Am_0004.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. 0004 W9128F

REPAIR GOLF TAXIWAY, ELLSWORTH AFB, SD

See attached documentation for content of the amendment revisions to solicitation.

Date for receipt of proposals is 22 MARCH 2022 at 1400 hours

Government Point of Contact: Jae Chang, Contract Specialist Jae.Chang@usace.army.mil

U.S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT

CONTRACTING OFFICE

1616 CAPITOL AVE.

OMAHA, NE 68102-4901

See Item 6

W9128F-22-R-0029

03/14/2022

02/09/2022

Am #0004 - 2 (Continuation SF 30)

11 MAR 2022

Solicitation No. W9128F22R0029

Date of Issue: 09 FEB 2022 Date of Receiving Proposals: 22 MAR 2022

SUBJECT Amendment No. 0004 to Request for Proposal Solicitation Package for Construction of

REPAIR GOLF TAXIWAY

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 (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 by “[*Am- [4]]”(underlining of added text and/or strikeout of deleted text) when possible.

Pages or Sections Deleted Pages or Sections Substituted or Added 00 22 00 00 22 00* 00 10 00-3 00 10 00-3*

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 Proposal/Email. See Section 00 22 00 for how to submit electronic proposals.

4. Electric Offers will be received until 2:00 p.m., local time at place of receiving proposals, 22 MAR 2022, as stated in the Request For Proposal.

Attachments:

Spec Pages listed in 1.a. above

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

11 MAR 2022

jmh/2181

CONTRACT LINE ITEM PRICING SCHEDULE

ITEM

NO.

DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT UNIT

PRICE

ESTIMATED AMOUNT

BASIC ITEMS

Entire work complete to remove existing Golf Taxiway and pavement draining system.

Job

XXX

Entire work complete to construct new Golf Taxiway and install new pavement draining system.

Entire work complete to remove and replace taxiway edge lighting. Includes all lighting constrained by the limits of construction from Golf Taxiway to Runway 13.

Entire work complete to temporarily modify lighting systems pursuant to project design.

TOTAL BASIC AMOUNT $_____________________________

OPTION ITEMS

[Option]

Additional cost for airfield pavement marking using Type III retroreflective beads in lieu of Type I retroreflective beads.

Item removed via Amendment 0004

Item removed via Amendment 0004

Access delays during concrete production placement. Estimated quantities are 25 hours. See note 7 below

Access delays other than during concrete production placement. Estimated quantities are 75 hours. See note 7 below.

TOTAL AMOUNT (BASIC PLUS OPTIONS) $_________________________________

NOTES:

1. See 00 21 00, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS (RFP) for evaluation of options. The Government reserves the right to exercise Option Item No. 0005, 0008, and 00090005 – 0009 within 210 calendar days after issuance of Notice to Proceed.

2. Prices must be entered for all items of the schedule. Total amounts submitted without prices being entered on individual items will be rejected. In case of variation between the Job (lump-sum) prices and the total amount, the lump-sum prices will be considered the price submitted. In case of variation between the unit prices and the extensions, the unit prices will be considered the price submitted.

3. A modification to a proposal which provides for a single adjustment to the total amounts, should state the application of the adjustment to each respective lump-sum price and unit price affected.

4. Quantities for unit priced items are estimated only and the respective unit price will prevail in the event of an overrun or under-run subject to General Conditions (Contract Clauses) clause “Variation in Estimated Quantities”

5. The Offeror shall commence work within 10 calendar days of receiving Notice to Proceed (NTP) and complete the entire work ready for use no later than 3 NOVEMBER 20234 NOVEMBER 2022. The Government may issue the NTP via e-mail or Facsimile (FAX) or by other means. See Section 00 73 00, paragraph 1.1: COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION AND COMPLETION OF WORK.

6. Item No. 0004 shall be completed prior to the commencement of construction.

7. Access Delays. Access Delays under Items 0008 and 0009 - Measure and pay for each half hour that the entire workforce is delayed or prevented from accessing the project site. The Contractor’s superintendent shall notify the Contracting Officer’s on-site representative within twenty-four hours (24) of any delay restricting access to the jobsite. This item will be paid based on a half-hour of work basis. All partial half hours for a notified delay will be rounded up to the next half-hour increment. These access delays apply to Items 0001, 0002, 0003, and 0004., 0006, and 0007.

00 22 00, Page 1

SECTION 00 22 00

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS,

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION

INDEX

1. WHO MAY SUBMIT

2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

3. FORMAT OF SUBMISSIONS

4. HOW TO SUBMIT

5. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

6. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

7. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

7.1. PREFACE

7.2. FACTOR 1 - PAST PERFORMANCE, CONSTRUCTION

7.3. FACTOR 2 TECHNICAL APPROACH

7.4. FACTOR 3 - OFFEROR’S KEY PERSONNEL

7.5. FACTOR 4 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION

8. PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

8.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

8.2. EVALUATION OF PRICE

9. COMPETITIVE RANGE

10. CLARIFICATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS

11. FINAL PROPOSAL REVISIONS

12. SMALL BUSINESS SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

13. AWARD OF CONTRACT

14. DEBRIEFING

Attachments:

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

00 22 00, Page 2

SECTION 00 22 00

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS,

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION

1. WHO MAY SUBMIT

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

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

There will be no public opening. All proposals submitted will become, upon receipt, the property of the U.S. Government and will not be returned. After evaluation of proposals, the proposals will be retained for the official contract file.

2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information sufficiently detailed to clearly indicate compliance with the proposal submission requirements.

3. FORMAT OF SUBMISSIONS

All written portions (other than the organization chart and bar chart schedule, which can be 11” x 17”) shall be in 8-1/2" x 11" format, unless indicated otherwise. The proposal shall be submitted in two separate volumes: Volume 1 (Technical) and Volume 2 (Price) as separate Adobe PDF files with Optical Character Recognition (OCR) applied to all documents that will enable word searches to be conducted using Adobe-compatible PDF software. Volume 1 shall have bookmarks, at a minimum, corresponding to each factor and sub-factor. See Section 8.1 for additional information related to submission of Volume 2, Price.

4. HOW TO SUBMIT

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.

Offers must be submitted electronically via Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Solicitation at https://piee.eb.mil/. Offerors must be registered in PIEE before they can submit a proposal.

REGISTER FOR ACCESS TO PIEE:

Every Vendor must register in the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment for the specific applications they wish to use. During registration, offerors will need to register for the solicitation module with the relevant role (Proposal Manager).

00 22 00, Page 3

To use an application in the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment system, you must establish a personal account in the system.

This account is activated by your Government Administrator or the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment Customer Support Center.

You will need to take several steps to establish your personal account:

On the PIEE Home Page, click the Help/Training button in the upper right hand corner for steps needed to complete before registering.

1. Complete your Vendor activation requirements (See Vendors Getting Started section on the Help/Training page).

2. Set up your PC to use the applications (See Machine Setup link on the Help/Training page).

3. Self-register as "Vendor" or your Contractor role for your CAGE codes (See the demo below for help with Self Registration).

4. Have your GAM activate your account.

Additional registration instruction and step-by-step walkthrough can be found at:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/xhtml/wbt/portal/overview/vendorRegister.xhtml

UPLOADING PROPOSAL TO PIEE:

Detailed instruction on the uploading of proposals can be found at:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/xhtml/wbt/sol/solicitation/proposals.xhtml

PIEE Web based training: https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/

In the event an offeror is unable to register for a PIEE account or otherwise is unable to upload their proposal to PIEE, the offeror shall email the individuals identified below no later than 48 business hours prior to the offer due date and time, stating the issue they are having with PIEE, and request instructions for an alternate method to submit their proposal. This alternate method will be in the form of either email or DOD Safe.

1. Jae Chang, Jae.Chang@usace.army.mil

2. William T. Rawe, William.T.Rawe@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 by the USACE Outlook Server or uploaded into the PIEE Solicitation website as identified in the PIEE Solicitation notification e-mail sent to the Contract Specialist(s)/ Contracting Officer will be the time and date the Government received the proposal. PIEE will provide the offeror with the upload date and time. 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.

00 22 00, Page 4

Volume I: Technical Volume II: Price and Pro Forma Information

Title the single files in the following format:

Title the single files in the following format:

W9128F22R0029_Company Name_Volume_1_Technical W9128F22R0029_Company Name_Volume_2_Price_and_Pro_Forma_Information (Note: Company name may be abbreviated)

5. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

a. All proposals and documentation which have been properly submitted will be evaluated. Proposals will be evaluated on the basis of the factors stated in the solicitation to select the responsible offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government. Uniformity of all proposals is essential to assure fair and accurate evaluation. All proposals must comply with the instructions in the solicitation. If a proposal is suspected of having a deficiency, it will be brought to the immediate attention of the appropriate authority who will determine if there is a deficiency. If the determination is made that a deficiency exists, the proposal will not be evaluated further and will be eliminated from further consideration. The affected offeror shall be promptly notified of the decision. Properly conforming proposals will be forwarded to the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) for evaluation. If, after award, the contractor wishes to replace key personnel or sub-contractors identified in the proposal, a formal request for substitution shall be presented to the Contracting Officer for approval. The Contracting Officer’s written consent shall be obtained before making any substitutions for these designated personnel or sub-contractors. The request shall clearly show the qualifications of the replacement personnel or sub-contractors and shall illustrate that the replacements have skills, experience, and capacity to accomplish the work equal to or better than those personnel or sub-contractors identified in the proposal.

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

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

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

d. Evaluation Definitions.

(1) Strength is an aspect of an offeror's proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

00 22 00, Page 5

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

(3) Deficiency is a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

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

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

(6) Discussions are exchanges (i.e., negotiations) in a competitive environment that are undertaken with the intent of allowing the offeror to revise its proposal. Discussions take place after establishment of the competitive range. See FAR 15.306(d).

e. Technical Rating Evaluation Process.

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

Ratings will be applied at the factor and sub-factor level. If at any level of evaluation an Offeror’s proposal is evaluated as not meeting a minimum requirement (that is, below the level of yellow (marginal)), this fact must be included in the rating and narrative assessment at that level and each higher level of indentation. Therefore, a red - unacceptable rating at any level must be carried to the factor level. The following ratings will be used to evaluate Factors 2 through 3. See paragraph 6 for Evaluation Factors:

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

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

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

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

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

00 22 00, Page 6 unawardable.

(2) Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation (Factor 1) results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered.

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

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

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

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

The Government will next consider how well the offeror performed on the contracts. Past performance on projects with more relevance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment rating than past performance on projects of lesser relevance. Owners/references may be asked to comment on items such as quality of design or construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and contractor; as well as level of support for such items as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting construction errors, warranty work, etc. (see Attachment A). The Government will target areas covered in the requirements of this proposal including records of conforming to quality, schedule, cost control, and customer satisfaction; as well as level of support for such items as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, problem resolution for construction errors, warranty work, and safety. The Government also places a higher value on projects which document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation; for example, but not limited to, telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the proposal, CPARS/CCASS or other agency performance databases, offeror furnished references, or personal knowledge. The Government also places a higher value on projects which provided particularly difficult or unique challenges and the innovative methods the contractor used to resolve problems successfully. This rating is not a separate

00 22 00, Page 7 proposal rating but is only used in developing an overall past performance confidence assessment rating assigned to the Past Performance Factor.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(3) Factor 4 Small Business Participation Evaluation. See paragraph 7.6.2.

6. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Offerors will be evaluated based on the Evaluation Factors shown below. The requirements specified in the solicitation are considered to be minimum requirements. A more favorable evaluation rating may be given for exceeding the minimum requirements. Note: The relative importance of Evaluation Factors 1-4 is described below. All Evaluation Factors, other than cost or price, when combined, are approximately equal to cost or price.

EVALUATION FACTORS

Volume 1

Factor Order of Importance

00 22 00, Page 8

Factor 1 – Past Performance, Construction Most important Factor, more important than Factors 2, 3, and 4 individually.

Factor 2 – Technical Approach 2nd most important Factor, less important than Factor 1, equal to Factors 3, more important than Factor

Factor 3 – Offeror’s Key Personnel Equal importance to Factors 2. Less important than Factor 1, more important than Factor 4

Factor 4 – Small Business Participation Least important technical Factor

Volume 2

Factor Order of Importance Price and Pro Forma Information All Evaluation Factors, other than cost or price, when combined, are approximately equal to cost or price

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

7. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

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

a. Volume 1 shall consist of Factors 1 through 4 and be divided as follows:

00 22 00, Page 9

Factor Factor 1 - Past Performance, Construction

Factor 2 - Technical Approach

Factor 3 - Offeror’s Key Personnel

Factor 4 - Small Business Participation

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

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

SF 1442 (Reference Section 00 10 00)

Pricing Schedule (Reference Section 00 10 00)

Representations and Certifications (Reference Section 00 45 00)

Pre-Award Survey Information, as defined in Section 8.1

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

7.1. PREFACE

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

00 22 00, Page 10 exceed four (4) pages.

7.2. FACTOR 1 - PAST PERFORMANCE, CONSTRUCTION

7.2.1. Runway Construction Experience

7.2.1.1 Submission Requirements

The Offeror shall submit three (3) examples of construction projects which best illustrate the experience of the construction contractor on projects of similar function, scope, size, and complexity to the Repair Golf Taxiway, Ellsworth AFB, as described in this solicitation. Any of the three project examples may also be used by the Offeror to meet the specialized experience requirements described in paragraphs 7.2.2.1 a through e below and provide the necessary cross-reference as described in paragraph 7.2.2.1. No more than three (3) projects should be submitted with a three (3) page limit per project. Each project example should provide a narrative of the example project, discussing the project and providing specifics as noted herein. If a Joint Venture (JV) is proposing, provide examples for each prime contractor in the JV within the three project examples allowed.

Each project cited should have a construction dollar value equal to or greater than $4,000,000 and should have been completed within six (6) years from the date that the proposal for this project is due. A single Task Order dollar value equal to or greater than $4,000,000 and completed within six (6) years from the date that the proposal for this project is due is acceptable. Indefinite- Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts, where numerous Task Orders are summed to meet the minimum construction dollar value identified herein, are not acceptable.

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

Each construction project example narrative should include the following information:

Project title and location

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

Original contract award amount and final construction cost

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

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

Sub-contractors utilized on the project and if they are proposed to be utilized for the Ellsworth AFB Project

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

All project examples should contain a Point of Contact (POC) as well as one alternate Point of

00 22 00, Page 11

Contact, to include the name, job title, address, telephone, and e-mail address. The POC and alternate shall be familiar with the construction performance of the offeror and be a representative of the owner/customer, not affiliated with the offeror. The POC and alternate shall be able to verify the experience cited.

7.2.2. Specialized Experience

7.2.2.1. Submission Requirements

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

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

Areas of specialized experience below are listed in descending order of importance. Offerors shall not submit more than two (2) projects per area of specialized experience in paragraphs a through c below. Each project should contain no more than two (2) pages. Each project narrative should include a description of the experience noted in paragraphs a through c below, the role of the offeror on the project including whether prime or subcontractor; subcontractors used on the project and if they are proposed to be utilized on this project; and total dollar value of the overall project and the dollar value of the specialized work. The offeror may utilize project experience submitted under paragraph 7.2.1 for any specialized areas noted in paragraphs a through c below, by providing a cross-reference to the appropriate project in paragraph 7.2.1.

a. Airfield Pavement. Show experience constructing Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavement with a thickness of 15 inches or greater. Projects submitted for evaluation should each consist of at least 10,000 square yards (SY) of total paving area. The Contractor should demonstrate experience with slip-form paving, to include installation of dowel bars in hardened concrete. In addition, experience installing PCC airfield pavement joint seals (both field molded and preformed compression); grooving of PCC airfield pavements; and installing pavement markings on PCC airfield pavements should be demonstrated.

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

OTHER HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENTS.

c. Demolition. Show experience in demolition of Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavement with a thickness of 12 inches or greater. The Contractor shall demonstrate experience using the double

00 22 00, Page 12 saw cut method to initiate the removal of pavement slabs adjacent to other slabs that are to remain in place without damaging the existing slabs to remain.

7.2.3. CPARS

7.2.3.1. Submission Requirements

Submit past performance ratings for each project the Offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1 Construction Experience and Qualifications.

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

7.2.3.2. Obtaining Past Performance Record

Firms are requested to retrieve their CPARS past performance information directly from the Contractor Performance Assessment Rating System (CPARS) available at:

http://www.cpars.gov. CPARS is an electronic repository of performance information collected by all the major federal performance reporting systems. Logging onto CPARS will require the following:

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

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

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

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

If no CPARS ratings are available, submit other construction ratings and forms from other government entities or completed Attachment A – NAVFAC USACE Past Performance

00 22 00, Page 13

Questionnaire (PPQ) Form for each project without a CPARS rating. If no ratings are submitted, CPARS Ratings will be pulled by the government, if available, for the subcontractors and evaluated.

For each subcontractor proposed, include a one-page sheet identifying the subcontractor by name and the proposed role on this project, DUNS or CAGE number of the subcontractor followed by project example sheets, as described herein. Submit Subcontractor CPARS with DD Form 2626 or PPQ-O Form completed by the Government for any of their projects that they submit.

If past performance ratings for subcontractor work is only available under the Prime Contractor on work they performed, submit the Prime Contractor Past Performance Assessment report for which their performance may be assessed along with DUNS and CAGE number of the Prime Contractor they worked for (identify subcontractor, if submitting Prime Contractor Performance Assessment report for subcontractor).

7.2.4. Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

7.2.4.1. Submission Requirements

The Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment A) is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client. The Past Performance Questionnaire should be completed by an owner or owner’s representative not affiliated with your firm. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact.

Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment A), which will provide contract and client Information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, via email at Jae.H.Chang@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 from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

7.2.5. Government Utilization of Alternate Information Sources for Past Performance

The Government will assess the past performance on projects submitted under the Factor 1, Construction Experience and Qualifications and reserves the right to conduct telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the proposal or to review personal knowledge. In addition, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance of the Offeror on the submitted projects and any other previous work. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror's proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

00 22 00, Page 14

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

Offeror shall not have received any overall “red - unacceptable” performance ratings for military and/or commercial airfield construction projects involving runway; parking apron; or taxiway pavement for fixed-wing aircraft within the last five years.

7.2.6. Evaluation

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

Evaluation will be based on the project example narratives and other requested information provided in the offeror’s proposal. Higher evaluation ratings will be given for project examples which are similar in function, scope, size, and complexity to this project and clearly demonstrate a contractor’s capabilities to construct a project of this nature, and execute the project successfully while containing costs and maintaining schedule. Projects submitted which demonstrate experience in construction of Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) airfield pavement 15-inch thick or greater will be rated more favorably. Projects meeting or exceeding the $4 million criteria in Paragraph 7.2.1 will be rated higher than those not meeting the minimum.

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

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

Lower evaluation ratings will be given for those project examples not meeting the minimum SY of Airfield Pavement for PCC identified above. Higher evaluation ratings will be given for those project examples which are similar in function, scope, size, and complexity to this project and clearly demonstrate subcontractor capabilities to construct a project of this nature, and execute the project successfully while containing costs and maintaining schedule. Any specialized experience performed by the Prime will be evaluated more favorably. Subcontractors that have previously worked with the proposed prime contractor(s) will be evaluated more favorably.

Projects which are relevant and similar and utilize personnel that will be used on the Repair Golf Taxiway, Ellsworth AFB project will be evaluated more favorably. Those subcontractors that include military construction projects will be rated more favorably.

The evaluation of past performance will examine how well offerors have performed on previous projects considering such criteria as quality, customer satisfaction, management/personnel labor, and safety/security with emphasis on quality, timeliness, and adherence to schedule.

This Factor will be evaluated using the Relevancy Rating and the Confidence Rating. The relevancy rating is not a separate proposal rating but is only used in developing an overall past

00 22 00, Page 15 performance confidence assessment rating assigned to the Past Performance Factor as indicated in para 5e(2).

Higher evaluation ratings will be awarded for “Exceptional (Outstanding)” performance. In descending order, lower ratings may be given for past performance of “Exceptional”, “Very Good (Above Average)”, “Satisfactory”, “Marginal”, and “Unsatisfactory” Performance on projects that show significant cost and/or time growth due to factors within the control of the offeror may be rated less favorably. If an offeror has no past performance ratings that can be obtained from the submitted CPARS, Other Government, PPQ or other sources available to the Government or references cited in Factor 1 – Construction Experience and Qualifications, a neutral rating will be given. The Government may, at its discretion, contact references cited to verify the information contained therein. The Government will evaluate the relative merits of each offeror's past performance. The Government reserves the right to consider all aspects of an offeror's performance history, but will attribute more significance to work that was similar in nature, magnitude, and complexity to this project.

7.3. FACTOR 2 TECHNICAL APPROACH

7.3.1. Submission Requirements

Based on your understanding of the RFP requirements, describe the technical approach you will take to address the unique challenges, opportunities, and constraints inherent to this project (i.e. work delays, scheduling, working on an active runway, equipment height restrictions, etc.). The submission for this factor may not exceed ten (10) pages, including explanatory drawings, excluding bar chart schedule. Provide a bar chart schedule (may not exceed four pages) on your plan for completing the work based on an arbitrary estimated, non-binding Contract Notice to Proceed date of 2 May 2022 and Contract Completion date of 3 Nov 2023.

The preliminary schedule shall reflect the following:

1. Upon receipt of Contract Notice to Proceed, the contractor will be permitted to begin certain construction activities as approved by USACE.

2. The contractor will not be allowed to begin demolition of concrete until approval of PCC mix design;

demolition shall not commence until 1 May 2023 unless an earlier date is requested by the prime contractor and approved by the Contracting Office

This schedule shall be considered the preliminary project schedule per specification Section 01 32 01.00 10

PROJECT SCHEDULE.

Note: Per Section 01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE, the initial project schedule shall be submitted for approval the day Contract Notice to Proceed is issued which shall be assumed to be 2 May 2022 Provide a bar chart schedule (may not exceed four pages) on your plan for completing the work based on an arbitrary estimated, non-binding Contract Notice to Proceed date of 1 May 2023 and Contract Completion date of 3 Nov 2023. This schedule shall be considered the preliminary project schedule per specification Section 01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE. Note: Per Section 01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE, the initial project schedule shall be submitted for approval the day Construction Notice to Proceed is issued which shall be assumed to be 1 May 20236 June 2022. Include major work milestones and scheduled activities (i.e. Non-Work Periods, Pavement Workshop, Order of Work restrictions and any other activity that will affect schedule as identified on the Construction drawings and Section 01 30 00 .24 OTHER ADMINSTRATIVE AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS.) Present a narrative to

00 22 00, Page 16 describe your technical solution for this project, specifically citing the process and major equipment used for construction of airfield pavement, discussion of the batch plant required to produce concrete for the project, how subcontractors will be managed, how supplies and materials will be managed (i.e. source and location of all aggregates for concrete and asphalt proposed for use in this project), and your schedule development and methods to be utilized and to keep the project on schedule, including responsibilities for schedule development and updates.

This portion of the factor shall also address mitigation of delays due to unforeseen conditions or events and methods to recover time to complete the scheduled work with the contract duration.

Proposed equipment shall be consistent with requirements of Section 32 13 14.13 CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR AIRFIELDS AND OTHER HEAVY DUTY PAVEMENTS of the…