R0015 amend1specs.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

THIS AMENDMENT DOES NOT CHANGE THE APRIL 27, 2010 PROPOSAL DUE DATE.

CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 2

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-10-R-0015

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

26-Mar-2010

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) COMMAND & CONTROL INTEGRATION FACILITY (C2IF), ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, HARFORD COUNTY, MD

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

08-Apr-2010

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

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT (continued)

a. BID SCHEDULE: Please delete the Bid Schedule in its entirety and substitute revised Bid Schedule, annotated Amendment No. 0001, attached hereto.

c. SPECIAL CLAUSES: Please delete Section 00800 in its entirety and substitute revised Section of the same number, annotated Amendment No. 0001, attached hereto.

d. PROPOSAL SUBMITSSION REQUIREMENTS AND PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS: Please add new Section 000110, annotated Amendment No. 0001, attached hereto.

e TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS:

(1) Section 01 11 00, SUMMARY OF WORK – Please delete Section 01 11 00 in its entirety and substitute revised section of the same number, annotated Amendment No.

0001, attached hereto.

(2) Section 01 45 01, CONTRACTOR QUALITY CONTROL – Please delete page 2 in its entirety and substitute revised page of the same number, annotated Amendment No. 0001, attached hereto.

(3) Section 01 50 00, TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION/SITE MANAGEMENT

- Please delete Section 01 50 00 in its entirety and substitute with revised section of the same number, annotated Amendment No. 0001, attached hereto.

(4) Section 02 41 00, DEMOLITION – Please delete pages 5 through 10 in their entirety and substitute revised pages of the same numbers, annotated Amendment No.

0001, attached hereto.

(5)Section 31 00 00, EARTHWORK – Please delete Sectio 31 00 00 in its entirety and substitute revise section of the same number, annotated Amendment No.

0001, attached hereto.

(6) Please add the following sections which were inadvertently omitted from the original solicitation, annotated Amendment No. 0001, attached hereto:

1. 04 20 00 MASONRY

2. 04 21 13 NONBEARING MASONRY VENEER

3. 05 50 13 MISCELLANEOUS METAL FABRICATIONS

4. 05 51 00 METAL STAIRS

5. 05 51 33 METAL LADDERS

6. 05 52 00 METAL RAILINGS

7. 06 10 00 ROUGH CARPENTRY

8. 06 41 16 LAMINATE CLAD ARCHITECTURAL CASEWORK

9. 06 61 16 SOLID POLYMER (SOLID SURFACING) FABRICATIONS

10. 07 21 16 MINERAL FIBER BLANKET INSULATION

11. 07 27 18 SHEET APPLIED AIR AND VAPOR BARRIER

12. 07 60 00 FLASHING AND SHEET METAL

13. 07 84 00 FIRESTOPPING

14. 07 92 00 JOINT SEALANTS

15. 08 11 13 STEEL DOORS AND FRAMES

16. 08 33 23 OVERHEAD COILING DOORS

17. 08 51 23 STEEL WINDOWS

18. 08 62 00 TRANSLUCENT PANEL SYSTEMS

19. 08 71 00 DOOR HARDWARE

20. 08 81 00 GLAZING

21. 08 91 00 METAL WALL AND DOOR LOUVERS

22. 09 22 00 SUPPORTS FOR GYPSUM BOARD

23. 09 29 00 GYPSUM BOARD

24. 09 30 00 CERAMIC TILE, QUARRY TILE, AND PAVER TILE

25. 09 51 00 ACOUSTICAL CEILINGS

26. 09 65 00 RESILIENT FLOORING

27. 09 68 00 CARPET

28. 09 90 00 PAINTS AND COATINGS

29. 10 14 02 INTERIOR SIGNAGE

30. 10 21 13 TOILET COMPARTMENTS

31. 10 22 13 WIRE MESH PARTITIONS

32. 10 22 19 DEMOUNTABLE MOVABLE PARTITIONS

33. 10 28 13 TOILET ACCESSORIES

34. 10 44 16 FIRE EXTINGUISHERS

35. 10 51 26 RECYCLED PLASTIC LOCKERS AND BENCHES

36. 10 56 13 STEEL SHELVING

37. 10 73 16 ARCHITECTURAL CANOPY

38. 11 13 10 DOCK LEVELERS

39. 12 93 00 SITE FURNISHINGS

40. 13 34 19 METAL BUILDING SYSTEMS

41. 14 24 00 HYDRAULIC ELEVATORS

f. CONTRACT DRAWINGS:

(1) Please delete the following drawings and substitute revised drawings of the same numbers with the latest revision date of 06 April 2010, attached hereto: C-001, C-

101, C-503, C-505, CD-102, CD-111, CD-112, CU-101, CU-201, E-802.

(2) Please make the following pen and ink change to drawing C-001 – Note 4 should read “Remove Building s 5031, 5032, 5033 and 5035. Buildings will be available for demolition by 15 July 2010.

(3) Please make the following pen and ink change to drawing C-0001 – Note11 should read “Remove Buildings 5042 and 5045. Buildings will be available for demolition by 15 November 2010.

g. 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.

Amendment No. 0001

RFP W912BU-10-R-0015

BID SCHEDULE

(To be attached to SF 1442)

Item Estimated Unit Estimated No. Description Quantity Unit Price Amount

00010-3

BASE BID:

1. C2 Integration Facility (except Items 2 through 4 below) 1 Job LS $

2. Undercut Soil Removal, Disposal 24,000 CY $ $ and Replacement (equal quantity)

3. Government Field Office Rental 31 Mo. $11,000 $341,000

4. Removal of Government Field Office 1 Job LS $50,000

TOTAL ESTIMATED BASE BID AND AMOUNT: $ __________

NOTES:

1. Offerors must bid on all items.

Request for Proposal No.

W912BU-10-R-0015

000110-1

Section 000110

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

AND PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS

1.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

1.1 General

This is a “Best Value” (Proposer offering the Government the most advantageous combination of Technical, Past Performance and Price factors and sub-factors listed in the solicitation for the C2 Integration Facility in Aberdeen, Maryland on Aberdeen Proving Ground. The construction criteria will rely upon industry standards, except where government standards are mandatory, such as when government standards are more stringent than industry standards.

In response to this solicitation offerors are required to submit proposals in accordance with the instructions herein. It is the intent of this solicitation to seek proposals from the most highly qualified offerors. Proposals will be evaluated on their own merits based upon the evaluation factors. Technical and Price proposals shall be submitted as two separate volumes as detailed further in this section. Price information will be evaluated for fairness, reasonableness, and for material unbalancing. Award will be made to the responsive, responsible offeror who represents the best value to the Government after evaluation of all proposals in accordance with the evaluations factors. The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.

1.2 Basis of Award

The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed-price contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal the Source Selection Authority determines is the most beneficial to the Government, considering both the non-price and price factors described herein.

All technical evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than the price.

To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for all factors and sub-factors not related to cost. Offerors are cautioned that 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, the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority must determine that the added value of the higher priced proposal would justify award to that offeror.

000110-2

1.3 Relative Importance – Factors and Sub-factors

Factor/Sub-factor Description Relative Importance Factor 1 Schedule Most Important Factor Factor 2 Corporate Experience Slightly Less Important than

Factor 1* Factor 3 Management Plan Slightly Less Important than

Factor 1* Sub-factor 1 Organizational Approach Equally important as sub-factor

Sub-factor 2 Key Personnel Equally important as sub-factor

Factor 4 Past Performance Slightly Less Important than

Factor 1* Factor 5 Cost Significantly Less Important than Factors 1 thru 4

*Factors 2, 3, and 4 are equally weighted.

1.3 General Instructions

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.

1.4 Evaluation Factors:

(1) FACTOR 1 – SCHEDULE

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Submit a narrative addressing the following:

Technical approach to the project, including the sequence of work

Mitigation efforts when encountering unforeseen conditions, design changes and customer requested changes

(ii) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Submit a summary level 50 activity Critical Path Method of calculations. The schedule shall demonstrate a reasonable and realistic sequence of activities which represent all work through the entire contract performance period.

Basis of Evaluation: The offeror will be evaluated on the logic and durations of their activities in the CPM schedule as well as a well defined and realistic work plan."

(2) FACTOR 2 – CORPORATE EXPERIENCE

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

(a) Using the Corporate Experience Form (ATTACHMENT 1), submit a minimum of three and a maximum of five projects relevant in scope and in the range of $5million to

000110-3

$10million, completed or ongoing by your firm within the past 7 years to demonstrate experience in construction of similar work to the RFP. Use the attached Corporate Experience Form to submit projects. Include a detailed description with each project explaining the scope of work performed and relevancy to the project requirements of the RFP. Identify the offeror’s role on the project.

Basis of Evaluation: The offeror will be evaluated to determine the extent of demonstrated corporate experience in performing relevant construction projects similar in complexity, dollar value, and magnitude to the RFP. The Government is seeking those firms with relevant construction experience where the primary focus is in contracts similar to the contract value that will be executed under this contract. A higher rating may be assigned based on the extent of Government experience.

(b) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Provide resumes of key personnel based on proposed management structure. At a minimum include Senior Project Manager, Superintendent and Quality Control Manager.

Basis of Evaluation: The offeror will be evaluated based on demonstration that personnel selected will successfully execute and manage the project based on education, experience and past projects.

(3) FACTOR 3 – MANAGEMENT PLAN

Sub-factors 1 and 2 are equally weighted

A. Sub-factor 1 – Organizational Approach

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Submit a narrative addressing the following:

Describe the proposed management structure for this contract; include an organization chart.

Describe the procedures used in selecting subcontractors Describe the procedures used in selecting superintendents, project managers and other key on-site representatives for projects

Basis of Evaluation: The offeror will be evaluated to determine if the proposal demonstrates an effective management structure and adequate selection procedures for on-site staffing and subcontractors.

B. Sub-factor 2 – Key Personnel

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Provide resumes of key personnel based on proposed management structure. At a minimum include Senior Project Manager, Superintendent and Quality Control Manager.

Basis of Evaluation: The offeror will be evaluated based on demonstration that personnel selected will successfully execute and manage the project based on education, experience and past projects.

(4) FACTOR 4 – PAST PERFORMANCE:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

000110-4

The Past Performance Questionnaire (ATTACHMENT 2) included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror included in its proposal for Factor 2, Corporate Experience. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client points of contact. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires are to be submitted via the offeror as part of the technical proposal. Copies of past performance questionnaires containing similar information that have been completed in the past 12 months may be submitted.

Also include performance recognition documents received within the last seven years such as awards, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

Basis of Evaluation: The degree to which past performance evaluations and all other past performance information reviewed by the Government (e.g., PPIRS, performance recognition documents, and information obtained for any other source) reflect a trend of satisfactory performance considering:

- A pattern of successful completion of tasks and/or contracts;

- A pattern of deliverables that are timely and of good quality;

- A pattern of cooperativeness and teamwork with the Government at all levels (task managers, contracting officers, auditors, etc.);

- Tasks that are identical to, similar to, or related to the task at hand;

- A respect for stewardship of Government funds;

- Demonstrated success in mitigating time and cost growth on projects.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) 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), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

(5) FACTOR 5 – PRICE

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Submit an original and one copy of the price proposal.

Include either the completed Section 000600, Representations and Certifications portion of the solicitation or your Online Representations and Certifications (ORCA) print-out and your bid bond under separate tabs in Volume II, Price and Pro Forma.

Basis of Evaluation: The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

(i) Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the RFP.

(ii) Comparison of proposed prices with the IGE.

(iii) Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information

000110-5

(iv) Comparison of market survey results.

The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total of all CLIN/SLIN prices, including all options, if any.

1.5 Statement of Compliance

The offeror is required to certify that all items submitted in the proposal comply with the RFP requirements and any differences, deviations or exceptions must be stated and explained. Offerors are required to complete the Compliance Statement provided below and submit it with their proposals. Even if there are no differences, deviations or exceptions, the offeror shall submit the Compliance Statement and state that none exist.

Statement of Compliance:

This offeror hereby certifies that all items submitted in this proposal comply with the solicitation requirements. The criteria specified in Solicitation No. W912BU-10-R-0015 are binding contract criteria and in case of any conflict after award, between W912BU-10-R-0015 and the contractor’s proposal, the solicitation criteria shall govern unless there is a written and signed agreement between the contractor and the Government waiving a specific requirement.

1.6 Who May Submit

Any legally organized offeror may submit a proposal, provided that all requirements specified in the solicitation are met.

1.7 Format and Volume Organization

Each offeror is required to submit his proposal consisting of the following volumes and information:

Volume I – Technical Proposal (Evaluation Factors 1 through 4)

a. Title Page, including the title of the solicitation, solicitation number, and date of submittal

b. Table of Contents

c. Compliance Statement

d. Specific Information for Evaluation as described in paragraph “Proposal Submission Requirements” - to include completed Past Performance Evaluation questionnaires.

Volume I shall be tabbed as follows:

Title Page Table of Contents Compliance Statement TAB A – Factor 1 – Schedule TAB B – Factor 2 – Corporate Experience Forms TAB C – Factor 3 – Management Plan

000110-6

TAB C.1 – Organizational Approach TAB C.2 – Key Personnel Resumes TAB D – Factor 4 – Past Performance TAB D.1 – Past Performance Questionnaires TAB D.2 – Recognition Documents

Volume II (Price & Pro Forma) (Evaluation Factor 5)

e. Completed Standard Form (SF) 1442, duly executed with an original signature by an official authorized to bind the company

f. Section 00010, completed Bid Schedule.

g. Completed Section 00600 (Representations, Certifications and Other Statement of Offerors or ORCA printout).

h. Bid Bond. See additional contract clauses in this solicitation regarding bid guarantee requirements.

Volume II shall be tabbed as follows:

Title Page Table of Contents Compliance Statement TAB A – Standard Form 1442, SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD and Section 00010 (Bid Form) TAB B – Section 000600, Representations and Certifications or ORCA print-out TAB C – Bid Bond

1.8 Envelopes

Proposal submission envelopes and/or boxes shall be marked:

Request for Proposal Number: ____________________________ Proposal Title: ____________________________ Proposal Due Date _________________________________ Proposal Time Due: ________________________________

1.9 Page Limits and Spacing

The following page limits shall apply, which do not include title sheets, indices, tables of content, schedules, or cover sheets: 35 pages maximum, also excluding past performance information/evaluation questionnaires or substitute correspondence from references. This page limit includes pages with illustrations/photos/sketches. Any evaluation documentation beyond 35 pages 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 minimally single spaced on 8-1/2 x 11 inch paper using the following page set-up parameters:

Page Size, Width – 8.5" Page Size, Height -- 11"

000110-7

Minimum Font – 12-point Margins – Top, Bottom Left, Right – 1” Gutter – 0” From Edge – Header, Footer – 0.5"

1.10 Submittal Address

Offerors shall submit their proposals no later than the time and date specified on Standard Form 1442, Block 13 to:

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia District ATTN: CENAP-CT-C (Denise DeTitta) Wanamaker Building, 100 Penn Square East, Room #643 Philadelphia, PA 19107-3390

1.11 Incurring Costs

The Government is not liable for any costs incurred by the offeror submitting an offer in response to this solicitation.

2.0 EVALUATION PROCESS

2.1 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

The SSEB is comprised of two separate committees, the Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) and the Price Evaluation Committee (PEC). The TEC will conduct an in-depth technical quality review of Factors 1 through 4 of this solicitation. The PEC will evaluate Factor 5 (Price). The evaluation will be based on the content of the proposal and any subsequent discussions, if necessary, as well as information obtained from other sources, e.g., Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), CAGE/DUNS search of team members identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representatives, etc.

The SSEB will not consider any information incorporated by reference, except as expressly permitted by this solicitation.

2.2 EVALUATION

2.2.1. The SSEB committees will evaluate the proposals and assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor and sub-factor, except that performance risk ratings are assigned to past performance (see performance risk rating definitions elsewhere in this document).

2.2.2. The Government intends to award without discussions. Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts, and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to fully evaluate proposals. Offerors should not assume they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in the proposal after submission.

2.2.3. In the event that the Government determines that discussions with offerors are required or are considered to be in the Government’s best interest, the Contracting Officer will set the “Competitive

000110-8

Range”. A “Competitive Range” is a subjective determination of the most highly rated proposals that have a likelihood of receiving the award.

2.2.4. If discussions are held, the Government may engage in a broad give and take with those offerors in the competitive range, in accordance with FAR 15.306 (d). The Government will provide the offeror an advance agenda for the discussions. During discussions, the Government may ask the offeror to further explain its proposal and to answer questions about it.

2.2.5. Upon conclusion of discussions, those offerors still considered the most highly rated will be afforded an opportunity to submit their proposal revisions for final evaluation and selection.

B. DEFINITIONS

Clarifications. IAW FAR Part 15.306 (a) (1), Clarifications are limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. If award will be made without conducting discussions, offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (e.g. relevance of past performance information, and adverse past performance) or to resolve minor or clerical errors.

Communications. IAW FAR Part 15.306 (b), Communications between the

Government and offerors, after receipt of proposals and before establishment of the competitive range are exchanges, leading to establishment of the competitive range (if required). Communications shall be limited to:

Offerors whose past performance information is the determining factor preventing them from being included in the competitive range. Such communications will address adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not had a prior opportunity to respond; and

Offerors (other than those discussed above) whose exclusion from or inclusion in the competitive range is uncertain.

Communications may be conducted to enhance Government understanding of proposals;

allow reasonable interpretation of the proposal; or facilitate the Government's evaluation process. Communications cannot be used to cure proposal deficiencies or material omissions, materially alter the technical or price elements of the proposal, and/or otherwise revise the technical or price elements of the proposal. Such communications may be considered in rating proposals for the purpose of establishing the competitive range, if required.

Communications shall not provide an opportunity for the offeror to revise their proposal, but may address ambiguities in the proposal or other concerns (e.g. perceived deficiencies, weaknesses, errors, omissions, or mistakes and information relating to relevant past performance).

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

000110-9

Discussions. IAW FAR Part (d) (1), Discussions are tailored to each offeror’s proposal, and must be conducted by the contracting officer with each offeror within the competitive range. The primary objective of discussions is to maximize the Government’s ability to obtain best value, based on the requirement and the evaluation factors set forth in the solicitation.

Exchanges. IAW FAR Part 15.306 (d) Exchanges with offerors after establishment of the competitive range. Negotiations are exchanges, in either a competitive or sole source environment, between the Government and offerors that are undertaken with the intent of allowing the offeror to revise its proposal. When negotiations are concluded in a competitive acquisition, they take place after establishment of the competitive range and are discussions.

Strength. Any aspect of a proposal that when judged against a stated evaluation criterion enhances the merit of the proposal or increases the probability of successful performance of the contract.

Significant Strength. A significant strength appreciably enhances the merit of a proposal or appreciably increases the probability of successful contract performance.

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

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

5. Adjectival Evaluation Definitions

a. Rating. The rating for the Technical factors will be expressed as an adjectival assessment of Excellent, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, Susceptible to Being Made Acceptable or Unacceptable.

b. Technical Factor Rating Definitions. The following rating definitions will be utilized in the evaluation of the Technical sub-factors (the Technical factor will be a “roll-up” of the Technical sub-factor ratings):

Adjectival

Rating DEFINITION AND CRITERIA

Excellent

The proposal has exceptional merit and reflects an excellent approach which will clearly result in the superior attainment of all requirements and objectives. This clearly achievable approach includes numerous advantageous characteristics of substance, and essentially no disadvantages, which can be expected to result in outstanding performance.

The risk of unsuccessful performance is very low as the proposal provides solutions which are unquestionably feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered very low risk in that they are exceptionally clear and precise, fully supported, and demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirements. Risk Level: Very Low

Good The proposal demonstrates a sound approach which is expected to meet all requirements and objectives. This sound approach includes advantageous characteristics of substance, and few relatively minor disadvantages, which collectively can be expected to result in

000110-10 satisfactory performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is low as the proposal contains solutions which are considered feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered to reflect low risk in that they are clear and precise, supported, and demonstrate an understanding of the requirements. Risk Level: Low

Acceptable

The proposal demonstrates an approach which is capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. The approach includes both advantageous and disadvantageous characteristics of substance, where the advantages are not outweighed by the disadvantages. Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages are likely to result in acceptable performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate, as the proposal solutions are generally feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered to reflect moderate risk in that they are somewhat clear and precise, partially supported, and demonstrate a general understanding of the requirements. Risk Level: Moderate

Marginal

The proposal demonstrates an approach which may not be capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. The approach has disadvantages of substance and advantages, which if they exist, are outweighed by the disadvantages. Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages are not likely to result in satisfactory performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is high as the proposal contains solutions which may not be feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered to reflect high risk in that they lack clarity and precision, are generally unsupported, and do not demonstrate a complete understanding of the requirements.

Risk Level: High

Susceptible to Being Made Acceptable

The proposal demonstrates an approach which, as initially proposed, cannot be rated Marginal because of error(s), omission(s) or deficiency(ies) which are capable of being corrected without a major rewrite or revision of the proposal. These solutions are further considered to reflect high to very high risk in that they lack clarity and precision, are generally unsupported, and do not demonstrate a complete understanding of the requirements.

Risk Level: High to Very High NOTE: A Susceptible rating cannot be a final rating. The final rating will either increase to a rating of Marginal or better or decrease to Unacceptable

Unacceptable

The proposal demonstrates an approach which, based on a very high risk, will very likely not be capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. This approach has numerous disadvantages of substance, and advantages which, if they exist, are far outweighed by disadvantages. Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages will not result in satisfactory performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is very high as the proposal contains solutions which are not feasible and practical. The solutions are further considered to reflect very high risk in that they lack any clarity or precision, are unsupported, and do not demonstrate an understanding of the requirement.

Risk Level: Very High

c. Past Performance Factor Rating Definitions. Risk ratings will be assigned for the Past Performance factor. Past Performance Risk Ratings assess the risks associated with each offeror’s likelihood of success in performing the requirements stated in the solicitation based on the offeror’s demonstrated performance on recent contracts. SSEB members and the SSA may use information from other sources in its evaluation of an offeror’s past performance, provided such information is consistent with the established evaluation criteria of the solicitation. Offerors having no relevant performance record will be given a neutral/unknown risk rating for this factor.

000110-11

ADJECTIVAL DESCRIPTION

Low Risk Little doubt exists, based on the offeror's performance record, that the offeror can perform the proposed effort.

Moderate Risk Some doubt exists, based on the offeror's performance record, that the offeror can perform the proposed effort.

High Risk Significant doubt exists, based on the offeror's performance record, that the offeror can perform the proposed effort.

Unknown Risk Little or no relevant performance record identifiable; equates to an unknown risk rating having no positive or negative evaluation significance.

000110-12

ATTACHMENT 1

CORPORATE EXPERIENCE FORM

Offeror:

Project Title: ___________________________________________________

Contract Number: _________________________

DUNS Number utilized during Project Performance:

Location:

Award Date:__________________ Completion Date:______________

Original Value: $_______________ Final Value: $

Type of Contract: □Fixed Price Cost Reimbursable

Project Description:

Customer Contact: Name:____________________________

Organization: __________________________________________________________

Telephone Number:

FAX Number:

Email Address:

CORPORATE EXPERIENCE FORM --- ATTACHMENT 1

ATTACHMENT 2

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

ATTACHMENT 2

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE COVER SHEET

1. YOUR FIRM NAME: __

2. FIRM BEING EVALUATED:

3. CONTRACT NUMBER:

4. TITLE OF CONTRACT:

5. REFERENCE ORGANIZATION NAME: _____________

6. EVALUATOR’S CONTACT INFO:

a. NAME & TITLE:

b. PHONE NUMBER:

c. FAX NUMBER: ______

d. EMAIL ADDRESS:

ATTACHMENT 2

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

E (EXCELLENT) – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective. (HIGH CONFIDENCE)

G (GOOD) – Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which/corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective. (SIGNIFICANT CONFIDENCE)

S (SATISFACTORY) – Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element contains some minor problems for which corrective action taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory. (CONFIDENCE)

M (MARGINAL) – Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. (LITTLE CONFIDENCE)

P (POOR) – Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely IN A timely manner. The contractual performance of the element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective. (NO CONFIDENCE)

N (NEUTRAL) – No relevant past performance record is identifiable upon which to base a meaningful performance risk prediction. A search was unable to identify any relevant past performance information for the contractor or their key personnel. (This is neither a negative or positive assessment.)

ATTACHMENT 2

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. Was this a competitive Contract? YES NO

2. Role of contractor. Prime Sub

3. Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance.

E G S M P N

4. Compliance with contractual terms and conditions. E G S M P N

5. Quality/integrity of technical data/report preparation efforts. E G S M P N

6. Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements.

E G S M P N

7. Effectiveness of overall contract management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program).

E G S M P N

8. Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors?

E G S M P N

9. Contractor was reasonable & cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes; responsiveness to administrative reports).

E G S M P N

10. Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance.

E G S M P N

11. Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations.

E G S M P N

12. Effectiveness of on-site management and control multidiscipline construction categories, including subcontractors.

E G S M P N

13. Effectiveness of material management. E G S M P N

14. Effectiveness of acquisition management. E G S M P N

15. Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client.

E G S M P N

16. Contractor safety record. E G S M P N

17. Responsiveness regarding safety issues. E G S M P N

18. If this is/was a Government cost type contract, rate the Contractor’s timeliness in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation and monthly status reports/budget variance reports.

E G S M P N

ATTACHMENT 2

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

19. If this is/was a Government cost type contract, the Contractor’s accuracy regarding monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation and monthly status reports/budget variance reports.

E G S M P N

20. Ability to hire/apply a qualified workforce to this effort. E G S M P N

21. Ability to retain a qualified workforce on this effort E G S M P N

22. If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

E G S M P N

23. Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problem?

E G S M P N

24. In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor.

E G S M P N

COMMENTS: Objective Comments/ concerns relating to this Offeror.

SECTION 00800

SPECIAL CLAUSES

INDEX

PARA TITLE

SC-1 COMMENCEMENT,PROSECUTION AND COMPLETION OF WORK

SC-2 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES - CONSTRUCTION

SC-3 CONTRACT DRAWINGS, MAPS AND SPECIFICATIONS

SC-4 PHYSICAL DATA

SC-5 LAYOUT OF WORK

SC-6 LIMITATION ON SUBCONTRACTING

SC-7 ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION

SC-8 AVAILABILITY AND USE OF UTILITY SERVICES

SC-9 EQUIPMENT OWNERSHIP AND OPERATING EXPENSE SCHEDULE

SC-10 CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE

SC-11 WARRANTY OF CONSTRUCTION

SC-12 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF CONTRACTOR

SC-13 TIME EXTENSIONS FOR UNUSUALLY SEVERE WEATHER

SC-14 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

SC-15 PARTNERING

Section 00800 Page 1

SPECIAL CLAUSES

SC-1 COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK (APR 1984)

The Contractor shall be required to (a) commence work under this contract within 10 calendar days after the Contractor receives the notice to proceed with an anticipated notic eto proceed date of 30 June 2010, (b) prosecute the work diligently, and (c) complete work required under Phases I, II and III not later than 15 June 2011, and work required for lease and removal of Governmnet trailer not later than 31 March 2012. The time stated for completion shall include final cleanup of the premises. (FAR 52.211-10)

SC-2 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES - CONSTRUCTION (SEP 2000)

(a) If the Contractor fails to complete the work within the time specified in the contract, the Contractor shall pay liquidated damages to the Government in the amount of $1,100 for each calendar day of delay until the work is completed or accepted.

(b) If the Government terminates the Contractor's right to proceed, liquidated damages will continue to accrue until the work is completed.

These liquidated damages are in addition to excess costs of repurchase under the Termination clause. (FAR 52.211-12)

SC-3 CONTRACT DRAWINGS, MAPS AND SPECIFICATIONS (AUG 2000)

a. Upon obtaining the plans and specifications, the Contractor shall:

(1) Immediately check the specifications and all drawings;

(2) Compare specifications andall drawings and verify the figures before laying out the work;

(3) Promptly notify the Contracting Officer of any discrepancies;

(4) Be responsible for any errors that might have been avoided by complying with this paragraph

b. Large-scale drawings shall govern small-scale drawings. Figures marked on drawings shall, in general, be followed in preference to scale measurements.

c. Omissions from the drawings or specifications or the misdescription of details of work that are manifestly necessary to carry out the intent of the drawings and specifications, or that are customarily performed, shall not relieve the Contractor from performing such omitted or misdescribed details of the work. The Contractor shall perform such details as if fully and correctly set forth and described in the drawings and specifications.

d. The work shall conform to the specifications and the contract drawings identified on the following, all of which are available in the office of the District Engineer, U.S. Army Engineer District, Philadelphia, Room 643, Wanamaker Building, 100 Penn Square East, Philadelphia, PA 19107. Drawings are titled: "C2 INTEGRATION FACILITY, C4ISR PHASE II, ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, MD" and have the drawing numbers, subtitles, and dates as indicated on Contract Drawing No. G-002, Drawing Index. (DFARS 252.236-7001)

SC-4 PHYSICAL DATA (APR 1984)

Section 00800 Page 2

Data and information furnished or referred to below is for the Contractor's information. The Government shall not be responsible for any interpretation of or conclusion drawn from the data or information by the Contractor. (FAR 52.236-4)

a. Weather Conditions. The climate of the area is referred to as "continental" by climatologists, characterized by cold winters and moderately hot summers. Complete weather records and reports may be obtained from the local U.S. Weather Bureau Office nearest to the work site. The Contractor shall satisfy himself as to the hazards likely to arise from weather conditions during the construction period.

b. Transportation Facilities. The facility is off Interstate 95 and U.S.

Route 40 and is accessed by public transportation, motor freight and ConRail system. The Contractor shall be responsible for all investigations of load carrying capacities of bridges and roadways.

c. Magnitude of the Contract Work. The estimated value of the contract work is over $10 million.

SC-5 LAYOUT OF WORK (APR 1984)

The Contractor shall lay out its work from the Government-established survey controls indicated on the drawings, and shall be responsible for all measurements in connection with the layout. The Contractor shall furnish, at its own expense, all stakes, templates, platforms, equipment, tools, materials, and labor required to lay out any part of the work. The Contractor shall be responsible for executing the work to the lines and grades that may be established or indicated by the Contracting Officer. The Contractor shall also be responsible for maintaining and preserving all stakes and other marks established by the Contracting Officer until authorized to remove them. If such marks are destroyed by the Contractor or through its negligence before their removal is authorized, the Contracting Officer may replace them and deduct the expense of the replacement from any amounts due or to become due to the Contractor. (FAR 52.236-17)

SC-6 LIMITATION ON SUBCONTRACTING (DEC 1996)

(a) This clause does not apply to the unrestricted portion of a partial set-aside.

(b) By submission of an offer and execution of a contract, the Offeror/Contractor agrees that in performance of the contract in the case of a contract for --

(1) Services (except construction). At least 50 percent of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the concern.

(2) Supplies (other than procurement from a nonmanufacturer of such supplies). The concern shall perform work for at least 50 percent of the cost of manufacturing the supplies, not including the cost of materials.

(3) General construction. The concern will perform at least 15 percent of the cost of the contract, not including the cost of materials, with its own employees.

Section 00800 Page 3

(4) Construction by special trade contractors. The concern will perform at least 25 percent of the cost of the contract, not including the cost of materials, with its own employees. (FAR 52.219-14)

SC-7 ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION (1974 NOV OCE)

a. If the performance of all or any part of the work is suspended, delayed, or interrupted due to an order of a court of competent jurisdiction as a result of environmental litigation, as defined below, the Contracting Officer, at the request of the Contractor, shall determine whether the order is due in any part to the acts or omissions of the Contractor or a Subcontractor at any tier not required by the terms of the contract. If it is determined that the order is not due in any part to acts or omissions of the Contractor or a Subcontractor at any tier other than as required by the terms of this contract, such suspension, delay, or interruption shall be considered as if ordered by the Contracting Officer in the administration of this contract under the terms of the SUSPENSION OF WORK clause of this contract. The period of such suspension, delay, or interruption shall be considered unreasonable, and an adjustment shall be made for any increase in the cost of performance of this contract (excluding profit) as provided in that clause, subject to all the provisions thereof.

b. The term "environmental litigation", as used herein, means a lawsuit alleging that the work will have an adverse effect on the environment or that the Government has not duly considered, either substantively or procedurally, the effect of the work on the environment. (CENAP)

SC-8 AVAILABILITY AND USE OF UTILITY SERVICES (APR 1984)

a. The Government will make all reasonably required amounts of utilities available to the Contractor from existing outlets and supplies, as specified in the contract. Unless otherwise provided in the contract, the amount of each utility service consumed shall be charged to or paid by the Contractor at prevailing rates charged to the Government or, where the utility is produced by the Government, at reasonable rates determined by the Contracting Officer. The Contractor shall carefully conserve any utilities furnished without charge.

b. The Contractor, at its expense and in a workmanlike manner satisfactory to the Contracting Officer, shall install and maintain all necessary temporary connections and distribution lines, and all meters required to measure the amount of each utility used for the purpose of determining charges. Before final acceptance of the work by the Government, the Contractor shall remove all the temporary connections, distribution lines, meters, and associated paraphernalia. (FAR 52.236-14)

SC-9 EQUIPMENT OWNERSHIP AND OPERATING EXPENSE SCHEDULE (MAR 1995)

a. This clause does not apply to terminations. See 52.249-5000, Basis for Settlement of Proposals, and FAR Part 49.

b. Allowable cost for construction and marine plant and equipment in sound workable condition owned or controlled and furnished by the Contractor or sub-contractor at any tier shall be based on actual cost data for each piece of equipment or groups of similar serial or series for which the

Section 00800 Page 4

Government can determine both ownership and operating costs from the Contractor's accounting records. When both ownership and operating costs cannot be determined for any piece of equipment from the Contractor's accounting records, costs for the equipment shall be based upon the applicable provisions of EP 1110-1-8, "Construction Equipment Ownership and Operating Expense Schedule," Region II. Working conditions shall be considered to be average for determining equipment rates using the schedule unless specified otherwise by the Contracting Officer. For equipment not included in the schedule, rates for comparable pieces of equipment may be used or a rate may be developed using the formula provided in the schedule.

For forward pricing, the schedule in effect at the time of negotiations shall apply. For retrospective pricing, the schedule in effect as of the time work was performed shall apply.

c. Equipment rental costs are allowable, subject to the provisions of FAR 31.205(d)(ii) and FAR 31.205-36. Rates for equipment rented from an organization under common control, lease-purchase arrangements, and sale-leaseback arrangements, will be determined using the schedule, except that actual rates will be used for equipment leased from an organization under common control that has an established practice of leasing the same or similar equipment to unaffiliated lessees.

d. When actual equipment costs are proposed and the total amount of the pricing action exceeds the small purchase threshold, the contracting officer shall request the contractor to submit either certified cost or pricing data, or partial/limited data, as appropriate. This data shall be submitted on Standard Form 1411, "Contract Pricing Proposal Cover Sheet."

(EFARS 52.231-5000)

Note #1: The small purchase threshold is $100,000.