09R0015-SPECS-AM1.PDF

US ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, PHILADELPHIA

POC:MICHELLE L. JOHNSON

WANAMAKER BLDG

100 PENN SQUARE EAST

PHILADELPHIA PA 19107-3390

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 PROPOSAL RECEIPT DATE OF 2:00 P.M., LOCAL TIME, ON JULY 21, 2009 IS NOT EXTENDED.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

U 1

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

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 W912BU-09-R-0015

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

3-June-2009

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 is extended, X 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 0 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) Armed Forces Medical Examiners System Facility, Dover Air Force Base, Dover, Delaware

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

1-July-2009

CODE

US ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, PHILADELPHIA

CONTRACTING DIVISION

WANAMAKER BUILDING

100 PENN SQUARE EAST

PHILADELPHIA PA 19107-3390

W912BU 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE E5CTCMLJ

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

This page was intentionally left blank for duplex printing.

Amendment No. 0001

Request for Proposals

W912BU-09-R-0015

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT (continued)

a. VOLUME 1 OF 2:

(1) Section 00815 WAGE RATES: Please delete this section in its entirety and substitute the revised section, annotated Amendment No. 0001, attached hereto.

(2) Sections 00120 PROPOSAL SUBMSSION REQUIREMENTS EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS OF AWARD ONE STEP – BEST VALUE, DESIGN BUILD: Please delete this section in its entirety and substitute the revised section, annotated Amendment No.

0001, attached hereto.

b. Please indicate receipt of this amendment on Standard Form 1442 (SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD) as Amendment No. 0001. Failure to acknowledge all amendments may be cause for rejection of the bid.

This page was intentionally left blank for duplex printing.

RFP W912BU-09-R-0015

Section 00120 Page 1

SECTION 00120

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS EVALUATION CRITERIA

AND BASIS OF AWARD

ONE STEP – BEST VALUE, DESIGN BUILD

1.0 OVERVIEW

The Government will evaluate proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria and the evaluation rating system described herein. Price information will be evaluated for fairness, reasonableness, and for material unbalancing, also as described herein. The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

2.1. The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed-price contract to that responsible Offeror whose proposal the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, considering the non-price factors described herein, and price. All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are considered significantly more important than the price. However, Offerors are reminded that the Contract award shall not exceed the cost limitation described in Section 00700 CONTRACT CLAUSES for this project. The intent of this solicitation is to obtain the best proposal within the cost limitation. There is no obligation to approach or match the cost limitation in the offer. After the Government individually evaluates and rates each proposal, the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority will compare proposals to determine which proposal represents the best value. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers. The Government will not award a contract to an Offeror whose proposal contains a deficiency, as defined in FAR 15.001.

If there is a lower priced, conforming offer(s), the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Official must determine that the added value of a more expensive proposal (within the cost limitation) would justify award to that Offeror.

2.2. As part of the evaluation, the Government will evaluate

betterments in proposals relative to the minimum standards in the RFP to determine if they offer additional value to the Government. In addition, innovations in proposals will be evaluated to determine if creative ideas of the Offeror are a better value to the Government compared to the minimum criteria.

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

3.1 Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms from a price and technical standpoint. Do not assume that Offerors will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss or revise their proposals.

Section 00120 Page 2

3.2. Firms formally organized as design-build entities, design firms and construction contractors that have associated specifically for this project, consortia of firms or any other interested parties may submit proposals. Associations may be as joint ventures or as key team subcontractors. Any legally organized Offeror may submit a proposal, provided that the Offeror or Offeror's subcontractor has or will have professional architects and engineers, registered in the appropriate technical disciplines and provided that the requirements specified in Contract clause, "Requirements for Registration of Designers", are met.

All designs must be under the direct supervision of appropriately licensed professionals for each discipline involved.

3.3. Submit proposals in five (5), tabbed, three-ring binders. One binder for each Volume indicated in paragraph 4.1 below.

3.4 Page Limits: The page limits indicated in paragraph 4.1 shall apply. These page limits do not include title sheets, indices, tables of content, schedules, required Attachment sheets (at end of this section), or cover sheets. This page limit includes pages with illustrations/ photos/sketches. Any evaluation documentation beyond the page limits indicated will not be read or considered during the evaluation process.

A page printed on both sides will be counted as two pages. Pages containing text shall be submitted on 8-1/2 x 11 inch paper. Each page shall be minimally single spaced with a minimum of a 12-point font and one inch margins all around.

4.0 PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS, SUBFACTORS AND

ELEMENTS

4.1 VOLUME 1 – TECHNICAL

Factor/Sub Factor

Location

Description

Relative Importance

Page Limits

FACTOR 1 TECHNICAL Most Important

Subfactor

Vol. 1 TAB A Quality of Building Systems and Materials

Most Important

Vol. 1 TAB B Sustainability Requirements

Slightly less important than Subfactor 1.

Section 00120 Page 3

4.2 VOLUME 2 – PERFORMANCE RISK

Factor/ Sub

FACTOR 2 Vol. 2 PERFORMANCE RISK Slightly less

Factor 1.

Vol. 2 TAB A Specialized Experience

Most Important Subfactor.

Vol. 2 TAB B Design-Build Team Slightly less

Subfactor 1.

Vol. 2 TAB C Summary Schedule Slightly less important than Subfactor 2.

Equal to Subfactors 4 and 5.

No limit.

Vol. 2 TAB D Organization/Tech nical Approach

Slightly less important than Subfactor 2.

Equal to Subfactors 3 and 5.

Vol. 2 TAB E Key Personnel Capabilities and Experience

Slightly less important than Subfactor 2.

Equal to Subfactors 3 and 4.

Section 00120 Page 4

4.3 VOLUME 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

FACTOR

Vol. 3 PAST PERFORMANCE Slightly less

Factor 2.

4.4 VOLUME 4 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

FACTOR

Vol. 4 TAB A

Price (Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Bid Schedules)

Slightly less

Factor 3.

N/A

Vol. 4 TAB B

Evidence of Bondability

Not Rated

N/A

Vol. 4 TAB C

Required Pre- Award Information

Not Rated

N/A Vol. 4 TAB D Subcontracting Plan

GO/NO-GO

4.5 VOLUME 5 – SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION

FACTOR

Vol 5

SMALL BUSINESS

UTILIZATION

Slightly less

Factor 4.

Section 00120 Page 5

5.0 VOLUME 1 – FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL

5.1. GENERAL: The Technical Factor consists of technical approach narratives and information regarding material and system quality. It must clearly define the proposed scope and quality levels that the design-build team is offering to the Government in enough detail for the Government and the Offeror to mutually understand whether or not the proposal meets or exceeds the minimum Solicitation requirements. Fully developed drawings, details, or specifications are not desired or required. The Offeror shall identify what it considers to be Betterments in its proposal for Subfactor 1 (See Section 00800, Special Clauses “Proposed Betterments“).

5.2. VOLUME 1 - TAB A – SUBFACTOR 1 - QUALITY OF BUILDING SYSTEMS AND

MATERIALS

5.2.1 Submission Requirements:

5.2.1.1. Presentation Drawings

(a) There are no specific drawings requirements for this Subfactor.

However, the Offeror has the option of providing concept level drawing information for specific materials and/or systems which the Offeror feels are necessary to describe the proposed systems or materials.

5.2.1.2. Technical Approach Narratives:

Provide technical approach narratives, both qualitative and quantitative, defining the elements of the proposal. It is acceptable to include all the sub-items shown below into a single combined narrative for the entire facility. It is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that all aspects identified in the evaluation criteria below are addressed. Whether individual narratives or a single combined narrative is provided, the maximum total length for narratives shall be ten (10) typewritten pages.

(a) Architectural Finishes: Describe how the materials selected provide for a suitable environment for the expected population of the facility. Discuss how these selections provide value to the Government and how they address the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Narrative should focus on aesthetics, durability and maintenance of the finishes proposed.

(b) Furniture Systems: Not Used.

(c) Mechanical Systems: Describe how the mechanical systems selected provide for a highly efficient environmental control system. Discuss how these selections provide value to the Government and how they

Section 00120 Page 6 address the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Narrative should focus on maintenance considerations, limiting energy consumption, and suitability of the proposed systems for the expected usage.

(d) Plumbing Systems: Describe how the plumbing systems selected provide for a highly efficient domestic hot water system and an efficient piping system. Discuss how these selections provide value to the Government and how they address the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Narrative should focus on maintenance considerations, energy consumption, and suitability of the proposed systems for the expected usage.

(e) Electrical Systems: Describe how the electrical power and lighting systems, telephone, and data systems selected provide for a highly efficient electrical system. Discuss how these selections provide value to the Government and how they address the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Narrative should focus on maintenance considerations, energy consumption, and suitability of the proposed systems for the expected usage.

(f) Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection (AT/FP) Considerations: Describe how the proposed materials, systems, and designs address the mandatory building AT/FP requirements included in the Statement of Work.

(g) Site Utilities and Site Systems: Describe how the site utility systems selected provide for an efficient piping system. Discuss how these selections provide value to the Government and how they address the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Narrative should focus on maintenance considerations and suitability of the proposed systems for the expected usage. Include information regarding coordination with privatized utility providers where applicable.

(h) Interoperability. Describe how critical building systems will communicate with each other to maintain a fully operational facility 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, and 365 days a year.

(i) Energy Conservation: Describe the strategy to achieve Energy Policy Act 2005 (30% energy savings over ASHRAE 90.1) in the proposed project.

5.2.1.3. Proposed Material Identifications: In order to evaluate and rate the quality of the materials being proposed, including any material or equipment warranties exceeding the one year warranty in the contract clause “Warranty of Construction”, the Offeror shall include in the proposal material identification for major materials in each of the areas shown below. Provide this information in tabular form supported by catalog information and/or on the color boards as applicable, including warranties. Table should include manufacturer’s name, model number, length of warranty, size/capacity (where available), efficiency (where applicable), and any other notes or information selected by the Offeror. The Government will evaluate and consider materials and equipment proposed by brand name and model number as a quality standard.

Unless substitution of a manufacturer, brand name or model is otherwise

Section 00120 Page 7 specifically prohibited in the contract, if the successful Offeror desires to substitute manufacturers, brand names or models after award, the substituted product must meet the contract requirements and be approved by the designer of record and the Government as equal in function, performance, quality and salient features to that initially proposed. Acceptance of the proposal is not a guarantee that the proposed products meet the contractual requirements.

(a) Architectural Finishes:

• Interior Walls

• Floors

• Ceilings

• Exterior Walls

• Any Special Features

• Hardware systems (not individual hardware sets)

• Door systems/types (not individual doors)

• Window systems/types (not individual windows)

• Roofing Systems

(b) Furniture Systems: Not Used

(c) Mechanical Systems:

• Central Heating/Cooling Equipment

• Pumps

• Air Handling Equipment

• HVAC System Control Equipment

• Energy Conservation Features

(d) Plumbing Systems:

• Fixtures

• Domestic Hot Water Generator

• Water Purification Systems

(e) Electrical Systems:

• Lighting Fixtures

• Main Switchgear and Panels

• Data, Telephone, Intercom, CCTV, or Other Special Systems as Identified in the SOW

5.2.1.4. Provide a list of quality improvements that are above the minimum stated within the performance specifications. Develop the following table, or similar, to identify quality betterments.

Improved Quality

Concise description of improved quality

Feature is included within the Construction Cost Limitation – YES/NO

Arch.

Finishes

Section 00120 Page 8

Etc.

5.2.2. Evaluation Criteria:

5.2.2.1. General: It is the objective that these buildings will have a 25-year useful design life before a possible reuse/repurpose or renovation requirement, to include normal sustainment, restoration, modernization activities and a 50-year building replacement life.

Within that overriding theme the Government will evaluate the Offeror selected systems and components proposed in terms of warranties provided, maintenance considerations (frequency, estimated cost, access, equipment locations), operability (ease of use, placement of control features, simplicity), durability (withstand usage, ease of cleaning), sustainability, and energy consumption (HVAC, lighting, power). The minimum acceptable level of quality for finishes and materials for these buildings are those materials suitable for the expected population and usage. Residential or similar grade finishes and materials are not acceptable for inclusion in these buildings.

5.2.2.2. Items identified as “desirable” or “preferred” would be considered betterments during the evaluation process, provided that they are included within the contract cost limitation identified in the Solicitation. Betterments are not limited to those specific items. The Government encourages the Offeror place emphasis on those design features which optimize and emphasize functional/operational requirements; interior finishes and systems; and life cycle/ energy efficiency. The Offeror may choose the lowest “Type of Construction” allowed by the Building Code for this occupancy/project and put the money into durable finishes and efficient systems. Unsubstantiated claims or narrative information will not be given evaluation credit during the evaluations. The following items will be considered in the evaluation of the building systems and materials of the various facilities (these are not subfactors):

(a) Architectural Finishes:

Satisfactory proposals include finishes which provide usable spaces for the intended purposes. Proposals will receive additional consideration for materials offered that include extended warranties, longer life expectancies, sustainability, durability (stand up to usage), have low maintenance requirements, and enhance the overall life cycle cost efficiency of the facility. Specific examples of desirable features:

solid wood cabinetry; solid surface counter tops; ceramic tile (in appropriate areas).

(b) Architectural Components and Systems:

Satisfactory proposals include components and systems that provide the basic function necessary. Proposals will receive additional consideration for components and systems offered that include extended warranties, longer life expectancies, sustainability, durability (stand

Section 00120 Page 9 up to usage), have low maintenance requirements, and enhance the overall life cycle cost efficiency of the facility. Specific examples of desirable features: 25 year non-pro-rated, no-leak roof warranty; high efficiency windows and doors.

(c) Furniture Systems: Not Used

(d) Mechanical Components and Systems:

Satisfactory proposals include components and systems that provide the basic environmental control function necessary. Proposals will receive additional consideration for components and systems offered that include extended warranties, longer life expectancies, reduce energy consumption, sustainability, maintainability (cyclical maintenance, access, equipment placement), and enhance the overall life cycle cost efficiency of the facility. Specific examples of desirable features:

energy recovery systems; sheet metal ductwork systems; exhaust air heat recovery systems; high efficiency central equipment (i.e. 0.5 kW/ton chillers, variable speed pumping and air handlers, etc.)

(e) Plumbing Components and Systems:

Satisfactory proposals include components and systems that provide the basic function necessary. Proposals will receive additional consideration for components and systems offered that include extended warranties, longer life expectancies, sustainability, durability (stand up to usage), have low maintenance requirements, and enhance the overall life cycle cost efficiency of the facility. Specific examples of desirable features: lifetime domestic hot water storage tank warranty;

high efficiency equipment; easy/local availability of replacement/repair parts; zoned/valved sub-systems to allow repair without building shutdown.

(f) Electrical Components and Systems:

Satisfactory proposals include components and systems that provide the basic function necessary. Proposals will receive additional consideration for components and systems offered that include extended warranties, longer life expectancies, sustainability, durability (stand up to troop usage), have low maintenance requirements, and enhance the overall life cycle cost efficiency of the facility. Specific examples of desirable features: high efficiency lighting fixtures; all copper conductors; provision of spare capacity for future loads; additional telephone/data/ outlets; ceiling fans.

(g) AT/FP Considerations: This consideration verifies the inclusion/compliance with the building related AT/FP minimum standard constraints included in the Statement of Work. All proposals must be compliant with the AT/FP requirements of the Statement of Work to be considered for award. Satisfactory proposals are compliant with all AT/FP requirements.

(h) Site Utilities Components and Site Systems:

Satisfactory proposals include components and systems that provide the basic function necessary. Proposals will receive additional consideration for components and systems offered that include extended

Section 00120 Page 10 warranties, longer life expectancies, sustainability, have low maintenance requirements, and enhance the overall life cycle cost efficiency of the facility. Specific examples of desirable features:

corrosion resistance; valves for isolation/repair of fluid systems;

placement to allow future replacement/maintenance without significant impact to other systems or access to facilities.

(i) Interoperability: Fire Alarm, Telephone, UMCS, and privatized utility systems (where applicable) must be integrated into the new facilities which require connection and interface with existing installation-wide systems must be accommodated in the proposed project.

(j) Energy Conservation: Proposals will receive a satisfactory rating if they describe a feasible strategy to achieve 30% energy savings over ASHRAE Standard 90.1 in the proposed project.

5.3. VOLUME 1 - TAB B - SUBFACTOR 2 - SUSTAINABILITY REQUIREMENTS

5.3.1. Submission Requirements:

The Offeror shall acknowledge that it understands the contract requirements for sustainable design and construction and that the final project will be certifiable to a LEED Silver rating. “Certifiable” means that this project has been designed for, and shall be developed for a sustainable rating of silver in accordance with LEED Version 2.2. The project has been registered with USGBC under LEED Version 2.2.

Validation of credits earned will be accomplished by the Government. The Offeror shall submit LEED Project Checklist demonstrating how it will achieve the Silver LEED rating. If the Offeror proposes a higher LEED rating than silver, the proposal shall describe whether or not it involves additional costs and clearly indicate if such costs would detract from higher rated factors herein, such as functionality, quality of materials and systems, site work, etc.

5.3.2. Evaluation Criteria:

All requirements identified as mandatory elsewhere in the Solicitation must be included and the proposal must meet the requirements of the LEED-NC requirements for a Silver rating. The Government will provide additional evaluation consideration for proposals which include LEED points identified as preferred. The Government does not desire to pay more to attain a higher LEED rating, such as Gold, if the additional cost would detract from the higher rated factors, herein.

6.0 VOLUME 2 – FACTOR 2 – PERFORMANCE RISK

6.1 VOLUME 2 – TAB A - SUBFACTOR 1 – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

6.1.1. Submission Requirements:

6.1.1.1. The Offeror shall select the design firm(s) and key

subcontractors for electrical and mechanical installation, (or prime contractor if design and/or electrical and mechanical work is to be self-performed). Also identify general subcontractors, if any of the facility types are to be subcontracted out and describe the extent of

Section 00120 Page 11 their involvement in the project. The prime contractor and the design firm(s) (or prime contract if design is to be self-performed) shall each demonstrate recent, relevant experience on similar projects, Construction - Specialized Experience Form (Attachment 1), Designer – Specialized Experience Form (Attachment 2), and Key Subcontractor - Specialized Experience Form (Attachment 3) at the end of the section.

Offerors may identify state and local government and private contracts that are similar to the Government's requirements. If the Offeror is a joint venture, each firm shall provide information, demonstrating experience relevant to their role on this project. Submit projects selected from those discussed in the experience narrative that are currently well underway (designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or completed and turned over no longer that five (5) years preceding the date of this Solicitation. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division or unit submitting the offer or by the team member. Design firms may list prime contractors they have worked for or government, private or commercial customers. If projects were design-build, so identify them. The prime contractor and the design firm(s) shall each submit a minimum of three (3), and no more that five (5), projects for the following facility types or their equivalent or similar commercial or institutional type:

• Facilities requiring complex level of physical and operational coordination of plumbing, HVAC, fire protection, and electrical systems similar in scope to this project.

• Forensics Laboratories of the type required for this project.

6.1.1.2. The Offeror may provide a supplemental narrative (not project lists), not to exceed two pages, explaining how any current experience that is not directly related to the specific projects above is applicable to this project and how the Government will benefit. The following information may be considered.

6.1.2. Evaluation Criteria:

6.1.2.1. The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, related experience of the prime contractor, design firm(s) and key subcontractors in design, construction or design-build, as relevant to their role on this project. If the design will be accomplished in-house, rather than by subcontract, then the design element of specialized experience will still be evaluated, realizing that the work is being done in-house. Experience on the similar projects identified in the project lists will receive more consideration than experience provided in the supplemental narrative. The Government may place greater importance on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor, depending upon overall role and relevancy considerations.

Federal Government project experience will not be rated inherently more important than non-Federal Government project experience. (Note: After award, the Section 00800 Special Clauses - Paragraph “Key Personnel, Subcontractors and Outside Consultants” will apply to the selection, which establishes the minimum quality standard. No substitution will be allowed without adequate reason and possible consideration to the

Section 00120 Page 12

Government.)

6.1.2.2. The Offeror must submit the requested information to demonstrate a record of recent, related experience in both design and construction, for the facility types (which may include similar state or local government or private counterparts) included in this contract.

Recent experience includes projects well underway (see above criteria) or those completed and turned over within five (5) years of the proposal issue date for this RFP for design or construction experience. Joint Venture partners should each demonstrate experience commensurate with their role on this project or explain in the supplemental narrative how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project.

6.1.2.3. The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing the Corps of Engineers Construction Contractor (or Architect-Engineer) Appraisal Support System (CCASS/ACASS), other DOD or Government appraisal systems or to interview owners or references. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

6.1.2.4. To receive credit for extent (amount) of experience, the Offeror and its proposed design firm(s) shall demonstrate a history of recent, relevant experience. A firm will not receive credit under this factor for the relevant experience of key personnel proposed for this project.

6.1.2.5. The Government will consider extent of recent experience, degree of relationship of such experience to this project, and demonstrated familiarity with applicable codes and local conditions.

Some examples of relevancy to this project may include, but not be limited to: (1) Number, size, type work, complexity, location (2) Dates (well under way or completed no more than 5 years preceding date of Solicitation) (3) Firm's role and extent of work self-performed (brokering out all work and simply "pouring the sidewalks" on a cited project are examples of less relevant experience)

6.1.2.6. The Government may consider previous D-B experience a strength, even if the experience is on different type projects than this project.

6.1.2.7. The firm(s) preparing the design must demonstrate

qualifications and experience in sustainable design and development and design, based on project experience on projects that have achieved US Green Building Council's LEED certification or project experience on completed Corps of engineers design-build projects that were validated as having achieving LEED silver rating or were certifiable at LEED silver or better for an acceptable rating. Additional consideration will be given if both the constructor and the design firm(s) demonstrate qualifications and experience on LEED.

6.2 VOLUME 2 – TAB B - SUBFACTOR 2 – DESIGN-BUILD TEAM

6.2.1. Submission Requirements

Section 00120 Page 13

The Offeror should describe any previous teaming experience between proposed team members. if not described in the project list. Describe team members' experience on similar facility type and on LEED projects, if not included on the project list. The above information is limited to projects that are well underway or that have been completed and turned over no longer than the past five years preceding the date of this solicitation.

6.2.2 Evaluation Criteria:

The Government may consider previous recent teaming experience among the team members as value added, even if on different type design and/or construction projects than this project. The more relevant the experience, the more credit will be given.

6.3 VOLUME 2 – TAB C – SUBFACTOR 3 - SUMMARY SCHEDULE

6.3.1. Submission Requirements:

6.3.1.1. The contract duration is as specified in Section 00800 SC-1.

6.3.1.2. Submit a preliminary summary level schedule for integrated design and construction. Schedules or diagrams may be provided separately in a size that is easily read, but shall be bound and clearly labeled as Tab C. The preliminary schedule will, after contract award, be replaced with a final schedule as required by Section 01 32 01 Project Schedule. The summary schedule shall be task oriented, indicating the number of calendar days, after notice to proceed, by which milestones are to be achieved. Offeror may use a critical path or other method of his choice; however, schedules shall be graphically represented. The proposed project schedule shall reflect the required contract duration. Give attention to the following features:

(a) Provide a narrative, describing the design packaging plan for separate design packages, based on the Offeror’s plan for fast tracking.

Describe all design and construction to be “fast-tracked” (See Section 01 33 16: Design After Award). If long lead item equipment must be ordered prior to completion of a design phase, describe the requirement in the narrative and show the required ordering date in the schedule.

(b) Show the design phase, including events associated with coordinating the interim and final design submittals for each package and the proper handling of the review comments for each design package (See Section 01 33 16: Design After Award).

(c) Show the overall construction phase for the facility, for the site work, and for utilities. Show fast track starts for the design package.

(d) Show turnover of the facility. Identify any proposed phased turnovers. The time to complete the facility and turnover to the Government must consider the requirement for the Contractor’s CQC completion inspection and the subsequent joint Contractor-Government turnover inspection.

Section 00120 Page 14

(e) Show as-built submissions (See Section 01 78 02 Closeout Submittals).

(f) Constraints: Offeror must demonstrate the capability and flexibility to plan and schedule the complete project to meet the proposed contract completion period. Clearly identify any constraints on the schedule presented (e.g., labor or material availability, permits, weather, etc.). Indicate the anticipated overall critical path on the schedule.

6.3.2. Evaluation Criteria:

6.3.2.1. Proposed Contract Duration: This duration will become the contractually binding completion period. The Government will evaluate the contract duration, as proposed by the Offeror in the Contract Line Item Schedule, with construction completion required by April 30, 2011.

In assessing the reasonableness of the proposed contract duration, the Government may take into account how well the proposed summary schedule supports the proposed duration, as well as use other information, such as but not limited to independent judgment concerning logic, constraints and typical construction durations. The Government will rate a proposed contract duration matching the maximum allowed contract duration as “satisfactory.” A proposed contract duration shorter than the maximum allowed duration will receive additional rating consideration, provided it is realistic and deemed to be achievable. The Government will consider an unreasonably condensed contract duration, which places additional cost or schedule risk on the Government or which may create a risk of contract or performance failure, as a significant weakness or a deficiency, depending upon the evaluators' judgment. During the subsequent comparison between proposals, differences between proposed contract durations of at least three weeks (differences of 21 calendar days between proposals) will be considered an advantage to the Government, with greater differences also considered, accordingly. No advantage will be considered between proposals for differences less than 21 calendar days.

6.3.2.1. Summary Schedule: The Government will evaluate the summary schedule for integrated design and construction. The length of the schedule must match the required contract duration. If it is shorter than the required contract duration, it offers no advantage to the Government because it is non-binding, only representing a preliminary planned schedule. A schedule shorter than the required contract duration may indicate the Offeror is placing additional risk on the Government for any delays between the scheduled completion date and the required contract completion period. Both parties shall assume field overhead costs are included in the contract price for the full proposed contract duration. Therefore, the Government believes that there is no valid need to shorten the schedule less than the full required contract duration. The Government will evaluate the schedule to assess the strength of understanding of the project scope, restrictions which must be considered in the schedule e.g., permitting, long lead items, etc.

The Government will evaluate the strength of understanding of events associated with coordinating design submittals, reviews and

Section 00120 Page 15 incorporating review comments, the Offeror's capability to schedule the complete project within the required contract duration and the realism of the schedule. The Government will evaluate the design packaging plan for logic, reasonableness, how it facilitates meeting the required contract duration and how it facilitates the Government’s ability to timely perform its design reviews. The packaging plan should minimize risk to the Contractor and to the Government for tear-out and coordination for reviews. For example, is the footing and foundation plan based on adequate design for building loads; etc.? A schedule that offers advantage(s) to the Government over one that merely indicates an adequate understanding of the scope, restrictions, major milestones and general understanding of the various events that can affect start and completion of construction will receive additional consideration.

6.4. VOLUME 2 - TAB D - SUBFACTOR 4 - ORGANIZATION/TECHNICAL APPROACH

6.4.1. Submission Requirements:

6.4.1.1. Provide information that describes the Offeror's organization and intended technical approach to executing the design-build contract per the detailed requirements herein. Demonstrate an understanding of the risk management process associated with design-build process. Limit the information to fifteen pages or less clearly but concisely describe the organizational and technical approach to project management and execution.

6.4.1.2. Organization. Describe what firms, their resources and how their resources will be utilized, their roles and responsibilities and any contractual arrangements that have been established. Clearly describe any teaming or joint venture arrangements, including a clear description of each firm's roles and responsibilities on the project. A copy of the teaming or joint venture agreement(s) may be appended to the plan (not included in the page limitation). Include a simple organizational chart, illustrating the organization, including the proposed quality control group(s). Present a matrix of responsibilities for each firm in executing the key work breakdown structure activities of the project, including design and construction activities for each major feature (i.e., site work, utilities and building). Identify the design firm(s) chosen for the project, if not to be self-performed.

Identify the specific firms chosen as key subcontractors for mechanical and electrical installation. If the Offeror intends to subcontract out to a general contractor, identify the General Contractor. The Offeror shall document unequivocal teaming arrangements with its design firms(s) and key subcontractors (See Attachment 9). Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing the how the design and construction process will be managed and the authorities and the delegations of authority within the team Include a key personnel organization chart that clearly depicts the key positions and the names of the personnel, their firm affiliations and their job locations, their job/position title within the organization. The key personnel organization chart shall be consistent with the corporate organization chart, with the matrix of responsibilities assigned to the D-B team firms, and with the list of key personnel to be provided under the Tab, Section 00120 Page 16

"KEY PERSONNEL CAPABILITIES AND EXPERIENCE".

6.4.1.3. Technical Approach for Design and Construction. Describe the technical approach to design and construction of these facilities.

Include any considerations of fast-tracking design and construction, panelized construction, pre-engineered components or buildings, factory built modules or assemblies, tilt-up, pre-cast parts, standard designs stick-built framing, etc. The Government is looking for ways to streamline construction, manage labor and other resource constraints in an effort to reduce costs and achieve an aggressive schedule.

6.4.1.4. Collaborative Approach for Design-build. Describe interactions within the team and with the Corps of Engineers during the design.

Discuss how the configuration management system will track and control design evolution and changes during design for quality control and to facilitate quicker Government reviews. Describe the role of the construction team members during design. Describe the type of Building Information Modeling (BIM) system to be used on the project (See Section 01 33 16 and Attachment F of that Document for CADD/BIM requirements and for Contractor Electives for additional consideration, as described below in the evaluation criteria) and how the team intends to develop and use the model. Describe the role and interaction of the design team with the construction team during construction, addressing, as a minimum, maintaining configuration management of the design during construction, including control and approval of revisions to the accepted design; requests for information; shop drawing and submittal reviews and approvals; progress meetings; site visits, if any; contract completion, closeout, as-built and completion documentation.

6.4.1.5. Planning and Scheduling. Describe the time control capabilities and systems to be used to plan design and construction and how the schedule will be used to manage design and construction. Discuss internal procedures for handling delays to minimize time growth and "schedule creep".

6.4.1.6. Self-Performed Work: Generally describe the items the Offeror will self-perform to comply with the requirements in Section 00800 for self-performed work.

6.4.1.7. Quality Control. Describe the team's quality control approach, corporate systems and capabilities to maintain quality control of the design and construction. Describe the proposed quality control organization, including the proposed staffing plan. There is no need to submit a quality control plan as the successful Offeror will provide that after award. The Government is interested in demonstrable capabilities to assure and control quality and how the Offeror can achieve or exceed the contract's minimum quality control system requirements. In addition to the required designer-of-record roles specified within the RFP for maintaining integrity of the design, describe any other DOR involvement in the quality control process, if any.

6.4.2. Evaluation Criteria

Section 00120 Page 17

6.4.2.1. The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the plan. The Government will evaluate the firm's understanding of D-B (and the requirements in described in the Division 01 requirements of the Solicitation) and the capability to execute the project. Some additional specific evaluation considerations are listed below. This list is not all-inclusive.

6.4.2.2. Organization. The Government will evaluate the clarity and strength of the overall organization and how well it is organized, structured and staffed to execute the entire scope of work. This subfactor will be rated as unsatisfactory, if the Offeror has not selected and committed to use its design firm(s). Joint venture participants' contribution to the organization should be commensurate with their skills and background.

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

6.4.2.4. Collaborative Approach for Design-Build. The use of on-dimensional (3D) Building Information Model (BIM) technology in the design process is considered a strength. The BIM requirements are described in Section 01 33 16, "Design After Award.” The Government will evaluate the integration of the design and construction firms and the staff during design and construction. The constructor must be actively involved in the design process, not just leaving it up to the designer (see Special Contract Requirement (SCR: "Constructor's role during Design''}. The Offeror must have an effective configuration management system to control and track revisions to the design. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's understanding of the design process and the roles of the designers of record and the Government reviewers. The Government will evaluate the role of the designer in maintaining design integrity throughout the process, including its key roles during construction. The Government places greater value in collaborative development of the Building Information Model as early as possible during the design and construction process. Additional consideration will be given to a team that includes as many subcontractors as possible (e.g., the key subs for electrical and mechanical, the fire protection subcontractor, fabricators, etc.) during design development, prior to release of the applicable design packages for construction, so that systems and trade coordination can reduce interferences, increase constructability and speed up construction operations. Additional consideration will also be given to a team that includes one or more BIM "Offeror Electives", as described in Appendix F of Section 01 33 16.

6.4.2.5. Planning and Scheduling. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's scheduling capabilities to manage an integrated fast track design-build schedule. Additional consideration will be given for teams

Section 00120 Page 18 that provide 4-D Schedule modeling with demonstrated experience in BIM.

6.4.2.6. Quality Control. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's capabilities and understanding of the contractually required quality control processes for both design and construction. The Government places value upon continued participation by the designers of record during the construction quality control process. The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the staffing plan to cover all required tasks and responsibilities.

6.5. VOLUME 2 - TAB E - SUBFACTOR 5 - KEY PROJECT PERSONNEL AND

SUBCONTRACTORS CABILITIES AND EXPERIENCE

6.5.1. Submission Requirements:

Provide a consolidated list of key personnel with name, position title and description of project responsibility for each. Indicate whether each individual has had a significant role in any of the cited project examples. If re-assignment of personnel is considered possible, provide alternate professionals in each assignment. Include key designers, whether employed by the prime or by a design subcontractor. For each person provide a brief resume, using the Key Personnel Resume form at the end of this Section (Attachment 5). Include the prime contractor's project manager responsible for design and construction, the design manager, the designers of record for architecture, lab design, interior design, structural, civil, geotechnical, fire protection, electrical, mechanical/plumbing, and permit preparers. Permit preparers must be professionally registered in the state the project is located. Where projects are located in states that require a separate registration for design of structures, the structural designer of record must be registered in that state. All other designers of record must be registered in accordance with contract clause: 52.236-25, Requirements for Registration of Designers. For construction, include the on-site manager and the general superintendent (in charge of self-performed work). Offeror shall provide unequivocal letters of commitment from all proposed key personnel not currently employed by the team members. Use the form letter (Attachment 6) at the end of this section.

In addition, identify the Key Subcontractors chosen for plumbing, HVAC, and electrical installation, describing the extent of their involvement in the project. Relevant experience and past performance for the key subcontractors shall be submitted using the same criteria for relevant experience and past performance. The Offeror shall document unequivocal teaming arrangements with its key subcontractors. Use the Letter of Commitment (attachment 7) at the end of this section.

6.5.2. Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate the required information to determine how well the Offeror identifies and demonstrates that its key personnel meet or exceed minimum qualifications necessary, which includes previous satisfactory experience in similar type work, to manage, control and perform the design, and to perform construction. Performance of key personnel proposed for this project may be taken into account when it comes to the attention of the Government. Evaluate how well the Offeror demonstrates that it has the necessary structure and experienced, Section 00120 Page 19 qualified personnel within its organization to effectively manage, control, administer and execute the integrated design and construction operations, quality control program and subcontracts. This shall be achievable with other projected on-going work.