W912BV-17-R-0020-0001.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)

30-105-04 EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Repair Building 280 Mechanical System & Finishes, Sheppard Air Force Base, Wichita County , TX.

1. The proposal due date IS NOT EXTENDED.

2. Section 00 21 00 is revised to increase the page limitation to 50 pages and made part of the solicitation. The revised information can be located by searching for “*AM1”

3. All potential offerors must acknowledge this amendment by completing blocks 15A, 15B and 15C of the this page.

Return the completed first page of this amendment with your proposal.

4. POC for this amendment is Pun Chittchang, punnie.chittchang@usace.army.mil, 918-669-7544.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 30

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15C. DATE SIGNED 15B. 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-17-R-0020

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9 Feb 2016

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, 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 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

7-Mar 2017

CODE

CONTRACTING DIV

USACE, 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 CODE CODE

EMAIL: TEL:

X

X 1

RFP SECTION 00 22 10: PHASE 1 OF 2 PHASE SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1. The Government is looking for ways to streamline design and construction, manage labor and other resource constraints in an effort to reduce costs and achieve an aggressive schedule in executing contracts to meet the Air Force program and mission goals of faster project execution at lower cost, while taking advantage of industry standards, means and methods.

In Phase 1 of the 2 phase design-build selection procedure, interested firms or joint venture entities (referred to as “offerors”) submit certain specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully execute the design-build construction contract resulting from this solicitation. The Government will evaluate the performance capability proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein and will select no more than five (5) of the Phase 1 offerors to compete for the design-build contract in Phase 2.

1.2. In Phase 2, the short-listed offerors will submit proposals in accordance with Section 00 22 20 to be provided with the Phase 2 solicitation.

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1. Who May Submit: Any legally organized Small Business firm may submit a proposal that is formally organized as a design-build entity, Small Business design firms and construction contractors that have associated specifically for this project, or consortia of Small Business firms may submit proposals.

Associations may be as joint ventures or as key team subcontractors. To qualify for Phase 2, the Offeror or Offeror’s subcontractor has to have or will have to have professional architects and engineers, registered in the appropriate technical disciplines and the requirements specified in Contract Clause, ”Requirements for Registration of Designers”, must be met. All designs must be under the direct supervision of appropriately licensed professionals for each discipline involved.

2.2. Proposal materials shall be submitted via AMRDEC SAFE website https://safe.armdec.army.mil/safe/, or via email, containing the proposal in PDF file format using Adobe Acrobat software. Proposals shall be tabbed and labeled in a manner to afford easy identification from a Table of Contents.

Each page shall be identified with the appropriate page number centered at the bottom of the page. Sheet size of the proposal contents shall be 8-1/2 inches x 11 inches where sheets are prepared specifically for this proposal, unless another paper size is specifically authorized elsewhere in this section for a particular submission. Do not use alternative paper sizes (e.g., 11” x 14” or 11” x 17” sheets) unless specifically authorized in this section for a particular submission. Do not use a font size smaller than 10, https://safe.armdec.army.mil/safe/ an unusual font style such as script, or condensed print for any submission. All page margins must be at least 1 inch wide, but may include headers and footers.

Phase 1 proposals shall not exceed *AM1 50 single-sided pages *AM1, excluding the cover sheet and Table of Contents. A page is defined as text or information on one side of the paper. Factor 2 – Past Performance will not be counted towards this page limitation, nor will the resumes submitted for key personnel. The Government will not evaluate any information beyond the page limitation noted. The Government will not review any information submitted in an appendix or attachment to the proposal. The Offeror shall not submit verbatim sections of this solicitation as part of their proposal. Offers that do not meet these requirements may be subject to rejection. Phase 1 does not involve a pricing submission.”

3.0 PHASE 1 PROPOSAL AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

Location Factor Number Description Relative Importance

Tab A SF 1442 and Proposal Data Sheet N/A

Tab B Factor 1 Specialized Experience 1st Most Important Factor

Tab C Factor 2 Past Performance 2nd (Slightly less important than Factor 1)

Tab D Factor 3 Organization and Technical Approach

3rd (Slightly less than Factor 2)

4.0 TAB A - STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

4.1. Submit the SF 1442, completed and signed by a person authorized by the Offeror. Include the completed proposal data sheet (See attachment 1, provided at the end of this Section).

5.0 TAB B – FACTOR 1 - SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

5.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.1.1. The prime contractor and the design firm(s) (or prime contractor if design is to be self-performed) shall each demonstrate recent, relevant experience on similar projects, using the Construction – Specialized Experience Form (Attachment 2), and the Designer – Specialized Experience Form (Attachment 3) at the end of the section. Offerors may identify state and local government and private contracts that are similar to the Government’s requirements. If the offeror is a joint venture, each firm shall provide information, demonstrating experience relevant to their role on this project. Submit projects selected from those discussed in the experience narrative that are currently well underway (designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or completed and turned over no longer that five (5) years preceding the date of this Solicitation. Both the Prime

Contractor and the design firm(s) shall each submit at least 3 but not more than 5 projects that are relevant/similar to the subject project with a dollar value that equals or exceeds $4 million dollars. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division or unit submitting the offer or by the team member.

Design firms may list prime contractors they have worked for or government, private or commercial customers. The offeror shall select the design firm(s).If projects were design-build, so identify them.

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

5.1.3. The offeror should describe any previous teaming experience between current team members, if not described in the project list. Describe team members’ experience on construction projects which are inclusive of multi-unit or large facility design and renovation with major impacts to facility systems (mechanical, electrical, plumbing, etc.) and architectural elements, if not included on the project list. Offeror may describe design-build experience on other type projects. The above information is limited to projects that are well underway or that have been completed and turned over no longer than the five years preceding the date of this solicitation. Limit to two pages.

5.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.2.1. The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, related experience of the prime contractor and design firm(s) in design, construction or design-build, as relevant to their role on this project. If the design will be accomplished in-house, rather than by subcontract, then the design element of specialized experience will still be evaluated, realizing that the work is being done in-house. Experience on the similar projects identified in the project lists will receive more consideration than experience provided in the supplemental narrative. The Government may place greater importance on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor, depending upon overall role and relevancy considerations. Federal Government project experience will not be rated inherently more important than non-Federal Government project experience.

5.2.2. The Offeror must submit the requested information to demonstrate a record of recent, related experience in both design and construction, for the project type (which may include similar state or local government or private counterparts) included in this contract, as described in Section 00 22 10. The firm(s) preparing the design must demonstrate qualifications and experience in multi-unit or large facility design and renovation with major impacts to all facility systems. Recent experience includes projects well underway (see above criteria) or those completed and turned over within five

(5) Years of the proposal issue date for this RFP for design or construction experience. Joint Venture partners should each demonstrate experience commensurate with their role on this project or explain in the supplemental narrative how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project.

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

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

5.2.5. 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:

(1) Number, size, type work, complexity, location

(2) Dates (well under way or completed no more than 5 years preceding date of Solicitation)

(3) Firm's role and extent of work self-performed (brokering out all work and simply “pouring the sidewalks” on a cited project are examples of less relevant experience)

5.2.6. Previous design-build experience is not necessary for an acceptable rating. The Government may consider previous D-B experience a strength, even if the experience is on different type projects than this project.

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

6.0 TAB C – FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

6.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

a. For the projects listed under Factor 1 – Specialized Experience, the Government will query the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (to include ACASS, CCASS, and CPARS) to validate past performance ratings on Department of Defense contracts and any other past performance information the Government deems necessary to evaluate a contractor’s past performance.

b. For each project that does not have an ACASS, CCASS, or CPARS evaluation, Offerors shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included at Attachment 4 to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance under such contracts. The Past Performance Questionnaire included in the solicitation is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 2. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted to the Contract Specialist as shown in Attachment 4. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment 4) which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Contract Specialist identified in Section 00 21 00, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors via email prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

c. The information contained in the questionnaires will be used to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance. If any negative past performance information is received, the contractor will be given an opportunity to provide rebuttal. Each contractor shall provide at least three (3) past performance ratings. Any rating an offeror has in ACASS, CCASS, and CPARS for the projects listed under Factor 1 will count toward this requirement.

The offeror is responsible for ensuring that the KO has received a minimum of three (3) questionnaires prior to that date/time or has provided written notification to the KO that they have current ratings in ACASS, CCASS, and CPARS. Entities that have no past customers shall notify the KO in writing, prior to the date and time established for the RFP closing, that they have had no previous clients and that the minimum number of questionnaires cannot be provided. It is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure that the reference documentation is provided, as the Government may not make additional requests for past performance information from the references.

The evaluation form should be submitted with your proposal or, if the client requests, be provided to the Contract Specialist directly from the reference.

Do not request past performance questionnaires on projects that have final ACASS, CCASS, or CPARS evaluations. If a past performance questionnaire is received on a project where a final ACASS, CCASS, or CPARS evaluation exists, the ACASS, CCASS, or CPARS evaluation will serve as the official rating of record for evaluation purposes.

d. The Government may contact references provided as part of Factor 1 – Specialized Experience, for information regarding the Offeror’s past performance on the project and for the purposes of assessing and verifying the scope of the work performed. Offerors should provide accurate, current, and complete contact information for references provided in the project descriptions.

e. The Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (ESRS), and any other sources not provided by the offeror.

f. 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.

6.1.1 Joint Venture Submission Requirements. Offerors submitting proposals as a Joint Venture (JV) shall obtain a DUNS number and be registered in the CCR as the offering Joint Venture. The Offeror must provide three (3) to five

(5) "recent", "relevant" projects performed by the JV that reflect the JV's ability to perform the work required in this solicitation as required by paragraph 5.1 “Specialized Experience”.

a. If the Offeror cannot provide a sufficient number of projects as the JV to meet the minimum requirement, the Offeror must provide those "recent", "relevant" projects that it has performed as the JV, and then supplement the record with additional "recent", "relevant" projects performed by each JV member in their individual capacities.

In such instance, each JV member must satisfy the minimum requirement of three (3) projects, to include any performed as the JV.

b. If the JV has no "recent", "relevant" projects performed by the JV, then each member of the JV must provide two (2) to three (3) "recent", "relevant" projects performed by the JV member that reflect the JC member's experience commensurate with their role on this project or how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project as required under Factor 1. In such instsances the combined experience projects, submitted by each member of the JC, shall not exceed the maximum number of projects stated in paragraph 5.1.1.

c. In addition to the examples of "Company Specialized Experience" and "Past Performance Surveys", the Joint Venture shall provide a brief narrative (not to exceed 1 page) stating the roles that each partner of the Joint Venture will perform on this project. The attached “Specialized Experience" and "Past Performance Survey" forms shall be used by the Joint Venture or the JV partners. Explain how the JV is structured and provide an organization diagram that outlines communications and authorities.

d. Verification: The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects not submitted by reviewing the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS, or other Government appraisal systems or to interview owner or references.

The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information. An Offeror will be afforded the opportunity to reply to or explain adverse performance information to which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to address.

6.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

a. Past Performance evaluation includes two aspects that results in the assessment of the offeror’s probability of performing the requirements stated in the RFP based on the offeror’s demonstrated performance on pages or less clearly but concisely describe the organizational and technical approach to project management and execution. The 15 page recent, relevant contracts (well under way or turned over no longer than five (5) years preceding the date of this solicitation). First offeror’s past performance will be evaluated to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the requirements of the RFP. Second the offeror’s past performance shall be given a Performance Confidence Assessment based on how well the contractor performed on recent and relevant past contracts. 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. Owners/references 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 as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting construction errors, warranty work, etc. The Government will target areas covered in the requirements of this proposal including records of conforming to quality, schedule, cost control, customer satisfaction, and level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, and problem resolution for construction errors, warranty work, and safety. The Government will not release interview information to the Offeror at any time, in order for the Government to solicit candid, unbiased interview comments. The Government also places a higher value on projects, which document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation, for example, but not limited to telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the proposal, CCASS/ACASS or other agency performance databases, Offeror furnished references, or personal knowledge. The Government also places a higher value on recent relevant projects and projects, which provided particularly difficult or unique challenges and the innovative methods the contractor used to resolve problems successfully. The Government’s evaluation is not limited to past performance information on the cited example projects. Firms without a history of past performance will receive a neutral rating.

b. Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor, if relevant. An entity may not establish past performance based on the past performance of its proposed key personnel, apart from that of the entity. If the Government does not obtain past performance information for the projects identified by the Offeror and cannot establish a past performance record for the Offeror through other sources, past performance will be rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The performance risk will be considered “unknown”.

7.0 TAB D – FACTOR 3 - ORGANIZATION AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

7.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

7.1.1 Provide information that describes the offeror’s organization and intended technical approach to executing the design-build contract per the detailed requirements herein. Limit the information to fifteen limit does not include resumes submitted for key personnel or the Safety Plan, below. Address the items in the order shown below.

7.1.2 Organization: Describe what firms, their resources and how their resources will be utilized, their roles and responsibilities and any contractual arrangements that have been established. Clearly describe any teaming or joint venture arrangements, including a clear description of each firm’s roles and responsibilities on the project.

The Offeror shall document unequivocal teaming arrangements with its design firms(s) (see Attachment 7). A copy of the teaming or joint venture agreement(s) may be appended to the plan (not included in the page limitation). Include a simple organizational chart, illustrating the organization, including the proposed quality control group(s).

Present a matrix of responsibilities for each firm in executing the key work breakdown structure activities of the project, including design and construction activities for each major feature (i.e., demolition, site work, electrical, mechanical, etc.). Identify the design firm(s) chosen for the project, if not to be self-performed. Phase 2 Offerors will be required identify the specific firm(s) chosen for mechanical and interior finish work. Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing the how the design and construction process will be managed and the authorities and the delegations of authority within the team Include a key personnel organization chart that clearly depicts the key positions and the names of the personnel, their firm affiliations and their job locations, their job/position title within the organization. The key personnel organization chart shall be consistent with the corporate organization chart, with the matrix of responsibilities assigned to the D-B team firms, and with the list of key personnel. Chart may be 11”x17” foldout to be counted as one (1) page.

7.1.3 Technical Approach for Design and Construction: Describe the technical approach to design and construction of the project. Include any consideration of fast-tracking design and construction (if applicable). The construction is required to be conducted in 2-phases with 1 of the 2 phases fully occupied during construction. Discuss how the construction will be conducted with no or minimal impact to the occupied portion of the facility. The Government is looking for ways to streamline construction, manage labor and other resource constraints in an effort to reduce costs and achieve an aggressive schedule with no or minimum impact to the occupants of the facility. In Phase 2, the Offeror will describe its design packaging plan for fast tracking (if applicable), the proposed project schedule, and contract duration. That level of detail is not required in Phase 1.”

7.1.4 Collaborative Approach for Design-Build: Describe interactions within the team and with the Corps of Engineers during the design. Discuss how the configuration management system will track and control design evolution and changes during design for quality control and to facilitate quicker Government reviews. Describe the role of the construction team members during design. Describe the role and interaction of the design team with the construction team during construction, addressing, as a minimum, maintaining configuration management of the design during construction, including control and approval of revisions to the accepted design; requests for information;

inspection support, shop drawing and submittal reviews and approvals;

progress meetings; site visits, if any; contract completion, closeout, as-built and completion documentation.

7.1.5 Planning and Scheduling: Describe the time control capabilities and systems to be used to plan design and construction and how the schedule will be used to manage design and construction. Discuss internal procedures for handling delays to minimize time growth or “schedule creep”. In Phase 2, the offeror will develop a summary schedule. In Phase 1, the Government is interested in the offeror’s planning and scheduling capabilities. Schedule and Scheduler shall meet the requirements of section 01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE.

7.1.6 Self-Performed Work: Generally describe the items the offeror will self-perform to comply with the requirements in Section 00 73 00 for self-performed work.

7.1.7 Quality Control: Describe the team’s quality control approach, corporate systems and capabilities to maintain quality control of the design and construction. Describe the proposed quality control organization, including the proposed staffing plan. Provide specific information on how you will manage design quality control, track design evolution and changes during design to meet the schedule and to facilitate quicker Government reviews. Provide information on how you will handle internal and external requests for information, shop drawings, submittal reviews, progress meetings, site visits, contract completion, closeout, as-built, and completion documentation. In addition to the required designer-of-record roles specified within the RFP for maintaining integrity of the design, describe any other DOR involvement in the quality control process, if any. There is no need to submit a quality control plan as the successful offeror will provide that after award. In phase 1, the Government is interested in demonstrable capabilities to assure and control quality and how the offeror can achieve or exceed the contract’s minimum quality control system requirements. Quality Control System and Quality Control Manager shall meet the requirements of section 01 45 00.00 10 QUALITY CONTROL.

7.1.8 Key Project Personnel Capabilities and Experience: (Not included in the 15 page count limit above.) Provide a consolidated list of key personnel with name, position title and description of project responsibility for each. Indicate whether each individual has had a significant role in any of the cited project examples. If re-assignment of personnel is considered possible, provide alternate professionals in each assignment. Include key designers, whether employed by the prime or by a design subcontractor. For each person provide a brief resume, using the Key Personnel Resume forms (Attachment 5) at the end of this section. Include the Contractor’s Project Manager responsible for design and construction, the Design Manager, the Designers of Record (DoR’s) for architecture, structural, civil, fire protection, electrical, mechanical/plumbing, and permit preparers.

7.1.8.1 The contractor shall provide a Project Manager (PM) over this project who is responsible for overall project management and execution. This individual shall be responsible for the project staff and overall project planning, organizational control, stakeholder management, leadership and team building, controls, budgets, resource control, risk management, coordination, communications, documentation, schedule, quality, contract compliance, project closeout, and safety on the project. The project manager will be responsible for checking and measuring project progress towards meeting project and contract objectives, evaluating deviations from the project plan, and make necessary corrective actions to project and contract deviations.

7.1.8.2 The Project Manager must meet one of the minimum credential/ experience requirements:

A. Be a licensed Architect through AIA.

B. Be a licensed Professional Engineer (PE).

C. Professional Project Manager (PMP) as outlined by the Project Management Institute (PMI) or Program Management Professional (PgMP)

D. Certified Professional Construction (CPC) as outlined by the American Institute of Constructors’ Certification Commission to include 8 years of experience managing construction.

E. Certified Cost Professional (CCP) or Certified Estimating Professional (CEP) as outlined by AACE International.

F. Bachelor of Science Degree in Construction Management and 6 years of construction and/or project management experience from a certified Associated Colleges of Construction/Associated Schools of Construction Education Program.

G. Master’s Degree in Construction or Industrial Management and 4 years of construction and/or project management experience.

H. No Bachelor’s Degree + Twenty Years documented full-time experience as a construction or project manager with five references for contact.

I. Any Bachelor’s Degree plus Ten Years documented full-time experience as a construction or project manager with five references for contact.

J. Retired Navy Chief Petty Officer (SeaBees) and 4 years of construction and/or project management experience.

K. Canadian Construction Association (CCA) Gold Seal Certification as a Project Manager.

7.1.8.3 The Project Manager with one of the above approved credentials shall not be employed by the Designer of Record, but shall be directly employed by the prime contractor. If the Project Manager will hold scheduling responsibilities, the Project Manager shall meet the minimum requirements as outlined in Section 01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE for the Designated Authorized Representative (DAR).

7.1.8.4 Permit preparers must be professionally registered in the state the project is located. Where projects are located in states that require a separate registration for design of structures, the structural designer of record must be registered in that state. All other designers of record must be registered in accordance with contract clause: 52.236-25, Requirements for Registration of Designers. For construction, include the on-site manager and general superintendent (in charge of self-performed work). Provide unequivocal letters of commitment from all proposed key personnel not currently employed by the team members. Use the form letter (Attachment 6) at the end of this section.

7.1.9. Safety Plan: Describe the team’s safety approach, corporate systems and capabilities to maintain safety requirements during construction.

Describe the proposed safety organization, including the proposed staffing plan. The intent is to provide enough detail to demonstrate the Offeror’s understanding of the project; however, it is not the intent for the Offeror to provide the amount of detail that will be required in the pre-work submittals contained in Division 01 of this RFP. Limit to two pages (not included in the total 15 pages listed in para. 7.1.1). Safety Manager shall meet the requirements of section 01 35 26 GOVERNMENTAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS.

7.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA:

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

7.2.2. Organization: The Government will evaluate clarity and strength of the overall organization, the structure and staffing to execute the entire scope of work. The Offeror is required to select and commit to design firms to achieve an “acceptable” rating. Joint venture participant’s contribution to the organization should be commensurate with their skills and background.

7.2.3. Technical Approach for Design and Construction: The Government places a higher value on an offer that provides proposed methods to streamline construction, manage labor and other resource constraints in an effort to reduce costs and support an aggressive schedule, including such things as fast-tracking (if applicable), and conducting construction related activities with no or minimal impact to the facility occupants. The

Government will also consider whether the approach reduces on-site craft labor and susceptibility to inclement weather delays.

7.2.4. Collaborative Approach for Design-Build: Reference “Section 01 33 16 DESIGN AFTER AWARD”. The Government will evaluate the integration of the design and construction firms and the staff during design and construction. The constructor must be actively involved in the design process, not just leaving it up to the designer. The offeror must have an effective configuration management system to control and track revisions to the design. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s understanding of the design process and the roles of the designers of record and the Government reviewers. The Government will evaluate the role of the designer in maintaining design integrity throughout the process, including its key roles during construction. The Government places greater value in collaborative development of the design and submittals as early as possible during the design and construction process. Additional consideration will be given to a team that includes as many subcontractors as possible (e.g., the key subs for interior finishes, mechanical systems installation, etc.) during design development, prior to release of the applicable design packages for construction, so that systems and trade coordination can reduce interferences, increase constructability and speed up construction operations.

7.2.5. Planning and Scheduling: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s scheduling capabilities to manage an integrated fast track design-build schedule. Reference section 01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE (Full).

7.2.6. Self-Performed Work: The Government will evaluate the

Contractor’s resources to determine if it has the capability to self-perform the required amount of the project, in accordance with public policy to assure adequate interest in and supervision of all work.

7.2.7. Quality Control: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s capabilities and understanding of the contractually required quality control processes for both design and construction. The Government places value upon continued participation by the designers of record during the construction quality control process. The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the staffing plan to cover all required tasks and responsibilities. Reference section 01 45 00.00 10 QUALITY CONTROL.

7.2.8. Key Personnel Capabilities and Experience: The Government will evaluate the required information to determine how well the Offeror identifies and demonstrates that its key personnel meet or exceed minimum qualifications necessary, which includes previous satisfactory experience in similar type work, to manage, control and perform the design, and to perform construction. Performance of key personnel proposed for this project may be taken into account when it comes to the attention of the Government.

Evaluate how well the Offeror demonstrates that it has the necessary structure and experienced, qualified personnel within its organization to effectively manage, control, administer and execute the integrated design and construction operations, quality control program and subcontracts. This shall be achievable with other projected on-going work. Give additional consideration to previous design-build experience. Evaluate whether designers of record are registered (a requirement), experienced and qualified, that permit preparers are qualified in the jurisdiction (a requirement) and that, if the project is located in a state with separate structural engineering registration, that the structural designer of record is properly registered in that state (a requirement). The minimum experience requirements for the Design manager are at least 5 years of design experience. The Project Manager must meet one of the minimum credential / experience requirements of 7.1.8.2 of this section. The minimum experience requirements for the superintendent are at least 5 years’ experience as superintendent, managing multiple trades and subcontractors. The minimum requirements for the Quality Control Manager are outlined in section 01 45

00.00 10 QUALITY CONTROL. The CQC Manager must have completed the course entitled "Construction Quality Management for Contractors" and have no other duties assigned in the organization chart/matrix. The minimum requirement for the Site Safety and Health Officer are outlined in section 01 35 26 GOVERNMENTAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS. If alternates are proposed for key positions, the evaluation rating will consider the lesser qualified or experienced person, if there is a difference.

7.2.9. Safety Plan: The Government will evaluate the narrative for realism, logic, and understanding of the contractual requirements in regard to the safety plan.

8.0 PHASE 1 OVERALL RATING

8.1. In addition to individual factor ratings, the Government will assign an overall rating for the Phase 1 proposal.

9.0 PHASE 1 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

9.1. SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

9.1.1. The SSEB will be established to conduct the evaluation of proposals received in response to this solicitation. The evaluation will be based on the content of the proposal, proposal corrections and any information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information.

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

9.2. EVALUATION

9.2.1. The SSEB will evaluate the proposals and assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor and sub factor. Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts for the Phase 1 submission, and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to determine their performance capability. Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in their proposal after submitting it in response to Phase 1.

9.2.2. The Government reserves the right to allow proposal corrections, if deemed necessary to determine the most highly qualified Offerors to shortlist for Phase 2.

9.2.3. The Contracting Officer, independently exercising prudent business judgment, will select between three (3) and five (5) of the most highly qualified Offerors to short-list for Phase 2.

9.3. DEFINITIONS

9.3.1. 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.

9.3.2. Weakness

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

9.3.3. Significant Weakness

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

9.3.4. Strength

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

9.3.5. Significant Strength

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

9.3.6. Deviation

Proposal implies or specifically offers a deviation below the specified criteria. The Offeror may or may not have called the deviation to the Government’s attention. A deviation is a deficiency. The proposal must conform to the solicitation requirements for award.

9.4. EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

9.4.1. General: The Government will review the proposals and rate the quality of each evaluation factor and sub factor (if any). The SSEB will rate each proposal against the specified evaluation criteria in the Solicitation requirements. They will not compare proposals at this time. After all proposals are rated, the Government will compare the ratings and relative advantages and disadvantages of proposals against each other in order to determine which Offerors are the most highly qualified under Phase 1 to short-list for participation in Phase 2.

9.4.2. Review Write-up: The Government will support each rating with a narrative, separately listing all strengths or advantages, weaknesses or disadvantages, deficiencies, and required clarifications.

9.4.3. Rating System: After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies, the SSEB will assign an adjective rating of “Outstanding”, “Good”, “Acceptable”, “Marginal”, , or “Unacceptable” to each factor and sub factor (except those factors rated as GO/NO-GO), which reflect the Government's confidence in each Offeror's technical ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the RFP. The Adjectival ratings shall be assigned, using the following criteria, which incorporate a proposal risk assessment:

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

9.4.3.2. Good: Proposal meets requirements and indicated an thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths that outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

9.4.3.3. 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.

9.4.3.4. 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 performance is high.

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

9.5. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM

9.5.1 Past Performance Relevancy Ratings: Aspects of relevancy include similarity, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming.

• 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.

9.5.2 Past Performance Confidence Assessment:

• 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 reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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

• 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.

PHASE ONE - TAB A

PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

SECTION 00 22 10 - ATTACHMENT 1

1. Name of Solicitation:

2. Name of Firm:

Address:

Phone:

Fax:

E-mail:

DUNS # (used for accessing the Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS) or A-E Contractor Administration Support System (ACASS) Database)

Also provide any other assigned number that identifies the member firm(s) in the ACASS or CCASS databases. If a separate DUNS has been created for a joint venture (J-V) it must also be submitted. Provide a DUNS number for each company identified in any proposed Contractor-subcontractor association of firms. If the firm is a joint venture or contractor-subcontractor association of firms, list the individual firms and briefly describe the nature of the association. Provide DUNS for each.

Firm 1:

Firm 2:

Firm 3:

Nature of Association:

3. AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATORS. FAR 52.215-11

The Offeror represents that the following persons are authorized to negotiate on its behalf with the Government in connection with this Request for Proposals (RFP).

[List names, titles, and telephone number of the authorized negotiator.]

Name of Person Authorized to Negotiate:

Negotiator's Address:

Negotiator's Telephone:

Negotiator’s E-mail:

COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

CONSTRUCTION OR PRIME CONTRACTOR

SECTION 00 22 10 - ATTACHMENT 2

Provide the following information to show examples of projects your company constructed within the last five years indicating experience with projects of similar type and scope. Use one form per project.

(a) Type of Facility Represented

(b) Your Firm’s Name

(c) Name of Project

(d) Location of Project

(e) Owner

(f) General Scope of Construction Project

(g) Your Role (Prime, Joint Venture, or Subcontractor, etc.) and Work Your Company Self-Performed

(h) Construction Cost

(i) Extent and Type of Work You Subcontracted Out

(j) Dates Construction: Began

Completed

(k) Your Performance Evaluation…