Am-0002_W9128F-20-R-0085.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. 0002 W9128F

SOCNORTH THEATER OPERATIONAL SUPPORT FACILITY, PN TDKA 143002 (FY20), PETERSON AFB, COLORADO

See attached documentation for content of the amendment revisions to solicitation

Date for receipt of proposals is 24 NOV 2020 at 1400 hours

Government Point of Contact: Bill Rawe, Contract Specialist, William.T.Rawe@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-0085

10/21/2020

10/06/2020

10/21/2020

Am #0002 - 1

Am #0002 - 2 (Continuation SF 30)

21 October 2020 Solicitation No. W9128F 20 R 0085

Date of Issue: 6 OCT 2020 Date of Receiving Proposals: 24 NOV 2020

SUBJECT: Amendment No. 0002 to Request for Proposal Solicitation Package for Construction of SOCNORTH THEATER OPERATIONAL SUPPORT FACILITY.

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 01 30 00.24, Page 13, paragraph 1.16 “AVAILABILITY OF UTILITY SERVICES”, delete the fourth sentence “Make arrangements with...method of payment therefore.”.

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

c. Drawings (Reissued). The following drawings are revised with latest revision date as shown in the drawing border and reissued with this amendment.

1. SHEET A-301, ROOF PLAN

2. SHEET TS-101, TELECOM SITE PLAN

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, 24 NOV 2020.

Attachments:

Specifications listed in 1.b., above Drawings listed in 1.c., above

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

21 OCT 2020

nep/2160

Am #0002 TC –1

SECTION 00 22 00

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS,

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION

Table of Contents

1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

2 BASIS OF AWARD

3 PROPOSAL FORMAT

4 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

5 SUBMITTING PROPOSALS

6 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

7 FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

7.1 TECHNICAL FACTORS 1, 2, 3, AND 4

7.2 TECHNICAL FACTOR 5 - PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

8 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

8.1 PREFACE

9 VOLUME 1 – TECHNICAL

9.1 FACTOR 1 – OFFEROR’S SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

9.2 FACTOR 2 – RISK MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL APPROACH

9.3 FACTOR 3 – TECHNICAL OFFEROR’S KEY PERSONNEL

9.4 FACTOR 4 - SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

9.5 FACTOR 5 – PAST PERFORMANCE

10 VOLUME 2 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

10.1 FACTOR 6 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

11 COMPETITIVE RANGE

12 CLARIFICATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS

13 FINAL REVISIONS AND SELECTION

14 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD REPORT

15 COMPETITIVE RANGE EXCLUSION NOTIFICATION

16 SOURCE SELECTION DECISION DOCUMENT

17 AWARD OF CONTRACT

18 DEBRIEFING

Am #0002 TC –2

Attachments:

1 - COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE CONSTRUCTION OR PRIME

CONTRACTOR

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

CAPABILITY

3 - COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE KEY SUBCONTRACTOR (OR PRIME

IF WORK NOT TO BE SUBCONTRACTED)

4 - PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION TELEPHONE INTERVIEW

QUESTIONNAIRE

5 - KEY PERSONNEL RESUME

6 - LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR KEY PERSONNEL

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

8 - PROPOSAL DATA SHEETS

W9128F-20-R-0085

Am #0002 Section 00 22 00

SECTION 00 22 00

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS, SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION

1 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

This is a single step best value tradeoff solicitation for the design and construction of the SOCNORTH Theater Operational Support Facility, Peterson AFB, Colorado (SOCNORTH).

The intent of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is to solicit proposals and award a firm-fixed price contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and whose proposal is determined to represent the overall best value to the Government. The Government reserves the right to award a contract without discussions in accordance with (IAW) FAR 52.215-1. Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a technical and cost/price standpoint. Offerors shall organize their proposals as described herein. Proposals may be determined non-compliant for failure to follow this format, and may be rejected from further consideration.

The proposal shall describe the capability of the offeror to perform the requirements of the Statement of Work (SOW). 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.

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.

2 BASIS OF AWARD

[*Am-2] To arrive at a source selection decision, the Government will evaluate the factors and proposed costs/price. The Government intends to award to the firm providing the proposal which is considered by the SSA to be the best value to the Government using best value trade-off methods. This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal. All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. The Contract award should not exceed the cost limitation described in Section 00 21 00 ($47,000,000). 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 cost limitation applies only to the basic bid CLIN’s.

3 PROPOSAL FORMAT

Written materials (other than organizational chart): 8 ½” x 11” format, using 10 point or larger font size. For each factor, provide a title sheet on the cover, Table of Contents, and file titled with appropriate factor number. Provide a title sheet within each electronic file identifying the prime, consortium, or joint venture’s name, address, telephone, fax and email address and point of contact.

Include the signature, title and contact information of the official that can bind the firm. Volume 1 shall have bookmarks, at a minimum, corresponding to each factor.

Document name and factor number shall appear in the bottom right corner of each page (along with the revision number and revision date for the amended page, if necessary).

Note: the Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits, as 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.

4 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

This solicitation is available for full and open competition, on an unrestricted basis. All proposers, including joint ventures, must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) and have completed their Representations and Certifications through SAM.

There will be no public opening. 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. The Government intends to award without discussions. Therefore, proposals submitted should include the most favorable terms from a technical and price standpoint. Do not assume that offerors will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss or revise their proposal.

5 SUBMITTING PROPOSALS

Proposals shall be submitted by the time and date as specified in Section 00 10 00, Page 1. 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. Bill Rawe, william.t.rawe@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: Technical Volume II: Price and Pro Forma Information

Title the single files in the following format:

W9128F-20-R-0085_CompanyName_Volume_I_Technical W9128F-20-R-0085_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 Volume 1.

6 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

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 represents the best value to the Government. Because of the number of proposals anticipated, uniformity of all proposals is essential to assure fair and accurate evaluation. All proposals must comply with the instructions in the solicitation. Proposals that do not conform to the RFP requirements may be considered to have a “deficiency”. If a proposal is suspected of having a deficiency, it will be brought to the immediate attention of the SSA. If the determination is made that a deficiency exists, the proposal will not be evaluated further and will be eliminated from further consideration. The affected offeror will be promptly notified of the decision. Properly conforming proposals will be forwarded to the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) for evaluation.

Evaluations will be conducted in accordance with the 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 identify strengths, significant strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies contained in them and to determine ratings for stated evaluation factors. See definitions and descriptions of terms and ratings below.

Evaluation Definitions.

Strength. 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.

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

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

Clarification. Clarifications are limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. If award without discussions is anticipated, offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their proposals or to resolve minor or clerical errors.

Communications. Communications are exchanges between the Government and offerors after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range.

Discussions. Discussions are negotiations conducted in a competitive acquisition and take place after establishment of the competitive range.

7 FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal. Award will be made to the offerors whose proposal represents the best value to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

Factors 1 and 5 are equal in importance and are the most important factors, factor 2 is the second most important factor, and factors 3 and 4 are the third most important factors. All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are significantly more important to cost or price. 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.

This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal.

VOLUME 1 –TECHNICAL

Factor Location Description Relative Importance

FACTOR 1 Vol. 1 TAB A Specialized Experience Factors 1 and 5 are equal in importance and are the most important factors.

FACTOR 2 Vol. 1 TAB B Risk Management, Technical Approach

2nd most important factor

FACTOR 3 Vol. 1 TAB C Key Personnel Factors 3 and 4 are approximately equal and 3rd most important factor.

FACTOR 4

Vol. 1 TAB D

Small Business Participation Plan

Factors 3 and 4 are approximately equal and 3rd most important factor.

FACTOR 5

Vol. 1 TAB E

Past Performance

Factors 1 and 5 are equal in importance and are the most important factors.

VOLUME 2 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

Factor Location Description Relative Importance

FACTOR 6

Vol. 2 TAB A

Price (Standard Form 1442, Proposal Data Sheet And Contract Line Item Schedule)

Factors 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 combined are significantly more important than Factor 6 (price).

N/A

Vol. 2 TAB B

Evidence of Bondability

Not Rated

Vol. 2 TAB C Required Pre- Award Information

Vol. 2 TAB D Subcontracting

Plan

7.1 TECHNICAL FACTORS 1, 2, 3, AND 4.

Each factor’s technical/risk rating shall be evaluated and assigned a rating based on the following:

Color Rating

Adjectival Rating

Definition

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.

NOTE: If, at any level of evaluation, an Offeror’s proposal is evaluated as not meeting a minimum requirement (that is, Red-Unacceptable) this must be detailed in the narrative assessment. A Red-Unacceptable rating at any level must be carried to the factor level.

7.2 TECHNICAL FACTOR 5 - PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION.

The following ratings will be used for assigning performance relevancy to the offeror’s past performance:

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

A performance confidence assessment rating will be assigned for each offeror after evaluating the offeror's recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the current procurement.

Adjectival Rating Description 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.

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.

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.

Offerors for which no relevant past performance record is available will not have that factor evaluated, either positively or negatively, in the evaluation of the proposal package. An “unknown/neutral” rating shall be assigned when an offeror provides no past performance data and/or where none can be readily obtained. When arriving at a consensus score for past performance, evaluators shall consider a “neutral” rating as one that neither helps nor harms an offeror’s chances of being awarded a contract.

Information obtained from owners, contract administrators, or other points of contact from past performance questionnaire or Contractor Performance Assessment System (CPARS) evaluations and personal knowledge of the SSEB members may affect the evaluation rating given for the Past Performance factor being evaluated. The Government reserves the right to contact any owner, contractor administrator or other points of contract furnished by the offeror to verify accuracy of information submitted for Factors 1 and 3.

8 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

All proposals should 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 proposers do not want the data contained in the proposal disclosed by the Government, the proposer 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 selected proposal will be incorporated into the contract and are subject to disclosure notwithstanding restrictive markings.

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 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. 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.

8.1 PREFACE

The Preface should consist of a brief explanation of the proposer, 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. Any additional information that will be useful to the selection board may also be included. This preface shall not exceed four (4) pages. The information included will not be evaluated but will be utilized by the Selection Board to aid in the evaluation process.

9 VOLUME 1 – TECHNICAL

9.1 FACTOR 1 – OFFEROR’S SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

9.1.1 Submission Requirements

[*Am-2] The Offeror should submit examples of construction projects which best illustrate the experience of the construction contractor on projects of similar function, scope, size, and complexity as this project. Offerors should submit six (6) projects as follows. The Offeror should submit three (3) projects performed by the Prime Construction Entity while in the same capacity as Prime Construction Entity. Additionally, the Offeror should submit three (3) projects performed by the Lead Design Entity while in the same capacity as Lead Design Entity. The proposed prime construction and lead design entities should have performed in the same role as the prime or lead entities on the projects submitted. Limit two (2) pages per project submitted. Any information presented beyond the page limit will not be evaluated.

No more than six projects may be submitted. Each project cited should have a construction dollar value equal to or greater than $20,000,000 and have been substantially completed within ten (10) years from the date that the proposal for this project is due. Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts, where numerous Task Orders are summed to meet the minimum construction dollar value identified herein, are not acceptable as project examples.

Factor 1 should include project examples that are similar to the SOCNORTH TSOC. For evaluation purposes “similar” is defined as sharing the following aspects with the SOCNORTH TSOC of comparable magnitude (or magnitude as defined above) and/or complexity:

[*Am-2] Military and/or commercial vertical facility construction (e.g., containing architectural, structural, mechanical, fire protection, and electrical construction features) and all other site development features applicable to the submitted project (e.g., demolition, earthwork, utilities, etc.), especially involving Commercial or Military multi-story facilities, and facilities with secure areas (secured areas defined per section 01 14 00).

Each project example narrative should include the following information:

Project title and location Detailed scope of the project including area of building in square feet (SF). May be part of the narrative description of the project.

Original contract award amount and final construction cost

Include a narrative of any cost differences greater than 5% Original contract finish date and actual finish date (Month/Year) Points of Contact, as described below Role of the proposing firm on the project, including a clear designation of whether or not the Offeror was the prime contractor and the percentage of self-performed work Subcontractors utilized on the project, the extent to which they were utilized (by percentage of cost), and if they are proposed to be utilized for the SOCNORTH project.

Prime Contractor Personnel on the project and if they are proposed to be utilized for the

SOCNORTH project.

Narrative description of the project, as described below.

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

Narratives for each project should include a brief overview of the project, discussing major features of the project and each project’s relevance, military or commercial construction project, building types and areas being constructed and similarities to this project. The role and work assigned to any sub-contractors and/or personnel noted in the narrative shall be explained. All time growth and construction cost growth should be explained in each project example narrative.

The government preference is that project examples submitted be of completed projects. A substantially completed project shall be defined as one that has been at least 95% billed and turned over for use.

9.1.2 Evaluation

The Offeror's experience in construction of facilities similar to this project will be evaluated. No more than six projects may be submitted for this Factor. If the number of project examples in this Factor exceeds six (three for construction and three for design), only the first six projects listed in the proposal will be evaluated.

Evaluation will be based on the project examples provided in the offeror’s proposal. Any additional material inserted into this Factor will not be evaluated.

Higher evaluation ratings may 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. The Government may rate proposals higher on projects meeting or exceeding project size threshold identified in paragraph 9.1.1. Higher ratings correspond to what may be considered strengths and significant strengths. Federal Government project experience may be rated higher than non-Federal Government Project experience. Previous design-build experience is not necessary for an acceptable rating. The Government may consider previous D- B experience a strength. Projects showing cost and time growth may be rated less favorably than those that maintain the contract completion date and the original award amount, unless the cost or time growth is fully explained to be caused by factors outside the proposer’s control. Failure to provide an explanatory narrative, as applicable, may be categorized as a weakness. Submission of fewer than three design and three construction projects may reduce the offeror’s rating in this Factor.

9.2 FACTOR 2 – RISK MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL APPROACH

9.2.1 Submission Requirements

Risk Assessment: Describe the offeror’s intended management, technical, and risk approach to design and construction. Provide a narrative describing: design-build approach, approach to risk identification, prioritization, analysis, mitigation, and tracking. The related roles, responsibilities, and coordination of construction management personnel should be addressed. Include in the narrative the proposed processes for handling the design phase (including any fast-track packages), field problems, RFIs, Government communication, and management involvement throughout the construction period. The assessment should include a table to identify and address probable internal and external risks in the areas of construction, material and equipment, labor, subcontracting, long lead items, testing/commissioning and project coordination; and the potential consequence to budget, quality, schedule, and safety. Include examples that demonstrate the offerors understanding of the project scope, location, and complexity.

Management and Technical Approach: Identify and explain the roles and responsibilities of team members that will perform major or critical aspects of design and construction phases. The Offeror shall document unequivocal teaming arrangements with its lead design entity (ies) and key subcontractors (see Attachment 7). 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 the list of key personnel to be provided under the Tab, “KEY PERSONNEL CAPABILITIES AND EXPERIENCE”. Provide an organization chart identifying on-site and remote positions and staff. Show the corporate organization and reporting chain for key personnel. Describe the technical approach to design and construction of the facility. Describe how the offeror plans to coordinate working space(s) and site access with the Corps of Engineers. Describe your approach to manage the physical standards for Secure Area construction. Describe how the offeror will communicate and coordinate design and construction issues throughout the construction period with the Corps of Engineers.

The submission for this factor may not exceed (15) fifteen pages, including explanatory drawings, excluding bar chart schedule. A copy of the teaming or joint venture agreement(s) shall be appended to the plan (not included in the page limitation). Provide a bar chart schedule (preferably shown on no more than four- 11 x 17 pages) on your plan for completing the work based on an estimated Contract Notice to Proceed date of 30 January 2021 and Contract Completion date of 9 February 2023. This schedule shall be considered the preliminary project schedule. Include major work milestones and scheduled activities (i.e. Non- Work Periods due to weather constraints and Section 01 14 00 WORK RESTRICTIONS.)

9.2.2 Evaluation

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s understanding of the unique requirements of the SOCNORTH’s design and construction as portrayed in its submission. The offeror MUST at a minimum address the key points listed above. Based on the submission provided, the Government will evaluate the offerors overall understanding of the requirements described in the solicitation as well as the offeror’s capability to execute the project. In particular:

a. Risk Assessment. The Government will evaluate the risk assessment to verify that the Offeror has a clear understanding of the risks, roles, and scope of the project. Proposals may be rated more favorable for risk assessments that are clearly identified with logical and accurate assessments of each risk. Proposals that identify a reasonable process for early risk identification and mitigation may receive a more favorable evaluation. A schedule including unrealistic durations or one that does not utilize the entire project duration may be considered a weakness. A proposal will not be rated more favorably that provides a duration shorter than the provided contract duration. The Government will consider an unreasonably condensed contract duration, which places undue risk on the Government, or which may create a risk of contract or performance failure as a weakness.

b. 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. Joint venture participants’ contribution to the organization should be commensurate with their skills and background.

c. Technical Approach for Design and Construction. 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.

9.3 FACTOR 3 – TECHNICAL OFFEROR’S KEY PERSONNEL

9.3.1 Submission Requirements

For key personnel provide a brief resume using the Key Personnel Resume form at the end of this Section (Attachment 5). Resumes shall be submitted for the personnel roles shown in this paragraph.

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

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

Project Manager Project Superintendent Contractor Quality Control System Manager Design Manager (Lead Design Entity Employee)

The resumes in this factor should clearly present the credentials of each person and show that each meets the requirements listed below. Each resume shall be limited to 2 pages. Each resume should include the following information:

Name, assignment for this project, and company employing the person Education and degree (Month/Year) 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.

Successful past performance at institutions of higher learning, especially where operations were maintained throughout, may be considered more favorably. Resumes should 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 shall be an employee of the Prime Contractor, have no other duties, and should possess a Bachelor’s Degree in Engineering, Architecture, or Construction Management, with a minimum of 5 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 2 of those 10 years should indicate experience as a Construction Project Manager for Military and/or commercial vertical construction.

Project Superintendent: The proposed On-Site Project Superintendent shall be an employee of the Prime Contractor, have no other duties, and should have a minimum of 5 years construction related experience (within the last 10 years) as a superintendent on construction projects similar in monetary size and/or scope to this project and for Military and/or commercial vertical construction.

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

System (CQC) Manager shall be an employee of the Prime Contractor, have no other duties, and should have a minimum 5 years of experience (within the last 10 years) as a Construction CQC for Military and/or commercial vertical construction on projects similar in monetary size and/or scope to this project. The CQC System Manager 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.

Design Manager: The Design Manager should have 5 years of design management experience over the last 10 years. 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.

Offeror shall provide unequivocal letters of commitment from all proposed key personnel NOT currently employed by the Offeror. Use the form letter (Attachment 6) at the end of this section.

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.

9.3.2 Evaluation

Qualifications of key 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. Higher evaluation ratings (corresponding to strengths, per the evaluation definitions shared above) may 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. Ambiguity and formatting issues fall into the weakness category while an omission may be categorized as a deficiency. Offerors that propose key personnel who also worked on the projects in Tab A may be rated more favorably. Key personnel that exceed the required minimum years of experience in their position may be rated higher. Previous design-build experience may be rated higher. Federal government project experience may be rated higher.

9.4 FACTOR 4 - SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

9.4.1 Submission Requirements

All Offerors (both Large and Small Businesses) are required to complete a Small Business Participation Plan. Offerors shall propose their best efforts when projecting the level of participation of Small Businesses (as a Small Business prime and/or Small Business subcontractors) for the anticipated performance of this contract.

Large Business primes may achieve the Small Business participation goals through subcontracting to Small Businesses.

Small business primes may achieve Small Business participation goals through their own performance/participation as a prime and through subcontracting to other Small Businesses.

a. Check the applicable size and categories for the PRIME Offeror only (check all applicable boxes):

□ Large Prime;

□ Small Business Prime; also categorized as a

□ Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) / 8(a)

□ Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB)

□ Historically Underutilized Zone (HUB Zone) Small Business

□ Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB)

b. Submit the total percentage of work to be performed by both Large and Small Business.

Include the percentage of work to be performed both by the Prime and anticipated Subcontractors. The Federal Government considers a Small Business Participation Goal (SBPG) of 25% of Total Contract Value of the resultant contract challenging, fair and reasonable.

Example: If the Prime proposes a task order price of $1,000,000 (including all options), and Small Business(es) will provide $250,000 in services/supplies as a prime or subcontractor, the % planned for Small Businesses is 25%; and 75% for large business, equaling 100%.

Total Percentage planned for Large Business(es) %

Total Percentage planned for Small Business(es) %

c. Indicate the total percentage of participation to be performed in each Small Business subcategory. Small businesses that qualify in multiple Small Business categories may be counted in each category in determining the overall Small Business percentage Example:

Victory Prop Mgmt. (WOSB and SDVOSB) performing 2%; and Williams Group (SDB, HUBZone and WOSB) performing 3%. Results equate to: SDB 3%; HUBZone 3%;

WOSB 5%; SDVOSB 2%; VOSB 2 %;).

SDB / 8(a): %

HUB Zone Small Business: %

WOSB: %

SDVOSB: %

d. List principle supplies/services to be performed by Small Businesses:

Example: If a Small Business qualifies also as a WOSB and a SDVOSB, and you can add them to each category below in which they qualify.

Small Business (SB): Identify Type of Service/Supply

SDB / 8(a): Identify Type of Service/Supply

WOSB: Identify Type of Service/Supply

HUB Zone Small Business: Identify Type of Service/Supply

SDVOSB: Identify Type of Service/Supply

e. Describe the extent of commitment to use each of the identified Small Business. Offerors do not need to submit copies of commitment instruments in their proposals. Rather, identify what types of commitments are in place with each company —i.e. a written contract, letter of commitment, verbal agreement, joint venture, mentor-protégé agreement, including how long agreement in place. Large Business must comply with DFARS 215.304(c)(i)C.

Name of Company Type of Commitment:

f. Past Performance Data submitted should demonstrate past performance of small business utilization for each of the project examples submitted in Factor 1. Past performance of the Offerors in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns and 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan; and the extent of participation of such firms in terms of the value of the total acquisition.

Small Business Offerors: The solicitation includes the clause 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns. Evaluation shall include the past performance of offerors in complying with requirement of that clause for projects submitted in Factor 1.

Other Than Small Business Offerors: The solicitation includes the clause 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Evaluation shall include the past performance of offerors in complying with requirements of that clause for projects submitted in Factor 1.

9.4.2 Evaluation

All Offerors will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of U.S. Small Businesses in the performance of this acquisition (as Small Business prime Offerors or Small Business subcontractors). The government will evaluate the five objectives listed below (items a through e). Omission of requested information may be categorized as a deficiency

a. The extent to which such firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in its proposal.

b. The extent of commitment to use such firms.

c. Identification of the complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform.

d. The extent of participation of Small Business prime Offerors and Small Business subcontractors in terms of the percentage of planned contracteddollars.

e. The extent to which the Offeror meets or exceeds previous acquisition Small Business subcontracting and participation goals for projects submitted in Factor 1.

9.4.2.1 Definitions

(1) Small Business Concern: see FAR Clause 52.219-8.

(2) Other than Small Business Concerns are all other entities including large business concerns, state and local governments, non-profit organizations, public utilities, educational institutions and foreign-owned firms that are awarded federal contracts for performance within the United States.

(3) Small Business Subcontracting Goals represents the minimum level for small business performance in the indicated small business category.

(4) Subcontract means any agreement (other than one involving an employer-employee relationship) entered into by a Federal Government prime Contractor or subcontractor calling for supplies or services required for performance of the contract or subcontract.

(5) Good Faith Effort entails evidence that an “Other than Small” concern has provided maximum practicable opportunity for SBC members by complying with its subcontracting plan, subcontracting responsibilities with supporting documentation prescribed by 13 CFR §125.3 – Subcontracting assistance.

(6) Contractor Team Arrangements as used in this solicitation, resultant proposals and contracts means an arrangement in which (1) Two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor; or (2) A potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them as its subcontractor for the requirement…