W912BU21R0021 - Amendment2 - 30 March.pdf

W912BU21R0021

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 reason for Amendment 2 is to: Amend Solicitation Provisions: C. Evaluation Approach and Proposal Submission, sections 7.3.1 and 7.3.2, rename Option CLIN names, Update Option CLIN descriptions, add Period of Performance Worksheet (section 00 22 00), update RFI reporting instructions and submission date, and remove duplicate "Vol. 1" document on beta.SAM w ebsite.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 22

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 30-Mar-2021

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W912BU21R0021

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11-Mar-2021

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

30-Mar-2021

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:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 23-Apr-2021 02:00 PM to 03-May-2021 02:00 PM.

CLIN 0001

The CLIN extended description has changed from:

Construct 16 Family Housing units per Statement of Work

To:

Construct 16 Family Housing units per Summary of Work

CLIN 0002

The CLIN description has changed from Option 1 to Deliver One Housing Unit to Option 1: Building 517.

Option 1 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Statement of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

Option 1 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Summary of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

CLIN 0003

The CLIN description has changed from Option 2 to Deliver One Housing Unit to Option 2: Building 518.

Option 2 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Statement of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

Option 2 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Summary of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

CLIN 0004

The CLIN description has changed from Option 3 to Deliver One Housing Unit to Option 3: Building 519.

Option 3 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Statement of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

Option 3 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Summary of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

CLIN 0005

The CLIN description has changed from Option 4 to Deliver One Housing Unit to Option 4: Building 521.

Option 4 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Statement of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

Option 4 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Summary of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

CLIN 0006

The CLIN description has changed from Option 5 to Deliver One Housing Unit to Option 5: Building 524.

Option 5 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Statement of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

Option 5 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Summary of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

CLIN 0007

The CLIN description has changed from Option 6 to Deliver One Housing Unit to Option 6: Building 525.

Option 6 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Statement of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

Option 6 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Summary of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

CLIN 0008

The CLIN description has changed from Option 7 to Deliver One Housing Unit to Option 7: Building 526.

Option 7 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Statement of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

Option 7 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Summary of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

CLIN 0009

The CLIN description has changed from Option 8 to Deliver One Housing Unit to Option 8: Building 527.

Option 8 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Statement of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

Option 8 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Summary of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

CLIN 0010

The CLIN description has changed from Option 9 to Deliver One Housing Unit to Option 9: Building 530.

Option 9 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Statement of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

Option 9 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Summary of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

CLIN 0011

The CLIN description has changed from Option 10 to Deliver One Housing Unit to Option 10: Building 541.

Option 10 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Statement of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

Option 10 of 10: One housing unit in accordance with the Summary of work.Option to be exercised within 9 months

The following have been modified:

BID SCHEDULE

RFP W912BU21R0021

BIDDING SCHEDULE

(To be attached to SF 1442)

Item Estimated Unit Estimated No. Description Quantity Unit Price Amount

BASE BID:

1. 16 Army Family Housing Units, including Site Work and Demolition 1 JOB LS $__________

OPTION BID:

2. Option 1: Building 517 1 JOB LS $

3. Option 2: Building 518 1 JOB LS $

4. Option 3: Building 519 1 JOB LS $

5. Option 4: Building 521 1 JOB LS $

6. Option 5: Building 524 1 JOB LS $

7. Option 6: Building 525 1 JOB LS $

8. Option 7: Building 526 1 JOB LS $

9. Option 8: Building 527 1 JOB LS $

10. Option 9: Building 530 1 JOB LS $

11. Option 10: Building 541 1 JOB LS $

TOTAL ESTIMATED BASE BID AND ALL OPTIONS AMOUNT $ ___________

NOTE: Bidders must bid on all items.

00 10 00

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION

Requests for Information (RFI) Procedure

The Philadelphia District requests that all Offerors follow the instructions below when submitting Requests for Information (RFI’s).

Requests for information will be answered by an Amendment so all Offerors are given the same information. Individual replies will not be issued.

RFI responses that affect the specifications will be issued as an Amendment to the specifications. If an RFI response conflicts with the Contract plans or specs, the Contract plans and/or specs will govern.

RFI responses may indicate that a resolution to an issue may be found in a Specific Amendment; however Offerors should always check all amendments to the plans and specs and prepare their bid accordingly. RFI responses that become invalid or inaccurate as the result of changes to the plans or specs issued by subsequent Amendments will not be revised.

Please do not submit an RFI more than once. Do not add subsequent questions to the list and resubmit your entire set of questions.

The following is the preferred format for submitting RFI’s. Questions submitted in this standard format will enable the Government to generate responses in a timelier manner.

Requests for information shall be submitted using a spreadsheet style method as shown below. Include the Solicitation Number in the subject line.

Please attach the spreadsheet file as an attachment.

Contracting questions can be emailed to Kelly Gunn at Kelly.L.Gunn@usace.army.mil.

All other questions can be mailed to Joe Durkin at Joseph.A.Durkin@usace.army.mil.

The spreadsheet shall contain the following columns: 1) RFI Number, 2) Reference to applicable Spec Section or Drawing Sheet Number, 3) applicable discipline involved (Mechanical, Electrical, Civil, etc…), and 4) a Clear and concise statement of the problem or clarification requested.

Example:

RFI# Discipline

Spec Sect/ Drawing Description

1 Mechanical 15 22 00 Para. 2.5.1 specifies 4-inch pipe, however Dwg P2.01 shows piping is 8-inch in size.

2 Architectural A5.1.2 Unable to locate the specifications for the Grab Bars shown in the Toilet rooms.

mailto:Kelly.L.Gunn@usace.army.mil mailto:Joseph.A.Durkin@usace.army.mil

RFI

All technical RFI’s need to be submitted to:

Joe Durkin Joseph.A.Durkin@usace.army.mil

All Contracting related RFI’s need to be submitted to:

Kelly Gunn Kelly.L.Gunn@usace.army.mil

RFI must be submitted NTL Monday 26 April 2021, 2 PM, EST

SITE VISIT: Security paperwork submittal date was 29 MARCH 2021

SITE VISIT SUMITTAL IS NOW CLOSED

mailto:Joseph.A.Durkin@usace.army.mil mailto:Kelly.L.Gunn@usace.army.mil

Use this SSP for acquisitions less than $100M

SOURCE SELECTION PLAN

FOR THE

ARMY FAMILY HOUSING

TOBYHANNA ARMY DEPOT, PA

SOLICITATION NUMBER: W912BU-21-R-0021

Type of Set-Aside:

8A Competitive

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, PHILADELPHIA

DISTRICT PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107

11 March 2021

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION I – OVERVIEW

A. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

B. ACQUISITION STRATEGY

SECTION II - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

B. FACTORS AND SUB-FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

C. EVALUATION APPROACH AND PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

D. DISCUSSIONS

SECTION I – OVERVIEW

This Source Selection Plan (SSP) identifies the structure of the Source Selection Team, including the Source Selection Authority, Contracting Officer, Legal Counsel, and members of the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB), the security requirements, rules of conduct, and general methods and procedures associated with the selection of construction contractor for Solicitation Number W912BU- 21-F-0021 for ARMY FAMILY HOUSING – TOBYHANNA ARMY DEPOT, PA. This plan is source selection information, as defined by FAR Part 2.101, and shall not be disclosed outside the Source Selection Team;

however, the submission and evaluation information will eventually become public knowledge as they become part of the solicitation.

A. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia District has a requirement from the TYAD to provide a new housing unit replacement for the existing housing units at Tobyhanna Army Depot

B. ACQUISITION STRATEGY

This is an 8a competitive acquisition for the single award of a firm fixed price contract. The Government will award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal is fair and reasonable and has been determined to be the most advantageous to the Government considering non-price and price factors and sub-factors defined herein. The basis of award is best value trade-off; therefore, the Government has the right to accept other than the lowest offer.

The right is also reserved to reject any and all offers.

SECTION II - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government. Appropriate consideration will be given to two (2) non-price evaluation factors in addition to the price evaluation. The non-price factors include: Past Performance, Management. Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest cost offered.

B. FACTORS AND SUB-FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal: Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government based upon compliance with the contract specifications and an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors described below.

Factor 1: Past Performance: Each offeror’s past performance information will be reviewed to determine relevancy and confidence assessment.

Factor 2: Management: Each offeror’s management information will be reviewed to determine a clear understanding of the work and an ability to coordinate resources to ensure successful and safe pursuit of the work within the specified period of performance.

Factor 3: Price: The resulting award will be a firm-fixed price contract. Price reasonableness will be utilized in the evaluation of the Firm-Fixed Price effort.

Evaluation of the offeror’s proposal shall address each factor as it applies to the Plans and Specifications. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section. During evaluations of each proposal, the Government will assign each factor a rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH AND PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team (SST).

1. Overview.

1.1 The intent of this solicitation is to select one contractor for Construction of a new Army Family Housing Units at Tobyhanna Army Depot. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein, and award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible offeror, whose proposal conforms with all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and whose proposal is determined to represent the overall best value to the Government, all factors considered.

1.2 The basis of award is the Tradeoff Process. The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible offeror whom the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers.

2.0 Submittal of Offerors

2.1 Offerors submitting proposals for this project should limit submissions to data essential for evaluation of proposals so that a minimum of time and monies will have been expended in preparing information required herein. However, in order to be effectively and equitably evaluated, the proposals must include information sufficiently detailed to clearly describe the offeror's past performance and management capabilities necessary for successful completion of the project. Innovative, creative, cost and time saving proposals that meet or exceed the requirements are encouraged and will be rated accordingly. Deviations from the requirements should be clearly noted and justified in the proposal.

2.2 Offerors shall submit their proposals to the US Army Corps of Engineers, Wanamaker Building, 100 Penn Square East, Philadelphia, PA 19107-3390 no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

2.3 Offerors are required to submit a proposal made up of Past Performance, Management, and Price. All proposal materials shall be submitted in binders with a table of contents and tabbed section dividers. Refer to Paragraph C.4 for Volume I and Volume II contents.

Proposals should 20 pages or less. Anything over 20 pages will not be evaluated. The teaming agreement will not count in the 20 page limitation.

Volume I shall be submitted in original plus two (2) paper copies and one electronic copy on CD*. Electronic copy needs to be readable, acceble, and be labled properly with company information on each submittal.

Volume II shall be submitted in original plus two (2) paper copies and one electronic copy on CD.* Volume II shall be placed in a separate envelope. DO NOT INCLUDE VOLUME II ON THE SAME CD AS

VOLUME I.

Failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate tab (factor or sub-factor) may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information.

*NOTE: The paper copy of the proposal will be used for evaluation and will control if there are any conflicts or discrepancies with the electronic version.

3. Proposal Evaluation Process.

3.2 A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of

representatives of the Corps of Engineers, User/Customer, and other required personnel will evaluate the proposals. Offerors are advised that the evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence. Non-price factors will be reviewed and rated without knowledge of the price offered. The number and identities of offerors are not revealed to anyone who is not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other offerors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is the Tradeoff Process.The evaluation process consists of four parts: proposal compliance review and responsibility determination, non-price factor evaluation, price factor evaluation, and trade-off analysis.

3.2.1 Proposal Compliance Review: This is an initial review to ensure that all information required for both the non-price and price proposal were received.

3.2.2 Non-Price Evaluation: The SSEB will evaluate and rate the proposals against the RFP requirements. Past Performance will be rated based on relevancy and confidence.

3.2.3 Price Evaluation: The SSEB and Contracting Officer/SSA will evaluate price proposals independent of the non-price proposal evaluation. The SSEB will not have access to price information until completion of the non-price evaluation.

3.2.4 Trade-off Analysis: After all above evaluations are

complete, the Contracting Officer/SSA will compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of non-price proposals and compare prices. The Source Selection Authority (SSA) will then consider all factors to select the proposal offering the best value to the Government.

4. Proposal Information and Related Evaluation Factors.

4.1 Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the factors and sub-factors below. Past Performance and Management are considered equally important as are the Management sub- factors. The combined non-price factors are considered equally important to cost or price.

Offerors are reminded to include their best terms in their initial offer and not to automatically assume that they will have an opportunity to participate in discussions or be asked to submit a revised offer. The Government may make award of a conforming proposal without discussions, if deemed to be within the best interest of the Government.

*Proposals without CD/DVD will be rejected as non-responsive.*

4.2 Volume I - Factor I – Past Performance (Three-Ring Binder)

4.3 Volume I - Factor II – Management (Three-Ring Binder)

Subfactor A Management Plan

Subfactor B Safety Subfactor C Schedule

4.4 Volume II - Price and Pro Forma

Information (Sealed Envelope) Tab A Standard Form 1442 and Price Breakout Schedule Tab B - Joint Venture Agreements Tab C - Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding and Proof of Financial Ability Tab D - Pre-Award Information

4.5 Ratings: Evaluators will apply the adjectival rating

for the definition that most closely matches the evaluation.

Table 1 Past Performance Relevancy

Ratings

RATING DEFINITIO

N Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

TABLE 2

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

RATING DEFINITIO

N

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

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

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

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

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

TABLE 3

COMBINED MANAGEMENT/RISK RATINGS

ADJECTIVA

L RATING

DEFINITIO

N

Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful contract performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable.

4.6 Definitions

1. 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. See FAR 15.001.

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

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

4. Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

5. Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

6. Uncertainty. Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission or mistake).

7. Clarification. Limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated.

8. Adverse Past Performance. Past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating from sources where the information is from other than formal rating systems such as “PPIRS” or “FAPPIS.”

a. If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal.

b. If there is not a completed CPARS evaluation, the Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for the project (Attachment B) to this solicitation. Do not submit a PPQ when a completed CPARS evaluation is available.

5.0 Volume I – Factor I – Past Performance

5.1 Submission Requirements: Provide title, location and a

description of the scope of (3) three projects substantially complete or completed by the prime contractor as of the date of this solicitation or within the last 5 years which are similar to this project in size and scope. Projects considered similar to this project include new construction of residential housing development (i.e. Army Housing community, etc.) with a minimum LEED Silver certifiable or certification. The description of the project shall include the following project elements: (a) Living areas, kitchen, bathrooms, bedrooms, storage, basement including an attached garage.

(b) Supporting facilities include site work: all required utility systems; storm drainage (including stormwater management pond(s));

street lighting; and information systems. (c) Commissioning of heating and air conditioning systems. (d) Automatic sprinkler system (i.e. fire suppression) will be provided.

NOTE: Not all of the three (3) sample projects need to show all

(a) through (d) elements, but at a minimum the combination of all three (3) sample projects need to show all four of these elements for past performance experience in order to be considered qualified.

Any of the sample projects that can show all four elements, will receive a higher rating. Note that at least one past project must be a single-family residential housing development (any dollar size);

and at least one of the sample projects must be a large complexity project that is a minimum of $15M in size as a prime contractor, or the offorer will be considered disqualified. Additionally, offeror’s will receive a higher rating for exceeding the minimum requirements and for projects that are more closely aligned with the scope of this project as indicated in the above paragraph(s).

NOTE: For purposes of evaluating past performance, the Prime

Contractor is defined as the contractor identified in Block 14 of the Standard Form 1442. If more than one contractor is listed in Block 14, then a signed joint venture must be submitted with the proposal and the joint venture shall be registered as such in the System for Award Management (SAM). However, each party of the Joint Venture must submit their own DUNS number with the JV proposal.

Projects performed by other contractors than the offeror, such as teaming partners or subcontractors, will not be evaluated for past performance, unless those other contractors are part of a joint venture offeror as demonstrated by a signed joint venture agreement.

If the Offeror represents the combining of two or more companies as a joint venture for the purpose of this RFP, each company in the joint venture may submit project examples, but the total submitted by the joint venture will not exceed five (5).

The following is additional information for this contract to aid in determining past projects that are similar in size and scope:

Accessibility for individuals with disabilities will be provided in 2 quarters. Comprehensive building and furnishings related interior design services are required. This project shall comply with the Army Standard for Family Housing and UFC 4-11-01. Design and construction include requirements of current Sustainable Design and Development Policy Update (Environmental and Energy Performance).

This project will be LEED Silver Certified. Facilities will be designed to a minimum life of 40 years in accordance with DoD's Unified Facilities Code (UFC 1-200-02) including energy efficiencies, building envelope and integrated building systems performance. This project also includes relocation and/or replacement of existing community amenities, which include picnic shelter, fire pits, and playgrounds.

5.2. Evaluation Criteria: The SSEB will evaluate the relevancy of recent experience identified in the proposal. Documentation of successful completion of projects similar in size and scope to this project will be considered relevant. Conversely, proposals that do not show documentation of successful completion of projects similar in size and scope will not be considered relevant. Projects considered similar to this project include new construction of residential houses. Additional consideration may be given for recent project experience that demonstrates experience with the following:

(1) working with USACE on Military Bases/Installations, or (2) modular construction.

The SSEB will assign a confidence rating to each offeror based on the degree of successful performance of all recent and relevant projects identified in the proposal in response to paragraph 5.1.

The Government reserves the right to check any or all cited references to verify supplied information and to assess owner satisfaction. The Government also reserves the right to not contact the provided references. The Government may also use other tools such as CPARS, CCASS, ACASS, FAPPIS, Dun & Bradstreet, etc. or any other relevant information to assist in its evaluation of an offeror’s past performance.

6.0 Volume I – Factor II – Management

6.1 Subfactor A Management Plan

6.1.1 Submission Requirements: Provide a management plan for the project that describes how your labor, resources, subcontractors and material suppliers will be coordinated and used to ensure successful and safe completion of the project. Describe how you will manage, supervise and coordinate the subcontractors' work and who in the organization will be responsible for this management and coordination. As part of the management plan include key tasks, including building demolition and the method of construction (i.e.

modular construction or stick built construction). Discuss how the progress will be managed through use of a detailed schedule to include scheduling of multiple work sites for various trades, pre-final/final inspections and turnover of multiple facilities. Discuss which resources are available but will not be present at the site. Provide an organizational chart for this project showing home office support, on-site management and the responsible chain of command. Joint venture offerors must show the respective areas of responsibility for each partner. Clearly delineate on-site from off-site personnel on the organizational chart. Project Manager, Site Superintendent, Contractor Quality Control Manager, and Site Safety and Health Officer shall be identified, and their resumes provided to confirm compliance with education and experience requirements of the contract specifications. Dual roles (i.e. Site Superintendent/Site Safety and Health Officer/Quality Control Manager) will not be allowed. Describe Offeror’s proposed approach to managing construction of these facilities, including coordinating sub-contractors, processes for requests for information, shop drawing and submittal reviews and approval, LEED documentation, progress meetings, turnover of operations and maintenance manuals and training requirements, as-built drawings, and contract completion and closeout. Generally, describe the items the Offeror will self-perform to comply with the requirements for self-performed work. Describe in general terms the team’s quality control approach, corporate systems, and capabilities to maintain quality control of the construction.

6.1.2 Evaluation Criteria: Comprehensive plans that demonstrate a clear understanding of the work and an ability to coordinate resources to ensure successful pursuit of the work will be considered to meet the RFP requirements. Plans that do not demonstrate a clear understanding of the work, that do not demonstrate a capability to coordinate resources, or that do not demonstrate appropriate staff capabilities will be considered to not meet the RFP requirements (NOTE: if proposed personnel are changed post award, they be will required to obtain Contracting Officer approval of the substituted personnel). Plans will be evaluated based on the level of involvement the contractor will have in the management, oversight, control, and coordination of the work performed by subcontractors. The SSEB will evaluate the clarity, adequacy, capabilities and strengths of the offeror’s organizational chart or managing a successful project. An organizational chart that clearly depicts a highly qualified on-site team supported by appropriate resources off-site and that clearly defines responsibilities will be considered to meet the RFP requirements. Charts that are confusing, cluttered with duplicative entries, or that do not clearly define responsibilities will be considered to not meet the RFP requirements.

6.2 Subfactor B - Safety

6.2.1 Submission Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the

following information (For a partnership or joint venture, the following submittal requirements are required for each Contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. EMR and DART Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

(a) Experience Modification Rate (EMR): For the three (3) previous complete calendar years (2017, 2018 & 2019), the Offeror shall submit its EMR (which compares your company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums over a three (3) year period). If you have no EMR, the Offeror shall affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the EMR and upward or downward trends shall be addressed as part of this element.

(b) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate: For the three (3) previous complete calendar years (2018, 2019, 2020), the Offeror shall submit its OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate, as defined by the U.S.

Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

If you cannot submit an OSHA DART Rate, the Offeror shall affirmatively state so, and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART Rate data and upward or downward trends shall be addressed as part of this element.

6.2.2 Approach for Safety: The Offeror shall describe the plan that it will implement to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as a part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. Also, describe any innovative methods that the Offeror will employ to ensure and monitor safe work practices at all subcontractor levels. The Approach for Safety shall be limited to two pages. Evaluation Criteria: The Government is seeking to determine that the Offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s overall safety record, the Offeror’s plan to select and monitor subcontractors, and innovative safety methods that the Offeror plans to implement for this procurement. The Government’s sources of information for evaluating safety may include, but are not limited to, OSHA, NAVFAC’s Environmental and Safety Application Management System (ESAMS), and other related databases. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete safety information regarding these submittal requirements rests with the Offeror. The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

Experience Modification Rate (EMR) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate Offeror Technical Approach to Safety Other sources of information available to the Government

(a) Experience Modification Rate (EMR):

The Government will evaluate the EMR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward or downward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating. Lower EMRs will be given greater consideration in the evaluation.

(b) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate:

The Government will evaluate the OSHA DART Rate to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward or downward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rates. Lower OSHA DART Rates will be given greater consideration in the evaluation.

(c) Technical Approach to Safety:

The Government will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which subcontractor safety performance will be considered in the selection of all levels of subcontractors on the project. The Government will also evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which innovations are being proposed that may enhance safety on this procurement.

6.3 Subfactor C - Schedule

6.3.1 Submission Requirements: Provide a bar chart schedule

utilizing days in lieu of dates, showing how the work will be performed and completed as specified in Section 00 70 00, Clause 52.211-10. 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 their choice that demonstrate the project’s critical path and milestones; however, schedules shall be graphically represented. At a minimum identify preconstruction activities, mobilization, and all efforts indicated in the Proposal Price Breakout Schedule (Bidding Schedule), to include construction method (modular or stick built construction). Procurement of long lead items shall be included in schedule. Also identify hazardous materials abatement and the building demolition schedule. Include schedule for sitework, final cleanup, activities required to turnover facilities, and demobilization.

6.3.2 Evaluation Criteria: The SSEB will evaluate the schedule to assess the strength of understanding of events associated with the construction process and completion requirements. The SSEB will also evaluate the offeror’s capability to complete the schedule within the proposed contract duration and the realism of the schedule.

Schedules offering duration less than that shown in 52.211-10 may receive a higher rating if the schedule is shown to be realistic and achievable. Should the Government accept shorter duration(s) than that required by 52.211-10 the accepted schedule will take precedence over 52.211-

10. NOTE: The SSEB will evaluate the offeror’s schedule using calendar days, not dates. If an offeror includes dates in the schedule, the dates will be used to calculate calendar days and the dates will not be considered to create binding dates.

7.0 Volume II - Price and Performa Information (Submit in a separate envelope).

PLEASE DO NOT INCLUDE VOLUME II ON THE SAME CD OR HARDCOPY AS

VOLUME I.

7.1 Tab A - Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Price Breakout

Schedule.

7.1.1 Submission Requirements: The offeror shall complete and submit Standard Form 1442 and Section 00010, Proposal Price Breakout Schedule. Both of these forms are included in Section 00010 of this solicitation. CDs must be properly labeled. Footers on every page to include company’s name and cage code.

7.1.2 Evaluation Criteria: The price will be evaluated on the proposal in the detail required by Section 00010. The price will be reviewed by the SSEB and Contracting Officer/SSA for fair and reasonableness through the use of a price analysis.

7.3 Tab B – Joint Venture and Mentor-Protégé Agreements

7.3.1 This section is hereby amended to read as follows:

Submission Requirements: Small business offerors (e.g., 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSBC, etc) submitting a proposal as a Joint Venture or Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture shall submit a copy of the joint venture agreement with the proposal.

Submission Requirements: Small business offerors (e.g., 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSBC, etc) submitting a proposal as a Joint Venture or Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture shall submit evidence from the Offeror's SBA Servicing Agency that the Offeror has notified and discussed the proposed joint venture for this specific project with the appropriate SBA Representative or Business Opportunity Specialist. Joint Venture agreements and approved 8(a) Mentor- Protégé agreements must be submitted with the proposal.

7.3.2 Paragraph 7.3.2 Evaluation Criteria would remain the same, as it references Title 13 of the CFR.

Evaluation Criteria: Joint Venture Agreements and Mentor-Protégé agreements must comply with the relevant regulations in Title 13 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

7.4 Tab C - Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding and Proof of Financial Ability

7.4.1 Submission Requirements:

A. Financial Capability. Submit Proof of Financial Ability (Most recent financial statement covering assets and liabilities). Include the name, address and telephone number of firm's banking institution. Bonding Capability. Submit information showing offeror's ability to be bonded for this project. Include the name, address and telephone number of the firm's bonding company.

7.4.2 Evaluation Criteria: This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

7.5 Tab D - Pre-Award Information

7.5.1 Submission Requirements:

A. The offeror shall submit one completed copy of Section 00600, Representations and Certification.

B. The offeror shall submit the following information:

a) Number of years the firm has been in business

b) Name, address and telephone numbers of two credit/trade references

c) A list of present commitments, including the dollar value

7.5.2 Evaluation Criteria: This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

D. DISCUSSIONS

1. GENERAL INFORMATION. In accordance with FAR 15.306(d), discussion sessions with each offeror may be held. Should discussions take place, all offerors in the competitive range will be allowed a minimum of 14 calendar days or maximum of 21 calendar days to submit Final Proposal Revisions or at the discretion of the Contracting Officer

2. DISCUSSION SCHEDULING. If discussions are conducted, the Contracting Officer will schedule the discussion sessions, and each offeror will be notified of the time and place at least three (3) business days prior to their discussion session.

SECTION 00 70 00 - CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT

The following were previously included by reference and are now included by full text:

252.219-7010 NOTIFICATION OF COMPETITION LIMITED TO ELIGIBLE 8(a) PARTICIPANTS--

PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (OCT 2019)

(a) Offers are solicited only from small business concerns expressly certified by the Small Business Administration (SBA) for participation in SBA's 8(a) Program and which meet the following criteria at the time of submission of offer:

(1) The Offeror is in conformance with the 8(a) support limitation set forth in its approved business plan.

(2) The Offeror is in conformance with the Business Activity Targets set forth in its approved business plan or any remedial action directed by SBA.

(3) If the competition is to be limited to 8(a) concerns within one or more specific SBA regions or districts, then the offeror's approved business plan is on the file and serviced by ____.

[Contracting Officer completes by inserting the appropriate SBA District and/or Regional Office(s) as identified by

SBA.]

(b) By submission of its offer, the Offeror represents that it meets all of the criteria set forth in paragraph (a) of this clause.

(c) Any award resulting from this solicitation will be made directly by the Contracting Officer to the successful 8(a) offeror selected through the evaluation criteria set forth in this solicitation.

(d)(1) Unless SBA has waived the requirements of paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (iii) and (d)(2) of this clause in accordance with 13 CFR 121.1204, a small business concern that provides an end item it did not manufacture, process, or produce, shall--

(i) Provide an end item that a small business has manufactured, processed, or produced in the United States or its outlying areas; for kit assemblers, see paragraph (d)(2) of this clause instead;

(ii) Be primarily engaged in the retail or wholesale trade and normally sell the type of item being supplied; and

(iii) Take ownership or possession of the item(s) with its personnel, equipment, or facilities in a manner consistent with industry practice; for example, providing storage, transportation, or delivery.

(2) When the end item being acquired is a kit of supplies, at least 50 percent of the total cost of the components of the kit shall be manufactured, processed, or produced by small businesses in the United States or its outlying areas.

(3) The requirements of paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (iii) and (d)(2) of this clause do not apply to construction or service contracts.

(e) The ____ [insert name of SBA's contractor] will notify the ____ [insert name of contracting agency] Contracting Officer in writing immediately upon entering an agreement (either oral or written) to transfer all or part of its stock or other ownership interest to any other party.

(End of clause)

(End of Summary of Changes)

Amendment No. 0002

RFP W912BU-21-R-0021

Section 00 22 00

Section 00 22 00 Attachments

Project Detail Sheet

Your firm’s name

Name of Project/Location/Square Footage

General Scope of Project

Your role (prime, joint venture, subcontractor) and work your company self-performed

Percentage of Work completed by Prime Contractor Personnel: %

Construction Cost:

At Award: $ Reason for the cost growth:

Final Cost $

Award Date:

Scheduled Completion: Reason for the time growth:

Actual Completion:

Extent and type of work you subcontracted out

Owner’s Point of Contact (POC) for reference (name and company and telephone number)

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0) CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS.

CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO USACE. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR USACE POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear…