexity of the projects and the similarity of those projects to the project in this solicitation.

The following relevancy ratings will be used to evaluate the past performance information:

Very Relevant. Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 6 and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant. Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant. Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant. Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

The Government will next consider how well the offeror performed on the contracts. Past performance on projects with more relevance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment rating than past performance on projects of lesser relevance. Owners/references may be asked to comment on items such as quality of design or construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and contractor; as well as level of support for such items as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting construction errors, warranty work, etc. (see the interview form at Attachment A). The Government will target areas covered in the requirements of this proposal including records of conforming to quality, schedule, cost control, and customer satisfaction; as well as level of support for such items as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, problem resolution for construction errors, warranty work, and safety.

The Government will not release the Interview Forms to the Offeror at any time, in order for the Government to solicit candid, unbiased interview comments. The Government also places a higher value on projects which document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation; for example, but not limited to, telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the proposal, CPARS/CCASS or other agency performance databases, offeror furnished references, or personal knowledge. The Government also places a higher value on projects which provided particularly difficult or unique challenges and the innovative methods the contractor used to resolve problems successfully. This rating is not a separate proposal rating but is only used in developing an overall past performance confidence assessment rating assigned to the Past Performance Factor.

The following ratings will be used for the Performance Confidence Assessment:

Substantial Confidence. Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence. Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence. No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 7

Limited Confidence. Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence. Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

For Volume 1, Factor 4, Past Performance, Construction, a neutral rating will be awarded when no past performance records are provided or are otherwise unavailable. Per Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.305(a)(2)(iv), “In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance."

(3) Factor 5 (Tab E) Small Business Participation Evaluation. See paragraph 7.6.2.

6. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Offerors will be evaluated based on the Evaluation Factors shown below. The requirements specified in the solicitation are considered to be minimum requirements. A more favorable evaluation rating may be given for exceeding the minimum requirements. Note: Factors 1-5 are shown below in order of importance. All evaluation factors, other than cost or price, when combined, are considered significantly more important than cost or price.

EVALUATION FACTORS

Volume 1

Location Factor Order of Importance Tab A Factor 1 – Construction Experience and

Qualifications Most important Factor, more important than Factors 2, 3, 4, and 5.

Tab B Factor 2 – Technical Approach 2nd most important

Factor, less important than Factor 1, equal to Factors 3 and 4, more important than Factor

Tab C Factor 3 – Offeror’s Key Personnel Equal importance to

Factors 2 and 4. Less important than Factor 1, more important than Factor 5

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 8

Tab D Factor 4 – Past Performance, Construction Equal importance to Factors 2 and3. Less important than Factor 1, more important than Factor 5

Tab E Factor 5 – Small Business Participation Least important technical Factor

Volume 2

Price - (significantly less important than the combined Factor elements in Volume 1)

Note: A poor evaluation rating for any Factor, or combination of different Factors, may cause the proposal to be evaluated as “Red - Unacceptable”. Volume 2, Price will be evaluated in accordance with requirements listed in paragraph 8.2, EVALUATION OF PRICE.

7. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

All proposals shall contain the information stated herein. Proposal clarity, organization (as defined in this solicitation) and cross-referencing is mandatory. No material (information not part of proposal) shall be incorporated by reference. Material not specifically identified below will not be evaluated. If offerors do not want the data contained in the proposal disclosed by the Government, the offeror shall follow the procedure specified in Section 00 21 00 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS, paragraph: RESTRICTION ON DISCLOSURE AND USE OF DATA. However, portions of the winning proposal will be incorporated into the contract and are subject to disclosure notwithstanding restrictive markings.

a. Volume 1 shall consist of Factors 1 through 5 (Tabs A through E) and be divided as follows:

Location Factor Tab A Factor 1 - Construction Experience and Qualifications

Tab B Factor 2 - Technical Approach

Tab C Factor 3 - Offeror’s Key Personnel

Tab D Factor 4 - Past Performance, Construction

Tab E Factor 5 - Small Business Participation

b. Volume 2 - Shall be a separate PDF file containing the information shown below. This volume shall include the following information, in the order identified herein.

Additional information on the content of this volume is shown in Section 8.1 below.

SF 1442 (Reference Section 00 10 00)

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 9

Pricing Schedule (Reference Section 00 10 00) Representations and Certifications (Reference Section 00 45 00) Pre-Award Survey Information, as defined in Section 8.1

[*Am-3]

c. Teaming Arrangements - For purposes of this RFP, an “Offeror” may include a group of two (2) or more entities that have formed a “contractor team arrangement,” as defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), Section 9.601. In the case of entities that have formed a contractor team arrangement, the experience and performance history of any member of the team, whether or not gained while working with the other member(s) of the currently-proposed contractor team arrangement, will be considered as a part of the evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal. In the case of contractor team arrangements involving a prime contractor and subcontractor(s), where the prime contractor submits the proposal in response to this RFP, the prime contractor must have completed at least 50 percent of the total number of projects submitted for Factor 1 – Runway Construction Experience (refer to paragraph 7.2.1) for consideration in response to the experience requirements of this RFP. In the case of subcontractor submissions, the subcontractor must submit the final cost of their portion of the project. An Offeror that relies upon the experience and performance history of a member or members of a proposed contractor team arrangement will be expected to maintain that arrangement during performance of any contract awarded to that Offeror under this RFP. As a part of their proposal, the Offeror must provide a contractor team agreement signed by all parties, identifying the legal name(s) of all entities and describing the nature of each entity’s relationship (teaming/partnering, joint venture, mentor/protégé, etc.) and their role on this project. This documentation shall be provided at the beginning of the Offeror's technical proposal, prior to any Factors (Tabs).

7.1. PREFACE

The Preface to Volume 1 should consist of a brief explanation of the offeror, the organization of the proposed construction team, and key sub-contractors that will be utilized on this project. If a teaming arrangement or Joint Venture (JV) of prime contractors will be utilized, the JV will be identified in this preface and the management of the JV will be provided. This preface shall not exceed four (4) pages.

7.2. TAB A - FACTOR 1 - CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE AND

QUALIFICATIONS

7.2.1. Runway Construction Experience

7.2.1.1 Submission Requirements

The Offeror shall submit three (3) examples of construction projects which best illustrate the experience of the construction contractor on projects of similar function, scope, size, and complexity to the Repair Runway, Biggs Army Airfield (AAF), Fort Bliss as described in this solicitation. Any of the three project examples may also be used by the Offeror to meet the specialized experience requirements described in paragraphs 7.2.2.1 a through e below and provide

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 10 the necessary cross-reference as described in paragraph 7.2.2.1. No more than three (3) projects should be submitted with a three (3) page limit per project. Each project example should provide a narrative of the example project, discussing the project and providing specifics as noted herein. If a Joint Venture (JV) is proposing, provide examples for each prime contractor in the JV within the three project examples allowed.

[*Am-1] Each project cited should have a construction dollar value equal to or greater than $10,000,000 and should have been completed within six (6) years from the date that the proposal for this project is due. A single Task Order dollar value equal to or greater than $10,000,000 and completed within six (6) years from the date that the proposal for this project is due is acceptable.

Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts, where numerous Task Orders are summed to meet the minimum construction dollar value identified herein, are not acceptable.

Narratives for each project should include a brief overview of the project, discussing major features of the project and each project’s relevance and similarities to this project. The government preference is that project examples submitted be of completed projects (i.e. construction complete).

Each runway construction project example narrative should include the following information:

• Project title and location

• Detailed scope of the project including area of paving in square yards (SY)

• Original contract award amount and final construction cost

• Original contract finish date and actual finish date. All time growth and construction cost growth shall be explained in each project example narrative.

• Role of the Offeror on the project, including a clear designation of whether or not the Offeror was the prime contractor

• Sub-contractors utilized on the project and if they are proposed to be utilized for the Fort Bliss Project

• Prime Contractor Personnel on the project and if they are proposed to be utilized for the Fort Bliss Project

All project examples shall contain a Point of Contact (POC) as well as one alternate Point of Contact, to include the name, job title, address, telephone, and e-mail address. The POC and alternate shall be familiar with the construction performance of the offeror and be a representative of the owner/customer, not affiliated with the offeror. The POC and alternate shall be able to verify the experience cited.

7.2.2. Specialized Experience

7.2.2.1. Submission Requirements

The Offeror should demonstrate experience in each of the following areas of specialized experience. If the Offeror proposes subcontractors, then a letter of commitment shall be required from each subcontractor and must be provided as part of the Offeror’s proposal in this tab.

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 11

After award of the contract, the Contractor shall obtain the Contracting Officer's written consent before making any substitutions for the subcontractors identified in this tab.

[*Am-3] Areas of specialized experience below are listed in descending order of importance. Offerors shall not submit more than two (2) projects per area of specialized experience in paragraphs a through e below. For paragraph “a. Airfield Pavement”, offerors shall submit two (2) projects each (4 total) demonstrating experience with Portland Cement Concrete and Asphalt Cement Concrete. Each project should contain no more than two (2) pages. Each project narrative should include a description of the experience noted in paragraphs a through e below, the role of the offeror on the project including whether prime or subcontractor; subcontractors used on the project and if they are proposed to be utilized on this project; and total dollar value of the overall project and the dollar value of the specialized work. The offeror may utilize project experience submitted under paragraph 7.2.1 for any specialized areas noted in paragraphs a through e below, by providing a cross-reference to the appropriate project in paragraph 7.2.1.

a. Airfield Pavement:

1. Show experience constructing Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavement with a thickness of 15 inches or greater. Projects submitted for evaluation shall each consist of at least 50,000 square yards (SY) of total paving area. The Contractor shall demonstrate experience with slip-form paving, to include installation of dowel bars in hardened concrete. In addition, experience installing PCC airfield pavement joint seals (both field molded and preformed compression); grooving of PCC airfield pavements; and installing pavement markings on PCC airfield pavements shall be demonstrated.

2. Show experience constructing Asphalt Cement Concrete (ACC) pavement with a total thickness of 4 inches or greater in multiple lifts. Projects submitted for evaluation shall each consist of at least 12,000 square yards of total paving area. The Contractor shall demonstrate experience placing high stability asphalt meeting Department of Defense requirements for military airfield projects (See Section 32 12 15.13, HOT-MIX ASPHALT AIRFIELD PAVING). In addition, experience installing pavement markings on ACC airfield pavements shall be demonstrated.

b. Contractor Quality Control (CQC) Geotechnical Laboratory. Show experience in the following: Experience in casting and breaking concrete cylinders and beams for compressive and flexural strength testing for airfield pavement consistent with requirements in ASTM C31, ASTM C39 and ASTM C78. Experience with concrete mix design for airfield pavement meeting requirements of ACI 211 and ASTM C1077. Experience with aggregate testing and deleterious materials in accordance with requirements in Section 32 13 14.13 CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR AIRFIELDS AND OTHER HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENTS. Ability to identify and resolve airfield pavement issues during construction. Submit current USACE laboratory certification for all testing required by Section 32 13 14.13 CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR AIRFIELDS AND

OTHER HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENTS.

c. Electrical. Show experience installing precision approach path indicator (PAPI) lighting, runway threshold lightings, runway edge lighting and taxiway edge lighting for Military and/or commercial airfield pavement construction consisting of runway; parking apron; or taxiway pavement for fixed-wing aircraft.

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 12

d. Demolition. Show experience in demolition of Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavement with a thickness of 12 inches or greater. The Contractor shall demonstrate experience using the double saw cut method to initiate the removal of pavement slabs adjacent to other slabs that are to remain in place without damaging the existing slabs to remain.

e. Aircraft Arresting System (AAS) – BAK 12/14:

1. Demonstrate experience installing a BAK 12/14 AAS on any runway project.

2. Demonstrate experience testing all components of the AAS, including BAK 14 lifting procedure in accordance with AFI 32-1043, T.O. 35E8-2-5-1 and T.O. 35E8-2-8-1.

7.2.3. Evaluation

The Offeror's experience in construction of facilities similar to this project will be evaluated. No more than the previously stated allotted projects may be submitted in this Tab. If the number of project examples in this tab exceeds the maximum allowed, only the first indicated number of projects listed in the RFP will be evaluated. Evaluation will be based on the project examples provided in the offeror’s proposal. Any additional material inserted into this tab will not be evaluated.

[*Am-1] Evaluation will be based on the project example narratives and other requested information provided in the offeror’s proposal. Higher evaluation ratings will be given for project examples which are similar in function, scope, size, and complexity to this project and clearly demonstrate a contractor’s capabilities to construct a project of this nature, and execute the project successfully while containing costs and maintaining schedule. Projects submitted which demonstrate experience in construction of Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) airfield pavement 15-inch thick or greater will be rated more favorably. Projects meeting or exceeding the $10 million criteria in Paragraph 7.2.1 will be rated higher than those not meeting the minimum.

Projects meeting the similarity criteria identified in Paragraph 7.2.1 will be rated higher than those projects that do not meet the similarity criteria. Projects still under construction or projects not completed within the last six (6) years will be evaluated, though less favorably than projects completed in the last six (6) years. Military construction project examples will be rated more favorably than commercial projects. Submission of fewer projects than allowed above may reduce the offeror’s rating in this Factor (Tab). Omission of requested information will result in lower ratings.

Specialized experience in construction of facilities similar to this project will be evaluated.

Lower evaluation ratings will be given for those project examples not meeting the minimum SY of Airfield Pavement for both PCC and ACC identified above. Higher evaluation ratings will be given for those project examples which are similar in function, scope, size, and complexity to this project and clearly demonstrate subcontractor capabilities to construct a project of this nature, and execute the project successfully while containing costs and maintaining schedule.

Any specialized experience performed by the Prime will be evaluated more favorably.

Subcontractors that have previously worked with the proposed prime contractor(s) will be evaluated more favorably. Projects which are relevant and similar and utilize personnel that will be used on the Repair Runway, Biggs AAF, Ft. Bliss project will be evaluated more favorably.

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 13

Those subcontractors that include military construction projects will be rated more favorably.

7.3. TAB B - FACTOR 2 TECHNICAL APPROACH

7.3.1. Submission Requirements

Based on your understanding of the RFP requirements, describe the technical approach you will take to address the unique challenges, opportunities, and constraints inherent to this project (i.e.

work delays, scheduling, working on an active runway, equipment height restrictions, etc.). The submission for this factor may not exceed twelve (12) pages, including explanatory drawings, excluding bar chart schedule. Provide a bar chart schedule (may not exceed four pages) on your plan for completing the work based on an arbitrary estimated, non-binding Contract Notice to Proceed date of 30 September 2018 and Contract Completion date of 1 October 2020. This schedule shall be considered the preliminary project schedule per specification Section 01 32

01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE. Note: Per Section 01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE, the initial project schedule shall be submitted for approval the day Construction Notice to Proceed is issued which shall be assumed to be 1 March 2019. Include major work milestones and scheduled activities (i.e. Non-Work Periods, Pavement Workshop, Order of Work restrictions and any other activity that will affect schedule as identified on the Construction drawings and Section 01 30 00 .24 OTHER ADMINSTRATIVE AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS.) Present a narrative to describe your technical solution for this project, specifically citing the process and major equipment used for construction of airfield pavement, discussion of the batch plant required to produce concrete for the project, how subcontractors will be managed, how supplies and materials will be managed (i.e. source and location of all aggregates for concrete and asphalt proposed for use in this project), and your schedule development and methods to be utilized and to keep the project on schedule, including responsibilities for schedule development and updates. This portion of the tab shall also address mitigation of delays due to unforeseen conditions or events and methods to recover time to complete the scheduled work with the contract duration. Proposed equipment shall be consistent with requirements of Section 32 13 14.13 CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR AIRFIELDS AND OTHER HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENTS of the specifications.

7.3.2. Evaluation

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s understanding of the unique requirements of airfield paving as portrayed in your discussion of construction intent for this project. Requirements to be evaluated include project schedule, the process and type of major equipment proposed for construction of airfield paving for this project. Submissions which demonstrate a complete, logical and well defined construction methodology, understanding and presentation of a realistic schedule that includes major work items and all phasing requirements shown on construction drawings and specifications will be evaluated more favorably. Material submitted that exceeds the twelve (12) page limit (excluding bar chart schedule) shall not be evaluated. Omission of requested information will result in lower ratings.

7.4. TAB C – FACTOR 3 - OFFEROR’S KEY PERSONNEL

7.4.1. Submission Requirements

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 14

In this tab, the offeror shall provide resumes for key construction personnel that will be assigned to this project. Resumes should be submitted for the personnel roles shown in this paragraph.

The first page of this Tab shall include a one-page listing of the names of the construction personnel that will be assigned to each of the positions listed below. Provide primary name and resume for each key construction person identified below.

Following this page, provide a summary of the duties and responsibilities of these individuals that clearly indicate separate duties and responsibilities for each individual. Note: The Superintendent, CQC, and Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO) may not share duties and must all be separate individuals in accordance with SECTION 01 45 00.00 10 paragraph 3.4.4.

Following this summary, the offeror shall submit the resumes for key construction personnel that will be assigned to this project. This tab shall include resumes on the following personnel:

Project Manager Project Superintendent Contractor Quality Control System Manager ACI Concrete Transportation Inspector

The resumes in this tab should clearly present the credentials of each person and show that each meets the requirements listed below. Each resume should be limited to two pages. Each resume should include the following information:

• Name, assignment for this project, and company employing the person

• Education and degree

• Past project experience (including what role or capacity the individual served on each project), as well as the durations (including month/year started and ended) employed on each project in that capacity, the monetary size of each project cited as experience, and a point of contact familiar with each project. Resumes should list enough projects to clearly show the requisite years of experience shown for personnel in the paragraph below. A brief description of each project cited in the resume should be provided, showing the monetary size of each project, and identifying any relevant features of each project. Resumes shall be listed in reverse chronological order, with the latest experience listed first, and all time gaps on each resume fully explained.

• Any pertinent training, registration, or certifications applicable to the position The proposal should clearly present the credentials of each person, and should show that each possesses the following qualifications:

• Project Manager: The proposed Construction Project Manager should possess a Bachelor’s Degree in Engineering or Construction Management, with a minimum of five years of experience (within the last 10 years) performing as a Construction Project Manager on construction projects similar in monetary size and/or scope to this project. A minimum of two of those five years should indicate experience as a Construction Project Manager for Military and/or commercial airfield pavement construction consisting of

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 15 runway; parking apron; or taxiway pavement for fixed-wing aircraft.

• Project Superintendent: The proposed On-Site Project Superintendent should have a minimum of five years of construction related experience (within the last ten years) as a superintendent on construction projects similar in monetary size and/or scope to this project and for Military and/or commercial airfield pavement construction consisting of runway; parking apron; or taxiway pavement for fixed-wing aircraft.

• Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System Manager: The Contractor Quality Control System (CQC) Manager should:

o Have a minimum five years of construction experience (within the last ten years) as a Construction CQC or Superintendent for Military and/or commercial airfield pavement construction consisting of runway; parking apron; or taxiway pavement for fixed-wing aircraft on projects similar in monetary size and/or scope to this project. The CQC System Manager shall be an employee of the Prime Contractor and have no other duties, and shall have completed or be scheduled to complete the “Construction Quality Management For Contractors” course identified in Section 01 45 00.00 10, QUALITY CONTROL, of the specifications prior to the start of construction.

• American Concrete Institute (ACI) Concrete Transportation Inspector: The ACI Concrete Transportation Inspector should possess:

o a Bachelor’s Degree in Civil Engineering or Construction Management and have a minimum two years of experience (within the last ten years) as a Construction CQC for Military and/or commercial airfield pavement construction consisting of runway; parking apron; or taxiway pavement for fixed-wing aircraft on projects similar in monetary size and/or scope to this project. The ACI Concrete Transportation Inspector shall be an employee of the Prime Contractor. In addition, the ACI Concrete Transportation Inspector shall possess current American Concrete Institute certifications as identified in Section 32 13 14.13 (paragraph 1.4.1), CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR AIRFIELDS AND OTHER HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENTS, of the specifications prior beginning any work on site pertaining to airfield pavements including demolition. The ACI Concrete Transportation Inspector shall not also perform the role of Construction Quality Control (CQC) System Manager. The ACI Concrete Transportation Inspector shall be physically present at the paving site at all times paving is ongoing or;

o Have a minimum five years of construction experience (within the last ten years) as a Construction CQC or Superintendent for Military and/or commercial airfield pavement construction consisting of runway; parking apron; or taxiway pavement for fixed-wing aircraft on projects similar in monetary size and/or scope to this project. The ACI Concrete Transportation Inspector shall be an employee of the Prime Contractor. In addition, the ACI Concrete Transportation Inspector shall possess current American Concrete Institute certifications as identified in Section 32 13 14.13 (paragraph 1.5), CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR AIRFIELDS AND

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 16

OTHER HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENTS, of the specifications prior beginning any work on site pertaining to airfield pavements including demolition. The ACI Concrete Transportation Inspector shall not also perform the role of Construction Quality Control (CQC) System Manager. The ACI Concrete Transportation Inspector shall be physically present at the paving site at all times paving is ongoing.

If, after award, the key personnel identified in the proposal are not able to be utilized on this project, replacement personnel with similar skills and experience shall be presented for acceptance and approval by the Contracting Officer. Replacement individuals for this project shall be required to have qualifications and experience meeting or exceeding those identified in the proposal. The Contractor shall obtain the Contracting Officer’s written consent before making any substitutions for these designated personnel.

7.4.2. Evaluation

Project Superintendent, Project Manager, CQC Systems Manager, ACI Concrete Transportation Inspector:

Qualifications of key construction personnel assigned to this project will be considered.

Resumes should be limited to those positions shown above – resumes for other project positions will not be evaluated. More favorable evaluation ratings will be given for past experience in projects similar in cost, size, and complexity to this project, experience on military construction projects, longevity of experience at the position being proposed, and education. More favorable ratings may be given if key personnel have worked on projects submitted in Tab A-Factor 1 Construction Experience. Personnel meeting the qualification requirements identified above will be given higher evaluation ratings than those not meeting the qualifications. Lower evaluation ratings will be given for resumes which are ambiguous, do not follow the requested format, or do not contain the information identified in Paragraph 7.4.1 above.

7.5. TAB D - FACTOR 4 - PAST PERFORMANCE, CONSTRUCTION

7.5.1. Submission Requirements

[*Am-2] Submit past performance ratings for each project the Offeror includes in its proposal for Tab A - Factor 1 Construction Experience and Qualifications <text deleted> .

If available, submit Contractor Performance Assessment Rating System (CPARS) or Construction Contract Administration Support System (CCASS) Performance Evaluations ratings. For projects which were constructed for other government entities, submit the performance appraisal sheets used by that government entity if available. For projects cited in Tab A - Factor 1 Construction Contractor Experience with no CPARS, CCASS, or other Government Performance Rating System, submit a Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment A).

Am #0003 00 22 00, Page 17

7.5.1.1. CPARS/CCASS Evaluations

Firms are requested to retrieve their CPARS/CCASS past performance information directly from the Contractor Performance…