AM0003 W9128F21R0007 99M RDI_2 HUBZone.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is change the proposal submission date from 15JAN21 to 19JAN21 as outlined in Block 13 of the 1442 and make revisions to Section 00 22 00 of the solicitation as a result of projnet inquiries. All other terms and conditions remain the same.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

U 1 55

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 07-Jan-2021

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W9128F21R0007

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

02-Dec-2020

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

Offer 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 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram 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 telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

07-Jan-2021

CODE

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DIST

CONTRACTING OFFICE

1616 CAPITOL AVENUE

OMAHA NE 68102-4901

W9128F 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9128F21R0007

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 15-Jan-2021 02:00 PM to 19-Jan-2021 02:00 PM.

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

00 22 00

SECTION 00 22 00

SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS (SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION)

1. CONTRACT INFORMATION

1.1. INDEFINITE DELIVERY TYPE CONTRACTS

The Government intends to issue a Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) solicitation and award a Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) for shared capacity of $99M to a target of four (4) contractors.

Individual Task Orders will be solicited and competed within the MATOC pool. Task Orders within the MATOC may be Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) or Firm Fixed Price (FFP) task orders, depending upon project risk.

The total ordering period for this MATOC is eight (8) years from contract. The base will be five (5) years and there will be one (1) option period of three (3) years. The Government’s decision to exercise an option will be contingent upon satisfactory contractor past performance and an informal survey of current market conditions. The decision to exercise the option is at the discretion of the Government. The minimum guarantee amounts for this MATOC (to include all option periods) are $2,500.00.

1.2. TYPES OF PROJECTS

Projects will vary in size, complexity, and location, and will require a high degree of flexibility and adaptability on the part of the contractor to respond quickly and effectively. All work will be time-sensitive in nature, necessitating an expedited response to mitigate threat to life and property and/or operational impacts to the Government.

Work contemplated under this MATOC may include such missions as:

Security and Defense Mission Support.

Support to USACE Protective Design Center of Expertise (PDC) and other federal agencies for time sensitive construction response actions in support of Security and Defense initiatives. This RDI MATOC could be used for construction of security measures, if other construction contracts are not available and the project is time-sensitive.

Additionally, given the need to address security vulnerabilities, many of these projects must be completed on an expedited basis. Examples of time-sensitive projects include installation of chemical/biological filtration systems, force protection at extremely critical government assets, security upgrades at key installations domestically and overseas, and infrastructure improvements at mission critical sites to ensure sustainability.

Support to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

The DHS mission is to secure our homeland by leading a unified national effort to protect America. The DHS prevents and deters terrorist attacks and protects against and responds to threats and hazards to the nation.

Homeland security includes, but is not limited to, protection of transportation systems, disruption of threats to installations, protection of critical infrastructure and key assets, positioning of resources to be ready for defense, and activities to ensure health and safety of the United States of America and its citizens.

Disaster Support Response.

Disaster Support Responses provide time-sensitive construction/rehabilitation/flood risk reduction support. Projects may include, but are not limited to, roads (primary, secondary and short-term temporary fixes), bridges, irrigation systems, coastal and marine resource management and development, dams and other water related structures, electric distribution systems, water and sanitation systems schools, clinics or hospitals, emergency power and other civil engineering works.

In addition, under USACE responsibilities to FEMA, the RDI MATOC may be used to provide USACE Mission Support through the local MSCs or District Commander to address temporary housing, critical facility repairs, power generation and transmission, debris removal and/or unwatering activities and other missions assigned to USACE via Emergency Support Function #3 (ESF#3), provided the requested services are within the scope of the contract.

Infrastructure Construction Support.

This RDI MATOC may support various time critical infrastructure construction repair/rehabilitation projects with the most prevalent being rehabilitation of levee systems. However, infrastructure construction support may include work on other essential infrastructure facilities, such as: roads, bridges, dams, utility systems (power, water, sewer, telephone, telecommunications) railways, subways, airports, and harbors, which are publicly owned, regulated or maintained by the government. This includes work on buildings, structures or other real property, when necessary to support a larger infrastructure mission assignment.

NOTE: Each Task Order Request for Proposal (RFP) will identify when the contractor must mobilize.

Emergency recovery actions may require mobilization within 24 hours of task order award. Projects may require incidental design and/or ecological/environmental, hazardous waste recovery, and munitions work.

1.3. PROJECT LOCATIONS

Projects may occur anywhere in the United States (U.S.) under the resulting MATOC. “United States” is defined as all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and outlying areas as defined by Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR)

2.101. The Offeror shall be prepared to respond to any location within the U.S., as defined above.

2. WHO MAY SUBMIT

This solicitation is open to only HUBZone participation.

All Offerors must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) in the same manner as they are proposing for this solicitation.

The Primary North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this solicitation is 236220, with a size standard for small business of $39.5 million dollars.

Proposals submitted must be sufficiently detailed to allow for an effective and equitable evaluation by the Government. There will be no public proposal opening. Proposals submitted will become, upon receipt, the property of the U.S. Government and will not be returned. After evaluation of proposals, electronic copies will be retained for the official paperless contract file. All other copies will be destroyed or forwarded to the Field and Areas Offices in support of their contract administration functions.

3. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

3.1. SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

In an effort to reduce paperwork and cost, all proposals shall be submitted electronically. All submissions will 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 files via email. Offerors may use compression utilities such as 7-Zip, WinZip or PKZip to reduce file size and facilitate transmission. Offerors are encouraged to send both files in the same email transmission, if possible.

Volume I: W9128F21R0007, Technical Proposal, Factors 1-5 Volume II: W9128F21R0007, Required Documents

For this solicitation, the recipients will be:

1. Tyler Hegge, whose email address is tyler.hegge@usace.army.mil and

2. Glenda Canty, whose e-mail address is glenda.a.canty@usace.army.mil and

3. Ericka T. Collins, whose email address is ericka.t.collins@usace.army.mil

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 via email 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.

Electronic Proposals shall be received via email No Later Than (NLT) the date and time indicated in Block 13 of the SF 1442 for this solicitation or as identified in subsequent amendments. (Note: Files or multiple files combined that are larger than 35MB in one email will likely not be received). (AM0003)

The Government is not be responsible for proposals delivered to any location or to anyone other than those designated to receive proposals on its behalf. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that the proposal is submitted so as to reach the designated recipient and is responsible for allowing sufficient time for the proposal to be received in accordance with the information provided.

Failure to submit a complete proposal IAW instructions and requirements may result in the entire offer being rejected.

3.2. SUBMISSION DEADLINE

Offers shall be submitted at the location stated and by the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442 (Section 00 10 00, Page 1).

4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND FORMAT

4.1. PROPOSAL FORMAT

1. Submit the following two files, titled in the format shown below:

a. W9128F21R0007_COMPANY NAME _VOLUME_I_FACTORS_1-5

b. W9128F21R0007_COMPANY NAME _VOLUME_II_REQUIRED_DOCS

2. Proposal Characteristics

a) VOLUME I, FACTORS 1-5 (File #1)

1) Contents of this file shall be arranged in the following sequence:

Table of Contents FACTOR 1: Previous Experience FACTOR 2: Past Performance FACTOR 3: Organizational Structure FACTOR 4: Key Personnel FACTOR 5: Technical Approach to Sample Project

2) Page limitations for Factors 1-5 are shown in Table 1, below:

Table 1 - Proposal Format -- Volume I: Technical Proposal and Past Performance

EVALUATION

FACTOR

TITLE

PAGE

LIMITATION

1 Previous Experience 9 2 Past Performance No page limitation 3 Organizational Structure

15 (exceptions are noted in paragraph

4, below) 4 Key Personnel 6 (each resume shall be no more than 2 pages)

5 Technical Approach to the Sample Project 10

3) All text shall be at least 10 pt. font and easily read. All text shall be typed and single-spaced and each page shall be 8-1/2 by 11 inches.

4) The following items are excluded from the Factor 3-page count:

a. A letter from DCAA approving the Offerors purchasing system would be excluded, as described in Factor 3

b. The Offeror’s organizational chart can be 11x17 inches but is included in the page limitations as one (1) page, as described in Factor 3.

5) Each page should contain the following information in the top and bottom margin. Exact placement (center, off-center, left, right, etc.) and sequence of presentation is at the discretion of the Offeror.

a. Page number. Pages for each factor should be separately and sequentially numbered (i.e., the first page submitted for evaluation of each factor should be “Page 1”). This includes all pages for Factor 4 Factor 2; while there is no page limitation for Factor 4 Factor 2, the page numbers are needed by the Government for reference during the selection process. (AM0002)

b. Factor number and title. For example, “Factor 1 – Previous Experience.”

c. Solicitation Number

d. Company name of Offeror and (at the Offeror’s discretion) the company logo

e. Disclosure information can be placed in the bottom margin.

6) Top, left, right, and bottom margins should be no less than 1”. No information should be included in any margin, except as required in Paragraph 5, above. Past Performance evaluations are exempt from this requirement.

7) For Factors 1, 3, 4 and 5, pages that exceed the page limitations for any factor will not be reviewed and the information contained on those pages will not be considered for evaluation. Note that including required information on a page that exceeds any of these limitations, and which is therefore not reviewed, may cause a Factor to be rated as Deficient.

8) Information contained within margins, other than what is required by the Government, will not be reviewed. Page limitations are per factor, i.e., an Offeror may not reduce the page count for one factor in order to submit additional pages for another factor.

b) VOLUME II, REQUIRED DOCUMENTS (File #2)

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

Cover Letter (not to exceed two (2) pages) Table of Contents Completed SF 1442 Completed SF 30 or acknowledgement of amendment(s) on SF 1442 (if applicable) Contractor Team Arrangement Requirements (if applicable)

2) Component requirements:

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

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

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

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

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

CAGE code, DUNS number and Tax Identification Number (TIN)

(b) Table of Contents: The table of contents should include all section headings and subheadings: worded exactly as they appear in the proposal.

(c) SF 1442: The SF 1442 shall be completed and signed by a person authorized by the Offeror.

(d) Completed SF 30: Offerors shall submit acknowledgement of all amendments to the

RFP in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30 (amendment form).

(e) Contractor Team Arrangement Requirements: For Contractor Team Arrangements, including Joint Ventures, submit the information required by Paragraph 6 “Contractor Team Arrangements”.

Page limitations for Volume II are shown in Table 2, below:

Table 2 - Proposal Format -- Volume II: Cost Information and Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements to Offerors

VOLUME II DESCRIPTION

PAGE

LIMIT

Tab 1 SF 1442 - Solicitation, Offer, and Award, SF30 N/A

Tab 2 Section 00 10 00 – Pricing (Fully Burdened Labor Rates - FFP) N/A

Tab 3 Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors N/A

Tab 4 Cost/Price Proposal for the Sample Project 20

Tab 5 Audit/Cost Accounting System Information N/A

Tab 6 Contractor Team Arrangements (if applicable) N/A

Tab 7 Company Bonding Letter N/A

5. INQUIRIES/QUESTIONS

Prospective Offerors shall submit contracting and technical inquiries and questions concerning this solicitation document via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at www.projnet.org/projnet. Please refer to Section 00 21 00 of this solicitation for Bidder Inquiry instructions.

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

The Offeror is permitted to submit multiple inquiries.***

6. CONTRACTOR TEAM ARRANGEMENTS

6.1. CONTRACTOR TEAM ARRANGMENTS OTHER THAN JOINT VENTURE/ MENTOR-PROTÉGÉ

Requirements:

All Offerors proposing a team arrangement other than a Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé, shall submit the following information:

a. A listing of the team arrangement members’ corporate name (no abbreviations), address, point of contact, phone number, DUNS Number, and Cage Code.

b. A copy of the signed team arrangement agreement or binding letter of commitment between each team partner. All team arrangement agreements and letters of commitment shall:

(1) Clearly identify the expected relationship, role and responsibility between the firms, Prime Contractor, and of the subcontractor or other entity (type and proportion of work to be performed);

and

(2) Be signed by the appropriate individual(s) of each firm.

6.2. JOINT VENTURE TEAM ARRANGEMENTS (INCLUDING MENTOR-PROTÉGÉS)

No contract may be awarded to a Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé that is not registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database. The Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé must have its own registered Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. Any Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé agreement that is required to be approved by the Small Business Administration (SBA) shall be approved in accordance to the applicable Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). If the applicable requirements are not met prior to the due date for the proposals, the proposal will be rendered unawardable.

1. In the cover letter of your proposal, provide the complete names, addresses, and phone number of the firms comprising the Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé.

2. A copy of the Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé agreement.

3. Signature requirements: SF 1442, SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (pages 00 10 00-1 and 00 10 00-2), Block 20 requires that the name and title of a person authorized to sign the offer for the Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé be provided. In the case of a Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé, subject Standard Form shall be signed by the principal representative of the Joint Venture/ Mentor-Protégé (or the alternate principal representative, if the principal representative is unavailable).

4. In addition to the requirements stated above, and to assure a single point of contact for resolution of contractual matters and payments, the Offeror shall submit a certificate signed by each participant in the Joint Venture containing the following statement:

“The parties hereto expressly understand and agree as follows:

1. (Name, title, and company) is the principal representative of the Joint Venture. As such, all communications regarding the administration of the contract and the performance of the work thereunder may be directed to him or her. In the absence of (same name, title, and company), (enter name, title, and company of alternate) is the alternate principal representative of the Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé. These individuals have authority to sign on behalf of the Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé.

2. Direction, approvals, required notices, and all other communications from the Government to the Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé, including transmittal of payments by the Government, shall be directed to (enter name, title, and company of principal), principal representative of the Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé.”

NOTE: Provide telephone numbers and email addresses for the points of contact listed in the above statement.

6.3. INTEGRITY AND VALIDITY OF CONTRACTOR TEAM ARRANGEMENTS

The Contracting Officer will recognize the integrity and validity of contractor team arrangements; provided that the arrangements are identified and company relationships are fully disclosed and validation of formal agreements and relationships (i.e., Mentor-Protégé agreements, Joint Ventures, partnerships, etc.) are provided in the offer and submitted with the proposal responding to the solicitation. Nothing in the solicitation authorizes contractor team arrangements in violation of antitrust statutes or limits the Government’s rights to:

a. Require consent to subcontracts (see FAR Subpart 44.2);

b. Determine, on the basis of the stated contractor team arrangement, the responsibilities of the Prime Contractor (see FAR Subpart 9.1);

c. Provide to the Prime Contractor data rights owned or controlled by the Government;

d. Pursue its policies on competitive contracting, subcontracting, and component breakout initial production or an any other time; and

e. Hold the Prime Contractor fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of team arrangement between the Prime Contractor and its subcontractors.

7. BASIS OF AWARD

The agency will use the Selection Procedures authorized by FAR Part 15.

Selection will be based on evaluation of technical factors, past performance, small business participation, and price.

(AM0002) There are five (5) non-price factors:

FACTOR 1: Previous Experience FACTOR 2: Past Performance FACTOR 3: Organizational Structure FACTOR 4: Key Personnel FACTOR 5: Technical Approach to Sample Project

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award contracts without conducting discussions with Offerors.

However, in the event that discussions are necessary, the PCO will establish a competitive range with approval from the Source Selection Authority (SSA). If the PCO determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the PCO may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint.

The Government intends to award a target of four (4) contracts. However, the Government reserves the right to award less than or greater than four (4) contracts under this MATOC to the Offerors whose proposal offers the best value to the Government.

8. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF EVALUATION FACTORS

FACTOR DESCRIPTION

Factor 1 Previous Experience

Factor 2 Past Performance

Factor 3 Organizational Structure

Factor 4 Key Personnel

Factor 5 Technical Approach to Sample Project

Technical evaluation factors are listed in descending order of importance. All technical evaluation Factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price.

9. SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS

All offers received in response to this solicitation will be evaluated in accordance with FAR Part 15.3, DoD Source Selection procedures, and Army Source Selection Supplement. The principal objective of this process is to select responsible Offerors who submit the offers that are the Best Value to the Government. The process is designed to ensure the impartial, equitable, and comprehensive evaluation of all technically acceptable, responsible proposals received in response to this solicitation.

10. TECHNICAL RATINGS

The evaluation ratings for Technical Factors 1, 3, 4, and 5 will be on an adjectival basis in conjunction with a narrative composed of the discussion of the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies of the proposal. The Source Selection Team will use a combined technical/risk rating system that includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in Table 2. The Combined technical/risk ratings will be used to evaluate Factor 1 Previous Experience, Factor 3 Organizational Structure, Factor 4 Key Personnel, and Factor 5 Technical Approach to Sample Project. The evaluation rating that will be used for Factor 2 Past Performance is described in Paragraph 11 below.

Table 2:

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates and 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.

Strengths, Significant Strengths, Weaknesses, Significant Weaknesses, and Deficiencies are defined as follows:

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

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

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

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

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

11. PAST PERFORMANCE RATING

The past performance evaluation factor assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an Offeror’s ability to supply products and services that meet users’ needs, based on a demonstrated record of performance. 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. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation, Relevancy and Contractor Performance, which are described below:

a. Relevancy. The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how relevant recent previous experience accomplished by the Offeror is to the anticipated work to be accomplished under this MATOC. Relevancy is defined as similarity of items stated within this solicitation such as: types of projects, dollar value, contract type, and stakeholder(s). With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment. Relevancy is not a separate proposal rating but is used to develop an overall Past Performance Confidence Assessment. The four levels of relevancy ratings are:

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

Not Relevant. Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and

b. Contractor Performance. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the Offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the Offeror performed those past contracts. The SSEB will review this past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment.

After evaluating relevancy and contractor performance, a Performance Confidence Assessment rating will be determined. In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each Offeror shall be assigned one of the following ratings:

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.

12. PPQ’S, CPARS AND CCASS RECORDS

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)/ Construction Contract Administration Support System (CCASS) records and Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ’s)are exempt from page count. The offeror shall be limited to submission of a CPARS or PPQ’s evaluation for each project submitted in Factor 1; the offeror shall submit a CPARS, if it is available for the project. See paragraph 13.2.1 below for the full requirement.

13. VOLUME I - TECHNICAL PROPOSAL AND PAST PERFORMANCE

Offerors shall submit one file labeled as Volume I with tabs (electronic bookmarks or equivalent) to identify the factors shown below. All required information for each identified factor must be contained within that specified Tab.

13.1. VOLUME I, TAB 1 – FACTOR 1: PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE

13.1.1 Submission Requirements

In this tab, the Offeror shall submit three (3) project examples of completed projects which demonstrate the Offeror’s experience in performance of work similar to that described in Section 01 11 00 and Paragraph 1.2 in Section 00 22 00.

If the Offeror submits more than three (3) projects, only the first three (3) will be evaluated.

A. Requirements applicable to every project example.

1. For the purposes of this solicitation, a project is defined as one of the following:

Work performed pursuant to:

a. A single task order of an indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) type contract at one site

b. A single task order of an indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) type contract at multiple sites within a single installation or facility

c. Work performed pursuant to a single stand-alone (non-IDIQ) contract at one site

d. Work performed pursuant to a single stand-alone (non-IDIQ) contract at multiple sites within a single installation or facility.

e . One specific task order of an indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) type contract or a single stand-alone “C” type contract which has one specific past performance evaluation in CPARS or via completion of a PPQ.

Work pursued under multiple task orders of an ID/IQ type contract does not constitute a "project" within this definition. Work pursued under mult iple stand-alone contracts does not constitute a project within this definition.

2. Past project examples submitted for this factor shall have been awarded to the Offeror (either singly, teaming partners or as one of the participants in a Joint Venture (JV) named on the SF1442 for this solicitation (W9128F- 21-R-0007)). (AM0002) The company shall have been the Prime Contractor for the past project, either singly or as a member of the Joint Venture to which it was awarded, or a teaming partner.

The table below provides example scenarios based on the requirements above:

Scenario Examples

Past Project Qualifies for

Evaluation for Factor 1 (if all other requirements are met)?

A Past project was awarded to Company X only. Company X is proposing as a Prime Contractor for W9128F-20-R-00XX and has signed the SF 1442 for

W9128F-20-R-00XX.

Yes

B Company Y has formed a JV with Company Z (forming Company “YZ”). Past project was awarded to Company Y only. Company YZ is proposing as a Prime Contractor for W9128F-20-R-00XX and has signed the SF 1442 for W9128F-20-

R-00XX.

Yes

C Company Y has formed a JV with Company Z (forming Company “YZ”). Past project was awarded to JV Company YZ. Company YZ is proposing as a Prime Contractor for W9128F-20-R-00XX and has signed the SF 1442 for W9128F-20-

R-00XX.

Yes

D Past Project was awarded to Company “AY,” a JV composed of Company A (not Prime Offeror for RFP W9128F-20-R-00XX) and Company Y. Company Y has formed a JV with Company Z (forming Company “YZ”). JV Company YZ is proposing as a Prime Contractor and has signed the SF 1442 for W W9128F-20-R-

00XX.

Yes

E Company Y has formed a JV with Company Z (forming Company “YZ”).

Company YZ is proposing as a Prime Contractor for W9128F-20-R-00XX and has signed the SF 1442 for W9128F-20-R-00XX. Company Y performed work on the past project, but was not the Prime Contractor for the past project (either singly or as a member of a JV).

No

F Company X is proposing as a Prime Contractor for W9128F-19-R-0043 W9128F- 20-R-00XX and has signed the SF 1442 for W9128F-20-R-00XX. Company X will use Company R as a teaming partner but Company R is not part of a JV with Company X for W9128F-20-R-00XX. The past project was awarded to Company R as a Prime Contractor (singly or as a member of a JV), but not Company X (singly or as a member of a JV). (AM0002)

G Company Y has formed a JV with Company Z (forming Company “YZ”).

Company YZ is proposing as a Prime Contractor for W9128F-20-R-00XX and has signed the SF 1442 for W9128F-20-R-00XX. Company YZ will use Company R as a teaming partner but Company R is not part of the JV. The past project was awarded to Company R as a Prime Contractor (singly or as a member of a JV), but not to Companies Y or Z (singly or as a member of a JV).

For the purposes of evaluating previous experience, only the Series LLC Managing Member’s previous experience may be used as the “Offeror” previous experience. (AM0003)

3. The project completion date shall have been within the past ten (10) years of the original (non-Amended) date that proposals are due. For the purposes of this solicitation, a project is considered complete when all construction is completed, the contractor has completely demobilized from the site, and all deliverables required by the contract or task order have been delivered and accepted by the Government. It is not necessary for the contract to be administratively/financially closed out.

4. Minimum of one (1) project examples submitted for this Factor shall have been awarded as a cost-reimbursement contract or a cost-reimbursement task order. Time and Materials contracts/task orders, Labor- Hour contracts/task orders, Letter Contracts, and Fixed Price contracts/task orders with cost reimbursable line items are not acceptable as Cost-Reimbursement projects. Contracts or task orders awarded by companies which operate federal governmental facilities are not acceptable. The remaining two (2) required projects may be either Cost Reimbursable or Firm Fixed Price.

5. Work shall have been performed within the United States, to include Hawaii, Alaska, and Outlying Areas as defined in by Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) 2.101. Projects performed in foreign countries, to include those at U.S. military installations or other U.S. facilities in foreign countries, are unacceptable.

6. The primary scope of work for the submitted project experience shall be directly related to the work identified in the Summary of Work, Section 01 11 00.

7. Contract/task order final cost shall be a minimum of $500,000. “Final cost” means the amount of costs the Offeror was reimbursed by the Customer, including the associated fee for the contract/task order. For task orders, the “final cost” amount is the award amount of the task order, not the parent contract.

Each project example submitted should include the following information, presented in this order:

1. Mission Type(s). Identify which of the following missions this project supported:

• Security and Defense Mission Support

• Support to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

• Disaster Support Response

• Infrastructure Construction Support

2. Customer (agency, military branch, state, city, etc.)

3. Solicitation Number

4. Contract and (if applicable) task order number, at award

5. Contract/task order title

6. Contract/task order award date

7. Notice To Proceed (NTP) date (if applicable)

8. Project completion date

9. Project duration (days)

10. Contract/task Order cost at award

11. Final Contract/task order cost to the Government/Customer

12. Location of work (City/Installation, State, Territory, Commonwealth, etc.)

13. Individual Point of contact for the customer/client.

a. Name

b. Title

c. Role (Contracting Officer, Program Manager, etc.)

d. Mailing address

e. Phone number (work)

f. Email address

14. List of key personnel, from Factor 4, and their role on this project. The offeror should indicate which of the key personnel are currently employed by the firm or if they are employed by a subcontractor or teaming partner.

15. Name of Company awarded the contract. If this differs from the company name of the Offeror for this solicitation, explain why (for example, if the current Offeror was then a member of a Joint Venture working under a different company name).

16. Affirmatively state that your firm was the Prime Contractor (either singly or as part of a Joint Venture) for the project

17. Description of the work performed

18. Explanation of how the work performed is relevant to this solicitation

19. If the Government/Customer contractually required your firm to mobilize within a certain number of hours or days from contract award or NTP, state the required response time and the time your company actually took to mobilize. Otherwise, state “No mobilization timeline requirement.”

The Government reserves the right to verify information on the project, and if the Government cannot verify the information, it may discount the project information, which could negatively affect the technical rating for this factor.

NOTE: If an Offeror includes an affiliation of a company with a named offeror, then the proposal must include a factual basis showing the planned relationship between the companies on the contract at issue, i.e. the proposal must indicate the involvement of the affiliate in performance of the contract before the agency can attribute the affiliate’s past experience or performance to the offeror. (AM#0001)

13.1.2 Evaluation Criteria

The following guidance is provided in regards to the assignment of “strengths,” “weaknesses,” and “deficiencies.”

Strengths or Significant Strengths may be given for each of the following criteria:

Clearly demonstrated diversity (geographical/scope) of time-sensitive experience to address multiple mission types of work as described in Paragraph 1.2 and Section 01 11 00.

At least one (1) of the projects submitted clearly demonstrated complex projects which presented unusual challenges requiring innovative solutions to be developed and implemented by the Offeror, and which resulted in project success.

Offeror submitted more than one (1) acceptable cost reimbursable project as project example.

The Government/Customer required the Offeror to mobilize to a site within 24 hours of contract award or

NTP, and the Offeror clearly demonstrated they successfully complied with that requirement. (Mobilization within 24 hours of contract award or NTP that was not required by the Government/Customer does not meet the requirements for this strength.)

Any other aspect of a proposal that the Government determines enhances the merit of the proposal or increases the probability of successful performance of the contract.

Weaknesses or Significant Weaknesses may be given for each of the following criteria:

Unclear or incomplete project information or descriptions which makes it difficult for the Government to determine whether a project meets the requirements stated in Paragraph 13.1.1.

Offeror’s time-sensitive projects, of the type described in Paragraph 3 of Section 01 11 00 and Paragraph 1.2 of Section 00 22 00, have limited diversity. For purposes of this weakness, diversity refers to the types of construction work performed (for example, the Offeror provides only time-sensitive road repair and road construction projects).

Omission or incompleteness of any requested information that is not otherwise stated as a deficiency.

Any other aspect of a proposal that the Government determines increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiencies shall be given for each of the following criteria:

Submission of fewer than three (3) project examples as required.

Submission of fewer than one (1) acceptable Cost Reimbursable project.

Submission of projects not meeting the requirements in Paragraph 1.2 and Section 01 11 00.

Submission of projects that do not meet the requirements stated in Paragraph 13.1.1.

Any project example submitted for which the Offeror was not the Prime Contractor, Joint Venture participant or teaming partner at the time of project execution.

Any other 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.

13.2. VOLUME I, TAB 2 – FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

13.2.1 Submission Requirements

Submit Offeror’s past performance ratings for each project submitted for Factor 1 – Previous Experience.

The offeror shall submit a CPARS rating, if it is available for the project. If a CPARS rating is not available, a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) is also acceptable. Previously completed PPQs are acceptable. Do not submit PPQs for projects evaluated via CPARS or CCASS. In the event an Offeror submits a PPQ for a project for which a CPARS evaluation is available, the CPARS evaluation will be considered authoritative. The titles of the projects shall be consistent with the previous experience projects submitted at Factor 1.

For each project, the offeror shall include: Project # - Title (matching Factor 1), Contract and task order number as applicable, a client point of contact including email and telephone number. The offeror shall provide information to document the relevancy of each previous experience project as it relates to requirements of Section C of this solicitation. Common aspects of relevancy include similarity of services/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, work for federal or non-federal clients, and degree of subcontracting/teaming. With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of less relevance.

If the Government does not receive past performance information for the project(s) identified by the offeror and cannot establish a past performance record for the offeror through other sources, or the offeror has no past performance record, the offeror will be given a “neutral” confidence rating. In rating past performance, the Government may consider available past performance information on predecessor companies, employment histories of key personnel, or major subcontractors performing key elements of the project.

The Government reserves the right to obtain past performance information from any available source. The Government will consider information submitted by the offeror, as well as any other relevant and reliable information obtained from any available source. The Government will consider information submitted in Government databases such as Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), as well as any other relevant and reliable sources of documented past performance information. The Government will evaluate the relevancy of the information, the source of the information, and general trends in performance, along with any other information, which may help the Government, assess performance risk. Information on significant problems encountered, customer dissatisfaction, and corrective actions taken should be provided.

The Government reserves the right to contact any and all individuals identified in the projects submitted for Volume I, Factor 1, Summary of Previous Experience and Organizational Chart. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to provide current contact information for the individual identified therein. The Offeror may provide additional points of contact (POCs) with the customer (prime contractor, if appropriate). The POC information should include the POC’s title, telephone number and e-mail address. The POCs may be contacted to assess the scope of work performed and to evaluate performance of the projects listed under the Previous Experience tab of Section I under this Volume I, if necessary. The intent of this past performance information is to provide POC information, not reiterate information provided in Volume I, Factor 1, Previous Experience.

The Government intends to assess the relative risks associated with the Offeror's performance based on the past performance information provided in the proposal. A significant achievement, unexplained or unresolved problem, or lack of relevant data may significantly impact the risk rating by the Government. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the offeror to include all relevant information, including demonstrated corrective actions, in its proposal.

13.2.2 Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

In the event that a formal past performance evaluation has not been completed via CPARS, or CCASS, the Past Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ-0, Attachment 1) is provided for the Offeror or its team partners to submit to the client. The PPQ 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 PPQs shall be submitted with your proposal or to the designated personnel listed below prior to the Phase 1 proposal due date. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the designated Government's point of contacts, via email at glenda.a.canty@usace.army.mil and ericka.t.collins@usace.army.mil 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 may utilize previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

(AM0002)

Do not submit PPQs for projects evaluated via CPARS or CCASS. In the event an Offeror submits a PPQ for a project for which a CPARS evaluation is available, the CPARS evaluation will be considered authoritative.

13.2.3 Government Utilization of Alternate Information Sources for Past Performance

The Government reserves the right to contact any persons who may be knowledgeable about the project or projects (this is not limited to contracts identified by the Offeror) submitted in an Offeror’s proposal. In addition, the Government may review and take into consideration other sources of information pertinent to the evaluation of the Offeror’s past performance.