12-R-0024 Amend 4.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this Amendment is to:

1) Provide Answ ers to RFIs Set 1 (Nos. 19-34).

2) Provide a revised MATOC Specs - Section 01 57 20 has been revised.

3) Provide a revised Seed Task Order SOW & Specs - Sections 00 73 00, 01 00 00, 02 41 00 & 31 11 00 have been revised.

4) Provide a revised Section 00 22 11 - corrects Paragraph 7.1.1.4.

No other changes are made w ith this Amendment. Proposals are still due Monday, 16 July 2012, 3:00 pm CTS.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 26

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 09-Jul-2012

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 W912BV-12-R-0024

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

15-May-2012

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 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

09-Jul-2012

CODE

CONTRACTING DIV

USAED, TULSA 1645 S 101 E AVE

TULSA OK 74128-4609

W912BV 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912BV-12-R-0024

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 01 10 - TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Table of Contents has changed from:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 1 Revised MATOC

Specifications

185 29-JUN-2012

Attachment 2 Seed TO Specifications &

SOW

109 31-MAY-2012

Attachment 3 Seed Task Order Wage Rates

9 13-JUN-2012

to:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 1 Revised MATOC Specs 193 09-JUL-2012 Attachment 2 Revised Seed TO Specs

SOW

105 09-JUL-2012

Attachment 3 Seed Task Order Wage Rates

9 13-JUN-2012

SECTION 00 22 11 - PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, EVALUATION CRITERIA, BASIS OF

AWARD ONE-STEP-BEST VALUE, DESIGN-BUILD (SINGLE AWARD)

The following have been modified:

MATOC SOURCE SELECTION

NOTE: The title to this section includes the words “Design-Build” although these MATOCs are not “design-build”. The title cannot be changed in the contract program so please disregard them in this title.

TITLE: Economically Disadvantaged Woman Owned Small Business (EDWOSB) Set Aside Independent Delivery Independent Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOCs) for General and Specialized Construction Related Services in Support of Various Military and Civil Works Construction Projects within the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Tulsa District Boundaries (“USACE Tulsa District EDWOSB IDIQ MATOCs for General & Specialized Construction Related Services”)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Overview

2.0 Proposal Submission Requirements and Instructions

2.1 Participation Information

2.2 Proposal Submission Requirements

2.3 General Instructions

2.4 Specific Instructions for the Technical Proposal (Volume 1)

2.5 Specific Instructions for the Seed TO Price Proposal (Volume 2)

3.0 Technical Proposal Contents and Related Evaluation Factors

4.0 Seed TO Price Proposal Contents and Related Evaluation Factors

5.0 Factor 1 – Performance Capability for MATOC

5.1 Volume 1, Tab A: Factor 1, Sub-Factor 1 – Relevant Specialized Experience

5.2 Volume 1, Tab B: Factor 1, Sub-Factor 2 – Management Effectiveness

5.3 Volume 1, Tab C: Factor 1, Sub-Factor 3 – Key Personnel

5.4 Volume 1, Tab D: Factor 1, Sub-Factor 4 – Safety Record

6.0 Factor 2 – Past Performance (Volume 1, Tab E)

7.0 Factor 3 – Performance Capability for Seed TO

7.1 Volume 1, Tab F: Factor 3, Sub-Factor 1 – Technical Approach

7.2 Volume 1, Tab G: Factor 3, Sub-Factor 2 – Proposed Contract Duration/Summary Schedule

8.0 Factor 4 – Price Proposal for Seed TO

8.1 Volume 2, Tab A: Proposal Cover Sheet

8.2 Volume 2, Tab B: Standard Form (SF) 1442, Solicitation, Offer and Award

8.3 Volume 2, Tab C: Pricing Schedule

8.4 Volume 2, Tab D: Bid Guarantee

8.5 Volume 2, Tab E: Representations and Certifications

8.6 Volume 2, Tab F: Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable)

8.7 Volume 2, Tab G: Financial Capacity and Pre-Award Information

9.0 Source Selection Evaluation Procedures

9.1 Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB)

9.2 Definitions

9.3 Adjectival Ratings, which incorporate a proposal risk assessment

9.4 Past Performance Risk Ratings

9.5 Technical Proposal Evaluation Rating System

9.6 Discussions

10.0 Basis of Award

ATTACHMENT 1: Experience Information Form (1 Page) ATTACHMENT 2: Past Performance Questionnaire (4 Pages)

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1 The Government intends to award a pool of up to five (5) MATOCs through FAR Part 15 One-Step Best Value “Trade Off” Source Selection. NOTE: A MATOC pool must have at least three (3) participants. When combined all non-cost factors are significantly more important than price. The Government is concerned with achieving the most advantageous balance between technical merit (“quality”) and price. The degree of importance of price could become greater depending upon the equality of the technical proposals. If competing technical proposals are determined to be essentially equal, price could become the controlling factor.

1.2 The MATOCs are IDIQ contracts as defined in FAR 16.504. Services will be provided by Firm-Fixed- Price (FFP) Task Orders (TOs). Only the Tulsa District shall issue TOs against this contract unless specifically authorized by a Tulsa District Contracting Officer.

1.3 In accordance with (IAW) the US Small Business Administration’s (SBAs) Women-Owned Small Business Federal Contract Program (WOSBFCP), these MATOCs will be set-aside for Economically Disadvantaged Women-Owned Small Businesses (EDWOSBs). The EDWOSB NAICS Set-Aside code is 237110 – Water and Sewer Line and Related Structures with a size standard of $33.5M.

1.4 Each MATOC will be a three (3) year contract (base year plus two option years). The Government is under no obligation to issue any TOs against these MATOCs in excess of the minimum contract obligation of $3,000.00.

1.5 IAW the SBA’s WOSBFCP, each MATOC may only have a maximum contract capacity of $4M.

Therefore, if the Government awards three (3) MATOCs the total capacity available (total sum of all task orders by all the MATOCs) would be $12M; four (4) MATOCs would be $16M and five (5) MATOCs would be $20M.

1.6 In order to not exceed the SBA’s manadated threshold for individual EDWOSB contracts, but still award as many task orders to the MATOCs as possible, the Government anticipates that these MATOCs will be used for smaller projects. Therefore, the individual task order capacity will not exceed $500K.

1.7 The MATOCs are intended for multi-tasking of general and specialized construction related services for a wide variety of new construction, maintenance, repair, alteration and minor and major construction type tasks for military and civil works projects primarily for the Tulsa District and customers within the geographic location. The tasks include, but are not limited to, work plans, total facility renovation, new construction; repairs and alterations;

preventive maintenance; installation/construction of the following systems: heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC), plumbing, electrical, elevators, building envelope, road and pavements, fire protection, antiterrorism/force protection (ATFP); environmental abatement, utility system modifications, and operations activities. This contract is intended to execute new construction, or construction repairs of real and personal property facilities, e.g., maintenance, repair, asbestos and lead-based paint abatement, and major and minor construction situations relating to, but not limited to, architectural, civil, mechanical, plumbing, structural, electrical, HVAC, instrumentation, telecommunications, and ATFP.

1.8 Location of projects could be anywhere in the USACE Tulsa District’s area of responsibility: Tulsa District’s MILCON boundaries include military installations in Texas, New Mexico and Oklahoma; Tulsa District’s Civil Works boundaries include all of Oklahoma and portions of Texas and Kansas.

1.9 Upon receipt of a TO, the Contractor shall provide all labor, materials, supplies, parts (to include system components), plant, supervision, equipment, and related services (except when specified as Government furnished), to perform the work as specified. Contractor's work and responsibility shall include all Contractor planning, programming, administration, and management necessary to provide all work as specified. The Contractor shall conduct all work in strict accordance with the contract and all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, codes, and directives. The Contractor shall provide related services such as preparing and submitting required reports, performing administrative work, and submitting necessary information as specified under this contract and within each TO. The Contractor shall ensure that all work provided meets requirements of the base contract and the scope of work for each TO and any specifications included with the TO or in any applicable document.

2.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS

2.1. Participation Information: Firms formally organized as construction contractors that have associated specifically for this project, consortia of firms or any other interested parties may submit proposals. Associations may be as Joint Ventures (JVs) or “team” arrangements.

2.2. Proposal Submission Requirements:

2.2.1. Each Offeror must submit a Technical Proposal that includes the following:

Performance Capability for the MATOC demonstrating their capability to successfully execute the type of projects described in Paragraph 1.7. The Government will evaluate the Proposal in accordance with the criteria described herein.

Performance Capability for Seed TO described below. The Government will evaluate the Proposal in accordance with the criteria described herein.

SEED TO: Skiatook Generator/Slide Repair & MCKARNS Slope Protection Repair

This project will be a total turn-key contract with all work being performed by the Contractor. The Contractor shall provide all plant, materials, equipment, labor, instruments, tools, subcontractors, supervision, management, and travel necessary to complete all work in accordance with the Summary of Work, the provided drawing, the specifications, the basic MATOC clauses and specifications and all other contract documents and requirements. The work required is summarized as follows: (1) replacement of 75 KW/480 V/3-phase, 94 KVA stand-by diesel generator and all associated appurtenances at the Skiatook Lake Gate Tower; (2) repair of earthen slide/slope failure near the Skiatook Lake stilling basin; and (3) site grading and stone protection of five separate locations along the MKARNS, including access roads and clearing and grubbing.

2.2.2. Each Offeror must submit a Seed TO Price Proposal for the Seed TO described above. The Government will evaluate the Seed Order Price Proposal in accordance with the criteria described herein.

2.3. General Instructions:

2.3.1. The Technical Proposal and Seed TO Price Proposal must be submitted as separate volumes. Ensure that the outside of each separate volume is clearly marked to indicate its contents; and the identity of the Offeror.

Additionally, clearly identify the “original” price proposal and the “original” technical proposal on the outside cover.

2.3.2. Both Proposals must be received by the closing date and time set for receipt of proposals.

2.3.3. No dollar amounts from the Seed TO Price Proposal are to be included in the Technical Proposal.

2.3.4. All information intended to be evaluated as part of the Technical Proposal must be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal (Volume 1). Do not merely cross-reference similar material in the Seed TO Price Proposal, or vice versa. Also, do not include links to websites in lieu of incorporating information into your proposal.

2.3.5. Deviations and exceptions to the terms and conditions of the solicitation are not allowed. Should the offer include any standard company terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation, the offer may be deemed “unacceptable” and thus ineligible for award. Should the Offeror have any questions related to specific terms and conditions, these must be resolved prior to submission of the offer. If the Offeror must make any assumptions prior to submitting the proposal, the Offeror shall list and describe in detail the assumptions on the first page of each Tab. All assumptions shall be fully supported with the Offeror’s rationale and shall fully explain the impact, if any, on the performance and/or specific requirement of the RFP. The Offeror shall clearly describe on the Proposal Cover Sheet submitted with the Price Proposal any assumption to the contractual and/or technical terms and include the monetary impact on the solicitation with the price proposal. This information will not be evaluated separately but may impact the evaluation of other factors.

2.3.6. Submit only the hard-copy paper documents and the electronic files specifically authorized and/or required elsewhere in this section. Do not submit excess information, to include audio-visual materials, electronic media, etc.

2.3.7. Unless specifically authorized, use only 8 ½ by 11 inch paper for hard copy submissions.

2.3.8. Do not use a font size smaller than 10, an unusual font style such as script, or condensed print for any submission.

2.3.9. All page margins must be at least 1 inch wide, but may include headers and footers.

2.3.10. Use three-ring binders to assemble your proposal. Do not use spring clamps or exceed the recommended capacity of the fastener or binder.

2.3.11. “Confidential” projects cannot be submitted to demonstrate capability unless all of the information required for evaluation as specified herein can be provided to the Government as part of the Offeror’s technical proposal.

Offerors that include in their proposals information that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, must be clearly marked in accordance with the instructions at FAR 52.215-1, “Instructions to Offerors—Competitive Acquisition”, paragraph (e), “Restriction on disclosure and use of data”.

2.3.12. For submissions with page limitations, the pages will be counted as follows: One side of the paper is one page; information on both the back and front of one sheet of paper will be counted as two pages. Where authorized, fold-out pages (11" x 14" or 11" x 17") will count as one page. Tables of content, proposal cover letters, and tabs between proposal information do not count toward any page limitations in the proposal.

2.3.13. Proposal revisions shall be submitted as page replacements with revised text readily identifiable, e.g., bold face print or underlining. The source of the revision, e.g., Error, Omission, or Clarification, or amendment shall be included and be annotated for each revision. Proposal replacement pages shall be numbered, shall be clearly marked “REVISED”, shall show the date of revision, shall be submitted in appropriate number of copies (e.g., if two (2) copies of the original page was required, then two (2) copies of the revised page will also be required, and shall be a different color than the original pages they are to replace).

2.3.14. Offerors submitting proposals as a Joint Venture (JV) shall obtain a DUNS number and be registered in the CCR as the offering JV.

2.4. Specific Instructions for the Technical Proposal (Volume 1):

2.4.1. Submit the ORIGINAL and THREE (3) additional sets of the written Technical Proposal as described below. In addition, submit the complete Technical Proposal on one (1) CD capable of being read by a Windows 7 computer. The CD shall contain the entire Technical Proposal in.pdf format using Adobe Acrobat software. The documents may be scanned into a .pdf file. The .pdf file(s) should be clearly identified and “linked” together in a logical manner that closely follows the required organization for the written proposal.

2.4.2. The original and all copies of the proposal will be organized and labeled as specified in the chart in 3.0 below.

2.4.3. The following page limitations are established for each Factor/Sub-factor:

Title Contents Page Limit Factor 1 Performance Capability for

MATOC

Sub-Factor 1 Relevant Specialized Experience Narrative “Experience Information” forms

15 Pages No Limit

Sub-Factor 2 Management Effectiveness Narrative 25 Pages Sub-Factor 3 Key Personnel Resumes No Limit Sub-Factor 4 Safety Record OSHA Forms 300 & 300a

Narrative No Limit 6 pages

Factor 2 Past Performance CPARS Evaluations PPQs

No Limit No Limit

Factor 3 Performance Capability for Seed TO

Title Contents Page Limit Sub-Factor 1 Technical Approach Narrative 10 pages Sub-Factor 2 Proposed Contract Duration/

Summary Schedule Narrative Chart

5 Pages No Limit

2.5. Specific Instructions for the Seed TO Price Proposal (Volume 2)

2.5.1. Submit only an ORIGINAL written Seed TO Price Proposal as described below. In addition, submit the complete Price Proposal on one (1) CD capable of being read by a Windows 7 computer. The CD shall contain the entire Price Proposal in.pdf format using Adobe Acrobat software. The documents may be scanned into a .pdf file. The .pdf file(s) should be clearly identified and “linked” together in a logical manner that closely follows the required organization for the written proposal.

2.5.2 There are no page limits set for the Seed TO Price Proposal. However, limit your response to information required by this solicitation. Excess information will not be considered in the Government’s evaluation.

2.5.3. The Seed TO Price Proposal shall be organized and labeled as indicated in the chart in 4.0. Note: If the Offeror is not required to submit any information under a listed Tab in accordance with the instructions below, that tab can be omitted. However, do not renumber the subsequent tabs.

3.0. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL CONTENTS AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

VOLUME 1

Factor/

Subfactor/ Element

LOCATION DESCRIPTION RELATIVE IMPORTANCE

FACTOR 1 PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY

FOR MATOC

Equally Important to Factor 2—combined Factors 1 & 2 are the Most Important Factors

Sub-factor 1 Tab A Relevant Specialized Experience Most Important Sub-factor (more important than Sub-factors 2, 3 & 4)

Sub-factor 2 Tab B Management Effectiveness 2nd Most Important Sub-factor (less important than Sub-factor 1 and more important than Sub-factors 3 & 4) Sub-factor 3 Tab C Key Personnel 3rd Most Important Sub-factor

(less important than Sub-factors 1 & 2 and more important than Sub-factor 4)

Sub-factor 4 Tab D Safety Record – OSHA Forms 300 or 300a

4th Most Important Sub-factor (less important than Sub-factors 1, 2 & 3)

FACTOR 2

Tab E PAST PERFORMANCE Equally Important to Factor 1—combined Factors 1 & 2 are the Most Important Factors

FACTOR 3 PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY

FOR SEED TO

2nd Most Important Factor (less important than Combined Factors 1 & 2

& more important than Factor 4) Sub-factor 1 Tab F Technical Approach Most Important Sub-factor

(more important than Sub-factor 2)

Sub-factor 2 Tab G Proposed Contract Duration/Summary Schedule

2nd Most Important Sub-factor (less important than Sub-factor 1)

4.0. SEED TO PRICE PROPOSAL CONTENTS AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

VOLUME 2

Factor/ Sub-factor/

Element

LOCATION DESCRIPTION RELATIVE IMPORTANCE

N/A Tab A Proposal Cover Sheet Not Rated N/A Tab B Signed SF1442 and Acknowledgement of Amendments Not Rated

FACTOR 4 Tab C SECTION 00 11 00, SEED TASK

ORDER PRICE PROPOSAL

3rd Most Important Factor (less important than Factors 1, 2 & 3 combined) N/A Tab D Bid Guarantee (Bid Bond) Not Rated N/A Tab E Representations & Certifications or

ORCA Printout Not Rated

N/A Tab F JV Agreement (if applicable) Not Rated N/A Tab G Financial Capacity Go/No Go

5.0 FACTOR 1 – PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY FOR MATOC

5.1. Volume 1 – Tab A: Factor 1, Sub-Factor 1 - Relevant Specialized Experience

5.1.1. Submission Requirements:

5.1.1.1. The Offeror shall demonstrate “recent”, “relevant” experience on similar projects as described in

1. 5, using the “Experience Information” form that is Attachment 1 to this section.

5.1.1.2. The Offeror shall complete a minimum of three (3), but no more than five (5), “Experience Information” forms in response to this factor. All blocks must be filled in and all data should be accurate, current, and complete. All projects submitted must be at least 50% complete and completed within the last five years. Offerors are required to use the Experience Information Forms provided; to assist in their completion an electronic MS Word format of the forms will be provided.

5.1.1.4. The Offeror shall in a short narrative describe the role of the proposed subcontractors in the MATOC and the percentage of work they will perform.

5.1.1.5. IAW FAR Clause 52.219-14(c)(3) the Offeror shall be required to perform at least 15% of the MATOC’s shared contract capacity.

5.1.1.6. The Offeror shall complete a minimum of one (1), but no more than three (3), “Experience Information” forms for each subcontractor described in Paragraph 5.1.1.4. All blocks must be filled in and all data should be accurate, current, and complete. All projects submitted must be at least 50% complete and completed within the last five years.

5.1.2. Joint Venture (JV) Offeror

5.1.2.1. The JV Offeror shall in a short narrative (not to exceed one page) describe the role of each JV member. Details of the JV arrangement are to be submitted in Factor 1, Sub-Factor 2.

5.1.2.2. If the JV Offeror has “recent”, “relevant” experience as a JV on similar projects as described in

1.5 (i.e. was not formed specifically for these MATOCs), it shall demonstrate that experience using the “Experience Information” form (Attachment 1 to this Section). The JV Offeror shall complete a minimum of three (3), but no more than five (5), forms. All blocks must be filled in and all data should be accurate, current, and complete. All projects must be at least 50% complete and completed within the last five years.

5.1.2.3. If the JV Offeror does not have “recent, “relevant” experience as a JV on similar projects as described in 1.5 (i.e. was formed specifically for these MATOCs), it shall demonstrate the “recent”, “relevant” experience of its individual JV Members separately using the “Experience Information” form

(Attachment 1 to this Section). Each JV Offeror Member shall complete a minimum of three (3), but no more than five (5), forms. All blocks must be filled in and all data should be accurate, current, and complete. All projects must be at least 50% complete and completed within the last five years.

5.1.2.4. The JV Offeror shall in a short narrative describe the role of the proposed subcontractors in the SATOC and the percentage of work they will perform.

5.1.2.5. IAW FAR Clause 52.219-14(c)(3) the JV Offeror shall perform at least 15% of the MATOC’s shared contract capacity.

5.1.2.5. The JV Offeror shall complete a minimum of one (1), but no more than three (3), “Experience Information” forms for each subcontractor listed in Paragraph 5.1.2.4. All blocks must be filled in and all data should be accurate, current, and complete. All projects submitted must be at least 50% complete and completed within the last five years.

5.1.3. Evaluation Criteria:

5.1.3.1. The Government will evaluate the extent of “recent”, “related” experience of the Offeror and its subcontractors in regard to their proposed roles in the MATOC. The Government may place greater importance on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor, depending upon overall role and relevancy considerations.

5.1.3.2. The Government will consider extent of recent experience, degree of relationship of such experience to this project, demonstrated familiarity with applicable codes and local conditions. Some examples of relevancy to this project may include, but not be limited to:

Number, size, type work, complexity, location Dates (well under way or completed no more than 5 years preceding date of Solicitation) Firm's role and extent of work self-performed (brokering out all work and simply “pouring the sidewalks” or similar minor work on a cited project are examples of less relevant experience).

5.1.3.3. Federal Government project experience will not be rated inherently more important than non-Federal Government project experience.

5.1.3.4. Offerors demonstrating experience with projects of similar size and complexity will be viewed more favorably by the Government.

5.1.2.5. If any of the information required is not included in the submitted “Experience Information” forms, then the Offeror will be considered non-responsive and evaluated as unacceptable.

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

5.1.2.7. An Offeror will not receive credit under this factor for the relevant experience of key personnel proposed for these MATOCs.

5.2. Volume 1 -Tab B: Factor 1, Sub-Factor 2 – Management Effectiveness

5.2.1. Submission Requirements.

5.2.1.1. The Offeror shall in a narrative format describe its quality control approach and capabilities to maintain quality control of the awarded TOs. Describe the proposed quality control organization. Provide information on internal and external requests for information, progress meetings, site visits, contract completion, closeout, and completion documentation will be handled. There is no need to submit a quality control plan; that requirement will be per TO.

5.2.1.2. The Offeror shall in a narrative format describe its plan and capabilities to respond to the Government’s Request for Proposal (RFP) for a TO. Include the following:

Plan and capabilities to estimate, prepare, submit and/or negotiate TO Proposals within the range anticipated under the awarded contract;

Plan to interface with the Government for informational, collaborative and historical purposes regarding projects for a wide variety of customers simultaneously; and

Plan for TO management under the awarded contract, including your plan for conducting meetings and in-process reviews.

5.2.1.3. The Offeror shall in a narrative format describe its plan for managing subcontractor performance, acquisition, execution and administration.

5.2.1.4. The Offeror shall in a narrative format describe the type of work it intends to self-perform; including its available resources in personnel, construction plant and equipment.

5.2.1.5. The Offeror shall in a narrative format describe its available resources and capabilities to support the MATOC concurrently with other projected on-going or new work; its available resources and capabilities to manage and execute several concurrent TOs. The Offeror should include a list of all current and projected on-going projects;

complete with estimated completion date, brief description, and level of magnitude (in dollars).

5.2.1.6. The Offeror shall in a narrative format state why it is especially qualified to undertake of these MATOCs.

5.2.1.7. The Offeror shall in a narrative format provide a disclosure statement which concisely describes all the relevant facts concerning any past or present organizational conflicts of interest that relates to the type of projects described in 1.5. If applicable, the Offeror shall provide information to assure the Government that the conflicts of interest have been mitigated and/or neutralized to the maximum extent possible. If a conflict of interest is discovered after award of the MATOCs, the Contracting Office will make a decision whether to terminate the contract.

5.2.2. Joint Venture (JV) Offeror

5.2.2.1. The JV Offeror shall in a narrative format describe the JV arrangement, including a clear, detailed description of each JV member’s roles and responsibilities.

5.2.2.2. The JV Offeror shall provide a copy of the JV Agreement in Volume 2, Tab F as described in 9.1.6.

5.2.2.3. The JV Offeror shall provide a simple organization chart, illustrating the organization.

5.2.3. Evaluation Criteria:

5.2.2.1. The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the above requirements.

5.2.2.2. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the requirements for the MATOCs and its capability to execute the projects.

5.2.2.3. The Government will evaluate the clarity and strength of the overall organization and how well it is organized, structured and staffed to execute the entire scope of work.

5.2.2.4. The Government will evaluate if the JV Offeror members’ contribution to the organization is commensurate with their skills and background.

5.3 Volume 1 - Tab C: Factor 1, Sub-Factor 3 - Key Personnel

5.3.1. Submission Requirements.

5.3.1.1. The Offeror shall provide resume data for key personnel that are expected to be assigned to TOs under these MATOCs to include, but not limited to: Construction Project Managers, On-Site Superintendents (site project superintendent), and Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System Managers.

5.3.1.2. Paragraph 3.4.1 in Section 01 44 00 in the MATOC Specifications provides more detailed requirements for the CQC System Manager such as required qualifications, experience and training. The resumes should reflect that the proposed CQC Systems Managers meet these requirements.

5.3.1.3. Resume information to be provided shall be limited to no more than two (2) pages per person and shall include the following information as a minimum:

Name and title Project assignment Name of firm with which associated Years experience in the role identified.

Years experience with this firm and with other firms Education degree(s), year, specialization, if applicable Active professional registration, year first registered, if applicable Other experience and qualifications relevant to same/similar work required under this contract

5.3.2. Evaluation Criteria: The Government will evaluate the required information to determine how well the Offeror identifies and demonstrates that its key personnel meet or exceed minimum qualifications necessary to perform any work awarded through TOs on these MATOCs.

5.4 Volume 1, Tab D: Factor 1, Sub-Factor 4 – Safety Record – OSHA Forms 300 or 300a

5.4.1. Submission Requirements:

5.4.1.1. The Offeror shall submit either OSHA Form 300 or 300a showing their incident rates for all projects within the past three (3) years. This form, in Microsoft Excel format, can be downloaded from the Internet at:

http://www.osha.gov/recordkeeping/new-osha300form1-1-04.xls.

5.4.1.2. This data is to be converted using the following formula for each of the three (3) years:

Number of Lost Time Accidents for the Year (Column H on Form 300 or 300A) x 200,000 divided by Man-Hours Worked that Year (from Form 300A) = Incident Rate for the Year

The Offeror shall calculate the lost time incident rate for each of the past three (3) years using the appropriate OSHA Form data. These calculations shall be presented for each year with the mathematical average of all three years.

The target average lost time incident rate is 1.0. Offerors with an average lost time incident rate exceeding

1.0 are encouraged to submit an explanation of their incident rate and/or what they have done to improve their safety record.

5.4.1.3. The Offeror shall in a narrative format submit improvements in their safety record, safety awards, and other safety recognition.

5.4.1.4. The Offeror shall in a narrative format submit a description of their safety incentives program if one is established. The description shall include, as a minimum, what benefits the Offeror has seen by implementing the program including any known benefits to their customers and how the program is administered.

5.4.2. Evaluation Criteria: The Government will use all information available, to include CCASS rating for safety, lost time incident rate, safety incentive program, safety awards, and other indications of improvements in safety to evaluate the Offeror’s overall safety record.

6.0 FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE (Volume 1, Tab E)

6.1. Submission Requirements:

6.1.1. The Offeror shall provide Past Performance Information (PPI) for each “Experience Information” form submitted in Factor 1, Sub-Factor 1. If forms are submitted for sub-contractors, then PPI is required for them as well.

6.1.2. For Department of Defense (DoD) projects the Offeror should submit a copy of the Government Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Evaluations such as Construction Contract Performance Evaluations (CCASS). If unable to provide the printed CCASS evaluations, provide written notification that current ratings are available so that the Government may obtain the printed evaluation.

6.1.3. For non DoD projects or projects that do not have a CPARS evaluation, the Offeror shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) to the points of contact (POC) responsible for monitoring performance under those contracts (Attachment 2 of this solicitation). Completed PPQs can be submitted as follows:

Inserted in the proposal by the Offeror, or Submitted by the client directly to Contract Specialist Pamela Moody at pamela.s.moody@usace.army.mil

6.1.4. The Offeror should include a list of the POCs contact information for PPQs that have been requested, but are not included in the proposal. The Offeror should follow-up with the POCs to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires.

6.1.5. The Offeror shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

6.1.6. The Offeror may submit PPQs they have previously received to be used on other RFPs as long as they pertain to the projects submitted in Factor 1, Sub-factor 1.

6.1.7. Offerors that have no PPI shall notify the Contracting Officer (KO) in writing, prior to the date and time established for the solicitation closing, that they have had no previous clients and that the minimum number of questionnaires cannot be provided. If a sub-contractor has no PP, the Offeror shall notify the KO in writing as stated above.

6.1.8. Offerors should not request PPQs on projects that have final CPARS evaluations (CCASS). If a PPQ is received on a project where a final CPARS evaluation exists, the CPARS evaluation will serve as the official rating of record for evaluation purposes.

6.1.9. The Government may contact the provided POCs for information regarding the Offeror’s and its sub-contractors’ past performance on the project and for the purposes of assessing and verifying the scope of the work performed. The Offeror should ensure that accurate, current, and complete contact information for the POCs is provided.

6.1.10. The Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating PP. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, PP Information (PPI) retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval

System (PPIRS), using the CAGE/DUNS numbers of the Offeror, Prime JV Offeror members and sub-contractors;

inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other sources not provided by the Offeror.

6.1.11. 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.

6.1.12. If any negative PPI is received, the Offeror will be given an opportunity to provide a rebuttal.

6.2. Evaluation Criteria:

6.2.1. Past Performance evaluation includes two steps that result in the assessment of the Offeror’s probability of performing the requirements of the MATOC as follows:

Step 1: The Offeror’s PPI will be evaluated to determine if it is “recent” and if it is “very relevant”, “relevant”, “somewhat relevant” or “not relevant” to the requirements of the MATOCs.

Step 2: The Offeror’s PPI shall be given a Performance Confidence Assessment based on the performance evaluations contained in the PPI.

6.2.2. The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor performance. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, the Government will only evaluate past performance of the division or unit submitting the offer or by the team member.

POCs may be asked to comment on items such as quality of construction, timeliness, management of the work subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and contractor, level of support for such things as O&M manuals, training, correcting construction errors, warranty work, etc.

6.2.3. The Government will target areas covered in the requirements of this proposal including records of conforming to quality, schedule, cost control, customer satisfaction, level of support for such things as O&M manuals, training, problem resolution for construction errors, warranty work, and safety.

6.2.4. The Government will not release the information obtained from the POCs to the Offeror at any time, in order for the Government to solicit candid, unbiased interview comments.

6.2.5. The Government places a higher value on the following types of projects; but its evaluation is not limited to PPI on these types of projects:

Projects that document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation such as interviews with the POC, CPARS Evaluations or personal knowledge.

Projects that provided particularly difficult or unique challenges and required the Prime Contractor or its sub-contractors to use innovative methods to resolve problems successfully.

6.2.6. The Offeror will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor, if relevant.

6.2.7. PPI of the Offeror’s key personnel, apart from the Offeror (the entity) will not be acceptable PPI for the Offeror.

6.2.8. If the Government does not obtain PPI for the projects identified by the Offeror or its sub-contractors in Factor 1 and cannot establish PPI for the Offeror or its sub-contractors through other sources, PP will be rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The performance risk will be considered “unknown”.

7.0. FACTOR 3 – PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY FOR SEED TO

7.1 Volume 1, Tab F: Factor 3, Sub-Factor 1 – Technical Approach

7.1.1. Submission Requirements:

7.1.1.1. The Offeror shall in a narrative format describe the proposed technical approach to executing the Seed TO.

7.1.1.2. The Offeror shall in a narrative format describe the proposed organizational and technical approach to project management and execution.

7.1.1.3. The Offeror shall in a narrative format describe the proposed CQC Organization.

7.1.1.4. The Offeror shall in a narrative format describe and DEMONSTRATE that they will be in accordance with Clause 52.219-14, LIMITATIONS ON SUBCONTRACTING, in Section 00 72 00.

7.1.2. Evaluation Criteria:

7.1.2.1. The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the above narratives.

7.1.2.2. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the Seed TO requirements and its capability to execute it.

7.1.2.3. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s project management and execution approach and its proposed CQC organization.

7.2 Volume 1, Tab G: Factor 3, Sub-Factor 2 – Proposed Contract Duration/Summary Schedule

7.2.1. Submission Requirements:

7.2.1.1. The Offeror has two options for proposing contract duration for the Seed TO:

The Offeror may use the Government’s number of calendar days for completion as set forth in Section 00 73 00, Clause 52.211-10 COMMENCEMENT, EXECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK; or

The Offeror may propose a shorter contract duration that shall become the required contract duration at TO award.

7.2.1.2. The Offeror shall submit a summary level schedule that meets the proposed contract duration including any construction phasing. The Offeror shall provide enough detail to demonstrate an understanding of the Seed TO;

however, the amount of detail that will be required in the pre-work submittals is not required in the proposal.

7.2.1.3. The summary schedule shall be task oriented, indicating the number of calendar days, after Notice to Proceed (NTP), by which milestones are to be achieved. The Offeror may use a critical path or other method of choice; however, schedules shall be graphically represented giving attention to the following features:

Show the overall construction phase for major item(s), for the site work, and for utilities (if applicable).

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

Show overall critical path.

7.2.1.3. The Offeror shall provide the summary schedule in such a way that is easily read. 11” x 14” and 11” x 17” paper is authorized for use for the schedule(s). If inserted into the Technical Proposal it should be folded in such a way as to be easily assessable. If it is bound separately, it should be clearly labeled.

7.2.1.4. The Offeror must demonstrate the capability and flexibility to plan and schedule the complete project to meet the proposed contract completion period. Any constraints should be clearly identified on the schedules (e.g., labor or material availability, permits, weather, etc.).

7.2.1.5. The Offeror shall in a narrative format provide a proposed phasing plan.

7.2.1.6. The Offeror shall in a narrative format provide proposed Crew Assembly and Work Schedule(s).

7.2.1.7. The Offeror shall in a narrative format provide a Safety Plan.

7.2.2. Evaluation Criteria:

7.2.2.1. In assessing the reasonableness of the Offeror’s proposed contract duration, the Government may take into account how well the proposed summary schedule supports the proposed contract duration, as well as use other information, such as but not limited to, independent judgment concerning logic, constraints and typical construction durations.

7.2.2.2. A proposed contract duration that is shorter than the Government’s number of calendar days for completion set forth in Section 00 73 00 Clause 52.211-10 will receive additional rating consideration, provided it is realistic and deemed to be achievable. The Government may consider an unreasonably condensed contract duration, which places additional cost or schedule risk on the Government or which may create a risk of contract or performance failure, as a significant weakness or a deficiency.

7.2.2.3. During the subsequent comparison between proposals, differences between proposed contract durations of at least three weeks (differences of 21 calendar days between proposals) will be considered an advantage to the Government, with greater differences also considered, accordingly. No advantage will be considered between proposals for differences less than 21 calendar days.

7.2.2.4. The length of the Offeror’s proposed summary schedule must match the proposed contract duration. If it is shorter than the proposed contract duration, it offers no advantage to the Government because it is non-binding, only representing a preliminary planned schedule. A schedule shorter than the proposed contract duration may indicate the Offeror is placing additional risk on the Government for any delays between the scheduled completion date and the required contract completion period. Both parties shall assume field overhead costs are included in the contract price for the full proposed contract duration. Therefore, the Government believes that there is no valid need to shorten the schedule less than the full proposed contract duration.

7.2.2.5. The Government will assess the strength and realism of the proposed summary schedule by evaluating the Offeror’s understanding of events associated with coordinating submittals and restrictions that must be considered in the schedule (e.g., permitting, long lead items, phasing, etc.).

7.2.2.6. A proposed summary schedule that offers advantage(s) to the Government over one that merely indicates an adequate understanding of the scope, restrictions, major milestones and general understanding of the various events that can affect start and completion of the Seed TO will receive additional consideration.

7.2.2.7. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed Phasing Plan, Crew Assembly and Work Schedule(s) and Safety Plan for realism and logic.

8.0. FACTOR 4 – SEED TO PRICE PROPOSAL

8.1 Volume 2, TAB A: Proposal Cover Sheet

8.1.1. The Offeror shall provide a proposal cover sheet as required by FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors— Competitive Acquisitions.

8.1.2. The format IAW FAR 52.215-1(c)(2)(i)-(v) is as follows:

PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

Solicitation Number:

DUNS Number:

The name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the Offeror (and electronic address if available):

A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all the terms, conditions and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item.

Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation:

Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

NOTE: The Government also requests that the Offeror provide their Tax Identification Number.

8.2. Volume 2, TAB B: Standard Form (SF) 1442, Solicitation, Offer, and Award:

8.2.1. The Offeror shall complete Blocks 14 – 17 on the back of the SF 1442.

8.2.2. The Offeror shall complete Block 19 on the back of the SF 1442 to acknowledge receipt of all Amendments IAW the instructions on the SF 30, Amendment of Solicitation. The Offeror does not need to sign and return the Amendments; acknowledgment in Block 19 is sufficient.

8.1.3 The Offeror shall complete Blocks 20A and 20C and sign Block 20B on the back of the SF 1442.

8.3. Volume 2, TAB C: FACTOR 4 – PRICING SCHEDULE.

8.3.1. Submission Requirements

8.3.1.1. The Offeror shall complete Section 00 11 10 in the Seed Task Order SOW & Specifications, in its entirety.

8.3.1.2. The Offeror shall include price breakdown information behind the Pricing Schedule.

8.3.2. Evaluation Criteria:

8.3.2.1. The Price Proposal for Seed TO will not be rated or scored, but will be evaluated for completeness, fairness and reasonableness IAW FAR 15.404(b), Prince Analysis for Commercial and Non-Commercial Items. Some of the techniques that will be used are:

Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation

Comparison of proposed prices with the Independent Government Cost Estimate

Analysis of date other than certified cost or pricing data (as defined at FAR 2.101) provided by the Offeror such as the supplemental price breakdown information provided behind the Pricing Schedule

8.3.2.2. The Price Proposal for Seed TO will also be evaluated for appearance of unbalanced line item prices IAW FAR 15.404-1(g).

8.3.2.3. The Offeror is cautioned to evenly distribute direct costs, such as material,…