Am-0001_W9128F-20-R-0052.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. 0001 W9128F

AIR FORCE CYBERWORX, XQPZ 164001, USAF ACADEMY, COLORADO

See attached documentation for content of the amendment revisions to solicitation

Date for receipt of proposals is 11 JUN 2020 at 1400 hours

Government Point of Contact: Brian Finerty, Contract Specialist, Brian.C.Finerty@usace.army.mil

U.S.ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA

Rocky Mountain Area Office Attn: CONTRACTING DIVISION (CENWO-CT-M) 5475 Tech Center Drive, Suite 205 Colorado Springs, CO 80919

See Item 6

W9128F-20-R-0052

04/24/2020

04/16/2020

04/24/2020

Am #0001 - 1

Am #0001 - 2 (Continuation SF 30)

24 April 2020 Solicitation No. W9128F 20 R 0052

Date of Issue: 16 APR 2020 Date of Receiving Proposals: 11 JUN 2020

SUBJECT: Amendment No. 0001 to Request for Proposal Solicitation Package for Construction of AIR FORCE CYBERWORX, XQPZ 164001.

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 00 21 00 Page 12, paragraph 1.12, delete item (b) in its entirety and replace with the following:

“ (b) Due to current limitations of access to the proposed project site, USACE is unable to offer an in-person site visit nor physical access to the project site. To remedy, USACE will provide all interested parties ‘‘Virtual Site Access’’, defined as the photos and drawings listed below.

The solicitation has included two photographic attachments and drawings:

Site Visit Attachment 1: Site Photos 1 Site Visit Attachment 2: Site Photos 2 DRAWINGS_W9218F-20-R-0052_CyberWorx_USAFA

The solicitation description and section 1.20 of the Request for Proposal make available information on where to submit questions.’’

(2) Section 00 21 00 Page 17, paragraph 1.18.2, delete cost limitation of “$30,000,000” and substitute “$27,000,000”.

b. Specifications (New and/or Revised and Reissued). Delete and substitute or add specification pages or sections as noted below. The substituted pages or sections are revised and reissued with this amendment. For convenience, on the revised specification pages, changes have been identified with highlighting, all portions of the revised specification pages apply regardless of whether changes are shown with highlighting.

Pages or Sections Deleted Pages or Sections 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. All other conditions and requirements of the request for proposal remain unchanged.

3. Electronic Proposals. Provide proposals via the instructions provided in Section 00 22 00 of the Request for Proposal.

4. Offers will be received until 2:00 p.m., local time at place of receiving proposals, 11 JUN 2020.

Am #0001 - 3 (Continuation SF 30)

Attachments:

Specifications listed in 1.b., above

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

24 APR 2020

nep/2160

This page was intentionally left blank for duplex printing.

Section 00 22 00 W9128F20R0052

Section 00 22 00 Page 1 Am #0001

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 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

4.1. EVALUATIONS FACTORS FOR AWARD

4.2. VOLUME 1 – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS

4.3. VOLUME 2 – PRICE AND PRO-FORMA INFORMATION

5.0 VOLUME 1 – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS

5.1. FACTOR 1 – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

5.2. FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

5.3. FACTOR 3 – KEY PERSONNEL CAPABILITIES AND EXPERIENCE

5.4. FACTOR 4 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN

5.5. FACTOR 5 – UTILIZATION OF SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS

6.0 VOLUME 2 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

6.1. GENERAL

6.2. FACTOR 6 – PRICE (STANDARD FORM 1442, PROPOSAL DATA SHEET AND

CONTRACT LINE ITEM SCHEDULE)

6.3. FACTOR 7 – EVIDENCE OF BONDABILITY

6.4. FACTOR 8 – REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

6.5. FACTOR 9 – SUB-CONTRACTING PLAN

7.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

7.1. SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

7.2. EVALUATION

7.3. DEFINITIONS

7.4. EVALUATION RATING SYSTEM

Section 00 22 00 Page 2

7.5. PAST PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT RATING SYSTEM

ATTACHMENTS

1 - NOT USED

2 - NOT USED

3 - COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE CONSTRUCTION OR PRIME

CONTRACTOR

4 - COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE DESIGN FIRM OR IN-HOUSE DESIGN

CAPABILITY

5 - COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE KEY SUBCONTRACTOR (OR PRIME IF

WORK NOT TO BE SUBCONTRACTED)

6 - PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION TELEPHONE INTERVIEW

QUESTIONNAIRE

7 - KEY PERSONNEL RESUME

8 - LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR KEY PERSONNEL

9 - LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR (DESIGN FIRM OR KEY SUBCONTRACTOR)

10 - PROPOSAL DATA SHEETS

Section 00 22 00 Page 3

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1. This is a Single Step “Best Value-Tradeoff” solicitation for the Design and Construction of the Air Force CyberWorx Facility project at the United States Air Force Academy, CO. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein, and award a firm-fixed-price contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms with all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and whose proposal is determined to represent the overall best value to the Government.

1.2. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS

Proposals shall be submitted by the time and date as specified. 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. Due to heightened security at Government installations, the proposal shall be emailed to the following. If the proposal is too large for email, Offers may be submitted electronically via DOD Safe Access File Exchange (SAFE) at https://safe.apps.mil/ to the following recipients:

1. Brian Finerty, brian.c.finerty@usace.army.mil

2. Christine Wilson, christine.l.wilson@usace.army.mil

**Offerors accessing the DOD SAFE site as a GUEST (a “Guest” is defined as a user who is not assigned a CAC) must request a package invitation from the Contract Specialist listed in Section 00 22 00 a minimum of 48-business hours prior to the close of the RFP.**

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 received by the USACE Outlook Server or uploaded into the DOD SAFE website as identified in the DOD SAFE notification e-mail sent to the Contract Specialist(s)/ Contracting Officer will be the time and date the Government received the proposal. Do not assume that electronic communication is instantaneous. Please make allowances for delays in transmittal.

Coordinate directly with the Contract Specialist for any questions related to submission requirements or format.

Volume I: Specialized Experience and Qualifications Volume II: Price and Pro Forma Information

Title the single files in the following format:

W9128F20R0052_CompanyName_Volume_I_Specialized_Experience_and_Qualifica tions W9128F20R0052_CompanyName_Volume_II_Price_and_Pro_Forma_Information (Note: Company name may be abbreviated)

It is imperative that none of the pricing or Volume 2 information show up in

Section 00 22 00 Page 4

Volume 1.

1.3. PROPOSAL FORMAT

Written materials: 8 ½” x 11” format using 10 point or larger font size. For each volume, provide a title sheet on the cover and table of contents. Volume 1 shall have bookmarks, at a minimum, corresponding to each factor and sub-factor. Provide a title sheet identifying the prime, consortium, or joint venture’s name, address, telephone, and email address and point of contact. Include the signature, title and contact information of the official that can bind the firm. Note that the Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits, where indicated below. For this solicitation, a page is considered a single sided page or sheet. Double sided pages will be considered two pages when determining page limits. Blank pages used to separate sections will not be counted when determining page limits.

Volume number and 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)

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

2.1. The Contracting Officer will award a firm-fixed-price contract to that responsible Offeror whose proposal 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. Volume 1 evaluation factors, when combined, are more important than Volume 2 cost or price; however, the Contract award should not exceed the cost limitation described in Section 00 21 00 for this project.

The intent of this solicitation is to obtain the best proposal within the cost limitation.

There is no obligation to approach or match the cost limitation in the offer. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers. The Government will not award a contract to an Offeror whose proposal contains a deficiency, as defined in FAR 15.001. If there is a lower priced, conforming offer(s), the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Official must determine that the added value of a more expensive proposal (within the cost limitation) would justify award to that offeror.

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 5

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 design-build entities, design firms and 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. All designs must be under the direct supervision of appropriately licensed professionals for each discipline involved.

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

4.0 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

4.1. The Evaluation Factors for award will be evaluated based on the adjectival methodology. 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 1-6 are shown below in descending order of importance.

4.2. VOLUME 1 –SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFITATIONS

Volume/Factor Description

Vol. 1 Factor 1 Specialized Experience

Vol. 1 Factor 2 Past Performance

Vol. 1 Factor 3 Key Personnel Capabilities and Experience

Vol. 1 Factor 4 Project Management Plan

Vol. 1 Factor 5 Utilization of Small Business Concerns

4.3. VOLUME 2 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

Volume/Factor Description

Vol. 2 Factor 6 Price (Standard Form 1442, Proposal Data Sheet And Contract Line Item Schedule)

Section 00 22 00 Page 6

Volume/Factor Description

Vol. 2 Factor 7 Evidence of Bondability

Vol. 2 Factor 8 Required Pre-Award Information

Vol. 2 Factor 9 Sub-Contracting Plan

NOTE: 8(a) Joint Venture Offeror or Offeror submitting 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 –SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFIATIONS

5.1. Factor 1 – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

5.1.1. Submission Requirements:

5.1.1.1. Design and Construction Projects. The Offeror shall submit four (4) projects performed by the Prime Construction Entity. The Offeror shall submit four (4) projects performed by the Lead Design Entity. Additionally, the Offeror may submit one (1) additional project performed by the Prime Construction Entity teamed with the Lead Design Entity. Total number of projects submitted shall not exceed nine (9) projects.

Limit one (1) page per project submitted. One additional page is allowed for describing past teaming experience between current team members (see below).

Any information presented beyond the page limit of ten (10) pages will not be evaluated. All projects must be of similar scope and costs to this project.

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 (designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or that have been completed and turned over no longer than the past seven years preceding the issue date of this solicitation.

5.1.1.3. Special Requirements. One (1) or more of the construction projects submitted and one (1) or more of the design projects shall clearly demonstrate experience with CONUS, new construction or renovation, secure area spaces that were designed, constructed, and accredited to current UFC 4-010-05 and ICD/ICS 705 standards -no smaller than 1,500 square feet in area.

One (1) or more of the construction projects submitted and one (1) or more of the design projects shall clearly demonstrate experience with research and/or lab facilities at institutions of higher education.

5.1.1.4. Project Information. All projects submitted should demonstrate experience on similar projects of similar or greater value to this project. Submit projects that are currently well underway (designed and at least 50% construction progress completed

Section 00 22 00 Page 7 based on payments approved by the customer) or completed and turned over no longer than seven (7) years preceding the issue date of this solicitation. The proposed prime construction and lead design entities 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

(g) Summary of Firm’s Role in the Project

(h) Construction Cost at completion

(i) Percentage (%) and Type of Work Subcontracted Out

(j) Dates Construction Began and Completed

5.1.2. Evaluation Criteria: The following criteria are not listed in any particular order of importance.

5.1.2.1. Experience on similar projects that exceed the scope and value of this project may be rated more favorably.

5.1.2.2. Previous Federal Government project experience on active duty military installations may be rated more favorably than projects not on active duty military installations.

5.1.2.3. Projects that clearly demonstrate experience with CONUS, new construction, secure areas that were designed, constructed, and accredited to UFC 4-010-05 and ICD/ICS 705 standards as described above may be rated more favorably.

5.1.2.4. Projects that demonstrate experience in the creation of cyber learning environments and cyber research facilities may be rated more favorably.

5.1.2.5. Projects that are not “well underway” or completed as defined above may be rated less favorably.

Section 00 22 00 Page 8

5.1.2.6. Previous design-build experience is not necessary for an acceptable rating. The Government may consider previous D-B experience a strength.

5.1.2.7. The Government may consider previous recent teaming experience (within past 7 years) among the team members as a strength. The more relevant the experience, the more favorably it may be rated.

[*Am- 1]

5.1.2.8. Note: A firm will not receive credit under this factor for the relevant experience of key personnel proposed for this project while they were employed at a different firm.

5.1.2.9. Note: 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.

5.2. FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

5.2.1. Submission Requirements:

Submit past performance evaluations and ratings for each project the Offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1 –Specialized Experience. 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. One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each offeror after evaluating the offeror's recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements.

If available, submit Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Performance Evaluations ratings. For projects which were constructed for other government entities, submit the performance appraisal sheets used by that government entity if available.

5.2.1.1. CPARS Evaluations

Firms are requested to retrieve their CPARS past performance information directly from CPARS available at: http://www.cpars.gov. CPARS is an electronic repository of performance information collected by all the major federal performance reporting systems. Logging onto CPARS will require the following:

All Department of Defense (DoD) employees (military and civilian), including DoD Contractors that are working on site (military/government facilities) or contractors working offsite using Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) are required to use certificates from DoD Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) to access CPARS. If the contractor doesn't work on site or with GFE they are encouraged to obtain and use a certificate from an External Certificate Authority (ECA). For DoD users, the use of PKI Login is Mandatory. Federal and Contractor users can use the PKI login category if they have PKI.

Section 00 22 00 Page 9

External Certificate Authority External Certificate Authorities (ECAs) and Interim External Certificate Authorities (IECAs) provide digital certificates to the DoD's private industry partners, contractors using their own equipment or working in non-government facilities, allied partners, and other agencies.

Additional information about the PKI certificate is at https://www.cpars.gov/pki_info.htm web page.

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

There are two other ways to obtain a copy of CPARS 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/Senior Contractor Representative” access at http://www.cpars.gov. This type of access is issued to only one person within the firm, typically a member of senior management. In addition to access to your completed CPARS performance evaluations, you will also be able to view status of evaluations which have not yet been completed. Following receipt of your application request, you will be emailed a logon and access instructions.

5.2.1.2. Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

The Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 6) 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 (Attachment 6), 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 prior 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.

5.2.1.3. Government Utilization of Alternate Information Sources for Past Performance

The Government will assess the past performance on projects submitted under the Specialized Experience factor and reserves the right to conduct telephone interviews

Section 00 22 00 Page 10 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 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.

5.2.2. Evaluation Criteria:

5.2.2.1. 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 (well under way or turned over no longer than 5 years preceding the date of this solicitation), relevant experience. See explanation of “well underway” and relevancy under the factor “Specialized Experience”. The rating system used for the performance confidence assessment is described in paragraph 8.5.

5.2.2.2. Relevancy: 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.

The projects will include those submitted under the Specialized Experience Factor as well as from other sources described above. 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 past performance relevancy ratings are described below:

(a) Very Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

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

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

5.2.2.3. Performance: The Government will next consider how well the offeror performed on the contracts. The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor performance. CPARs and/or PPQs with little to no supporting narrative will

Section 00 22 00 Page 11 be weighted less significantly (both positive and negative) than CPARs and/or PPQs with more convincing supportive narratives. 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 designer or contractor, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting design or construction errors, warranty work, etc. (see the interview form at attachment 6). The Government will target areas covered in the requirements of this proposal including records of conforming to quality, schedule, cost control, customer satisfaction, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, problem resolution for design or 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, 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 past performance confidence ratings are described below:

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

(b) 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.

(c) 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.

(d) 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.

(e) 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.

5.2.2.4. 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

Section 00 22 00 Page 12 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. If the Government does not obtain past performance information for the projects identified by the offeror and cannot establish a past performance record for the offeror through other sources, past performance will be rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The performance confidence assessment rating will be considered “Unknown Confidence”.

5.3. FACTOR 3 – KEY PERSONNEL CAPABILITIES AND EXPERIENCE

5.3.1. Submission Requirements:

5.3.1.1. For key personnel provide a brief resume using the Key Personnel Resume form at the end of this Section (Attachment 7). Indicate the position title on each project listed in resumes. Provide the name, owner, dollar amount, date of completion, and brief scope of each resume project. Each resume is limited to two (2) pages.

Include resumes for the following key personnel:

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

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

- General Superintendent (Prime Construction Contractor Employee)

- Design Manager (Lead Design Entity)

- Communications/Electrical Engineer

- Structural Engineer

- Mechanical Engineer

- Civil Engineer

5.3.1.2. The Project Manager, Superintendent, and Design Manager shall demonstrate experience on projects that involve heavy steel, multi-story construction.

5.3.1.3. The minimum experience requirement for the Project Manager is 10 years of experience as a Project Manager, managing similar projects to this solicitation.

5.3.1.4. The Project Manager shall demonstrate experience on at least one project that included CONUS, new construction or renovation, “Secure Area” (in accordance with UFC 4-010-05 and ICD/ICS 705) completed or well underway in the past 7 years (as required for projects in Factor 1).

5.3.1.5. The minimum experience requirement for the Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System Manager is 10 years of experience as a Quality Control Manager on similar

Section 00 22 00 Page 13 projects to this solicitation. CQC System Manager shall comply with personnel requirements listed in Section 01 45 00.00 10.

5.3.1.6. The Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System Manager shall demonstrate experience on at least one project that included CONUS, new construction or renovation, “Secure Area” (in accordance with UFC 4-010-05 and ICD/ICS 705) completed or well underway in the past 7 years (as required for projects in Factor 1).

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

5.3.1.8. The Superintendent shall demonstrate experience on projects of similar size and scope with at least one project that included CONUS, new construction or renovation, “Secure Area” (in accordance with UFC 4-010-05 and ICD/ICS 705) completed or well underway in the past 7 years (as required for projects in Factor 1).

5.3.1.9. The minimum experience requirements for the Design Manager is at least 5 years of Design Manager experience.

5.3.1.10. The minimum experience requirements for the Design Manager and designers of record are at least 10 years of design experience. The Design Manager and designers of record should be registered in accordance with FAR 52.236-25 and show experience with projects of similar size and scope.

5.3.1.11. The Communications Engineer shall be a Registered Communications Distribution Designer (RCDD) in accordance with Section 01 86 29.

5.3.1.12. The Electrical Engineer shall be a Registered Professional Engineer with at least 10 years of design experience. This may be the same individual as the Communications Engineer.

5.3.1.13. The Structural Engineer shall demonstrate experience designing a facility which includes Progressive Collapse Avoidance as required by current UFCs.

5.3.1.14. Offeror shall provide unequivocal letters of commitment from all proposed key personnel NOT currently employed by the Offeror. Use the form letter (Attachment

8) at the end of this section.

5.3.2. Evaluation Criteria: The following criteria are not listed in any particular order of importance.

5.3.2.1. The Government will evaluate the required information to determine how well the offeror identifies and demonstrates that its key personnel meet or exceed minimum qualifications necessary, which includes previous satisfactory experience in similar type work, to manage, control and perform the design, and to perform construction.

5.3.2.2. Resumes that do not clearly state the personnel’s specific duties and job title on previous projects may be rated less favorably.

5.3.2.3. Project Managers that hold active architect or engineer professional registration may be rated more favorably.

Section 00 22 00 Page 14

5.3.2.4. Offerors that propose key personnel who worked on the projects in Factor 1 may be rated more favorably.

5.3.2.5. Key personnel that show experience with research facilities and/or laboratories at centers of higher education may be rated more favorably.

5.3.2.6. Key personnel that exceed the required minimum experience with “Secure Areas” (in accordance with UFC 4-010-05 and ICD/ICS 705) may be rated more favorably.

5.3.2.7. Key personnel that exceed the required minimum years of experience in their position may be rated more favorably.

5.3.2.8. Previous design-build experience may be rated more favorably.

5.3.2.9. Previous Federal Government project experience on active duty military installations may be rated more favorably.

5.3.2.10. Performance of key personnel proposed for this project may be taken into account when it comes to the attention of the Government. This shall be achievable with other projected on-going work.

[*Am-1] <text deleted>

5.4. FACTOR 4 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN

5.4.1. Submission Requirements:

5.4.1.1. Provide information that describes the offeror’s Project Management approach to executing the design-build contract per the detailed requirements herein. Clearly and concisely describe the organizational and technical approaches to project management and execution, and contract duration. Limit the information to eight (8) pages or less.

5.4.1.2. Organization. List the design and 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, including the proposed quality control group(s). Identify the design firm(s) chosen for the project, if not to be self-performed. The Offeror shall document unequivocal teaming arrangements with its lead design entity (ies) and key subcontractors (see attachment 9). Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing how the design and 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 D-B team entities, and with

Section 00 22 00 Page 15 the list of key personnel to be provided under the Factor, “KEY PERSONNEL

CAPABILITIES AND EXPERIENCE”.

5.4.1.3. Technical Approach for Design and Construction. Describe the technical approach to design and construction of the facility. Include considerations for management of both the “Secure Area” construction security (in accordance with UFC 4-010-05 and ICD/ICS 705) and work within the USAFA Secure Cadet Area.

Include any considerations of innovative design and construction processes and products.

5.4.1.3.1. Describe your approach and proposed solutions for the various mechanical systems with specific emphasis on managing solar loads through the large amount of glazing.

5.4.1.3.2. Describe your design and construction approach for the Secure Area with particular emphasis on phasing of the project. The Government will not take Beneficial Occupancy of the Secure Area prior to taking Beneficial Occupancy of the facility as a whole.

5.4.1.3.3. Describe your design and construction approach for meeting sustainability and renewable requirements.

5.4.1.3.4. Describe your understanding of civil and site conditions that could potentially affect the construction process, including, but not limited to, potential for unknown underground utilities and environmental issues. Address how these will be resolved in a timely manner to reduce potential delays.

5.4.1.4. Exceptions, deviations and betterments. Exceptions and deviations are neither encouraged nor desired. However, if the Offeror chooses to do either, each instance needs to be separately identified at the front of Factor 4 – Project Management Plan, with a justification and rationale for the deviation or exception. Deviations and exceptions with associated justification and rationale will count as part of the page limit for this section. The Government reserves the right to accept or reject, partially or in full, the deviation or exception. Similarly, quality betterments should be listed at the end of this section. The Government reserves the right to accept or reject, partially or in full, the proposed betterment. The table of Betterments will not count as part of the page limit for this section.

5.4.1.4.1. Provide a list of quality improvements that are above the minimum stated requirements within this RFP. Develop the following table, or similar, to identify quality betterments. List only Quality Betterments included with the proposal that are within the Contract Cost Limitation.

Improved Quality Concise description of improved quality of items within the CCL

Arch. Finishes $

Etc.

Section 00 22 00 Page 16

5.4.1.5. Proposed Contract Duration: The offeror shall propose the contract duration in the appropriate Contract Line Item Number in the CLIN Schedule. The offeror shall also list this duration in this section of the proposal.

5.4.1.6. Risk Assessment: Page Limit – Four (4) pages of the eight (8) page Project management Plan. Submit a list of risks specifically associated with this project.

Identify the degree of risk, possible impact of the risk on project (schedule, cost, safety etc.), whether it’s within or outside the Offeror’s control, and a plan to mitigate the risk(s).

5.4.2. Evaluation Criteria: The following criteria are not listed in any particular order of importance.

5.4.2.1. Organization. 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 factor will be rated as unacceptable if the Offeror has not selected and committed to use its lead design entity (ies). Joint venture participants’ contribution to the organization should be commensurate with their skills and background.

5.4.2.2. Technical Approach for Design and Construction. Proposals that clearly and concisely demonstrate a thorough understanding of the constraints and impacts (schedule, budget, security, accreditation, etc.) of the “Secure Area” (in accordance with UFC 4-010-05 and ICD/ICS 705) construction and working within the USAFA Secure Cadet Area may be rated more favorably. The Government will not take Beneficial Occupancy of the Secure Area prior to taking Beneficial Occupancy of the facility as a whole.

Proposals that clearly and concisely demonstrate a thorough understanding of project subject to State Historic Preservation Office review of design and construction may be rated more favorably.

The Government places a higher value on an offer that provides proposed methods to streamline construction and manage labor and other resource constraints, in an effort to reduce costs and support an aggressive schedule including such things as fast-tracking, etc. The Government will also consider whether the approach reduces on-site craft labor and susceptibility to inclement weather delays.

5.4.2.3. Offeror-identified quality betterments may be rated more favorably, provided that they are included within the contract cost limitation identified in this solicitation, and if accepted by the government.

5.4.2.4. Higher evaluation ratings may be given for clear and concise design and construction methodologies and phasing to limit risks for the Secure Area.

5.4.2.5. Higher evaluation ratings may be given for approaches that demonstrate proactive management practices and reduce risk.

Section 00 22 00 Page 17

5.4.2.6. Organization. The Government will evaluate the clarity and strength of the overall design approach and how well it is organized and structured to execute the entire scope of work.

5.4.2.7. Proposed Contract Duration: Unless changed during negotiations, this duration will become the contractually binding performance period. The Government may 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.

5.4.2.8. Risk Assessment: The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which it demonstrates the ability to: Identify and mitigate risk(s); establish a degree of risk, that may impact mission, safety, quality, schedule, and cost; and, identify whether risk(s) is/are within the Offeror’s control. The less detailed and applicable the risks are to this project, the less favorably the offeror may be rated.

5.5. FACTOR 5 – UTILIZATION OF SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS (REQUIRED FOR ALL

OFFERORS)

5.5.1. Submission Requirements:

5.5.1.1. This sub-factor requires all offerors, regardless of size status to address their planned small business usage for this project. All offerors are required to provide a Small Business Participation Plan. It should address their corporate approach and methodology for acquiring, soliciting and using small businesses in the performance of this contract. All plans should address the Offeror's commitments to providing subcontracting opportunities, as well as evidence of planned and /or continued outreach efforts to encourage and use small businesses. This Participation Plan should include a breakdown of small business subcategories to be used as shown on the chart in (d) below.

5.5.1.2. The Participation Plan should demonstrate commitment to all federally designated categories of small business: Small Businesses (SBs), Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (VOSBs), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (SDVOSBs) HUBZone Small Businesses (HUB), Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDBs), and Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSBs).

5.5.1.3. The plan should identify all categories for participation as part of the Offeror's team.

This should include a general description of the type of work, product or service anticipated to be supplied via a small business concern. The Offeror shall not exceed more than 10 pages for the submitted Small Business Participation Plan. A specific format is not required, however, items stated below (a) through (e) shall be provided as a minimum.

Small Business Participation Plan requirements:

(a) Provide a Narrative addressing the corporate approach and methodology for acquiring, soliciting and using small businesses in the performance of this contract. The Narrative should address the Offeror's commitment to providing subcontracting opportunities, as well as evidence of planned and /or continued outreach efforts to encourage and use

Section 00 22 00 Page 18 small businesses. The Narrative should provide detailed supporting documentation regarding the individual commitments expressed in percentages for evaluators to determine that the goals stated are realistic.

(b) Provide the applicable size and categories for the PRIME Offeror for this procurement.

______Large Business Prime Offeror ______Small Business Prime Offeror (also check type of SB below) ____Small Disadvantaged Business

____Woman-Owned Small Business ____HUB Zone Small Business ____Veteran Owned Small Business ____Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business

(c) Submit the Total Percentages planned for Small Business. Percentages are based on

Total Contract Value of the Offeror. For this project, the awardee is targeted to subcontract 15% of the Total Contract Value to the Small Business Community.

Total Percentage planned for Small Business: = __________% (Small Business Prime Contractors – Include yourselves in the above percentage.)

For example: If you are a Small Business Prime Contractor and will be doing 40% of the work and you will be subcontracting another 20% to other small business firms, then your Total Percentage planned for Small Business will = 60%

(d) Indicate the total percentage of participation, Supplies/Services to be provided and the name of the small business firms intended to be used by each type of subcategory small business.

Type of Small Business % Supplies/Services Name of Small

Business Firms

Small Business Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) Woman Owned Small Business (WOSB) Historically Underutilized Business Zone Small Business (HUBZone)

Service Disabled Veteran-Owned (SDVOSB)…