W912BV18R00470002.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

Amendment 0002 addresses changes made to Paragraph 5.1.1 in Section 00 22 00. All changes are highlighted in yellow .

Contract Specialist: Julie S. Hill, 918-669-7699 or julie.s.hill@usace.army.mil.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 31

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 31-Oct-2018

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 W912BV18R0047

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11-Oct-2018

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

31-Oct-2018

CODE

CONTRACTING DIV

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, TULSA DISTRICT

2488 E. 81ST STREET

TULSA OK 74137-4290

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912BV18R0047

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

PHASE 1 OF 2

SECTION 00 22 00

PHASE 1 OF 2 PHASE DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.0 OVERVIEW OF PHASE 1 SELECTION PROCEDURES

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

3.0 PHASE 1 PROPOSAL AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

4.0 TAB A – STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

5.0 TAB B – FACTOR 1 – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

5.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

6.0 TAB C – FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

6.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

6.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

7.0 TAB D – FACTOR 3 – ORGANIZATION AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

7.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

7.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

8.0 PHASE 1 OVERALL RATING

9.0 PHASE 1 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

9.1 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

9.2 EVALUATION

9.3 DEFINITIONS

9.4 EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

PHASE ONE – SECTION 00 22 00 ATTACHMENTS

1 – PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

2 – COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE - CONSTRUCTION OR PRIME CONTRACTOR

3 – COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE - DESIGN FIRM OR IN-HOUSE

DESIGN CAPABILITY

4– NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (FORM PPQ-0)

5 – KEY PERSONNEL RESUME

6 – LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR KEY PERSONNEL

7 – LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR DESIGN FIRM

PHASE 1 OF 2 PHASE DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.0 OVERVIEW OF PHASE 1 SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.1 This is a two-phase competitive solicitation for a firm, fixed-price contract, which will be awarded using the Best Value Trade-Off Process.

1.2 The preliminary scope of this contract includes design and construction of an approximately 8,361 SM (89,997 SF) two high bay fuel/defuel aircraft maintenance docks, plant equipment maintenance support facility and associated back shop, administrative and facility support spaces. Includes site grading, storm drainage, aircraft parking apron, aircraft hangar dock access ramps and movement area, utility infrastructure systems, electrical, water, sewer, industrial waste, aircraft fueling system, communications, vehicle parking, curb and gutter, walks and all other supporting facilities. Passive force protection consists of fencing to isolate the hangars. Facilities will be designed as permanent construction in accordance with DoD unified facilities criteria UFC 1- 200-01. This project will comply with DoD antiterrorism/force protection requirements per unified facilities criteria UFC 4-010-01.

1.3 Phase 1. The first phase consists of a process known in commercial design-build as the “Request for

Qualifications” or the acronym: “RFQ”. This solicitation refers to it as “Phase 1”. In Phase 1 of the 2 Phase design-build selection procedure, interested firms or Joint Venture (JV) entities (referred to as “Offerors”) submit 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 up to five (5) of the highest rated Phase 1 Offerors to compete for the design-build contract in Phase 2.

1.3.1 Phase 2. In Phase 2, the selected Offerors will submit preliminary technical-design proposals and the remainder of the performance capability proposals, including identification of key subcontractors, the proposed contract duration, a preliminary schedule, plus a price proposal in response to the Phase 2 Request for Proposal. The final evaluation rating used for comparison, selection, and award will reflect both the rating received in Phase 1 and the evaluation rating received in Phase 2.

1.3.2 The Phase 1 proposal must describe the capability of the Offeror to perform the work, describe the Offeror’s understanding of the requirements contained in the Statement of Work and set forth full, accurate, and complete information as required by the RFP. The proposal should be prepared simply and economically and be legible, clear, and coherent.

1.3.3 Offerors will not be participating in a sealed bid procurement process under this acquisition method. Issuance of this Request for Proposal does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government.

2.1 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.2 Who May Submit: Any legally organized business firm that is formally organized as design-build entity, design firms and construction contractors that have associated specifically for this project, consortia of business firms or any other interested parties may submit proposals. Associations may be as joint ventures as a partnership in accordance with FAR 9.601, or as key team subcontractors. To qualify for Phase 2, the Offeror or Offeror’s subcontractor shall have professional architects and engineers, registered in the appropriate technical disciplines and the requirements specified in Contract Clause, ”Requirements for Registration of Designers”, in addition to the requirements of paragraph 7.1.9 (below) must be met.

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

2.3 Where to Submit: Pro Forma Information will be received until the date and time indicated on Standard

Form 1442 at the address shown in Section 00 21 00 INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES

TO OFFERORS.

2.3.1 Pro Forma Requirements to be provided for Phase 1: This information should be submitted as a separate .pdf file named “Pro Forma Requirements.pdf”. This information consists of the following:

a. The Offeror will submit a cover letter containing:

1) Solicitation number.

2) Name, address, email, and telephone and fax numbers of the Offeror.

3) Names, title, email, and telephone and fax numbers of persons authorized to negotiate on the

Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this RFP.

4) Name, title and signature of the person authorized to sign the proposal.

5) A statement specifying agreement with all terms, conditions and provisions included in the

RFP.

6) Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Codes for the Offeror, and all teaming partners who participated in the Factor 1 – Specialized Experience.

b. Acknowledgement of all amendments to the RFP in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30 (amendment form).

c. The completed Section 00 45 00 of the RFP (Representations and Certifications), Printed Entity Record from System for Award Management (SAM).

d. Letter from Surety stating Offeror is capable of providing a Bid Guarantee in Phase 2 as required in FAR 52.228-1.

e. Financial statement and bank letter that verify that sufficient funds will be available to finance the work.

f. For Joint Ventures, the information required by paragraph “Joint Ventures”.

g. Identify if this proposal is being submitted as a HUBZone entity.

2.4 Submission Deadline. Proposals shall be received by the Tulsa District no later than the time and date specified in Block 10 of Standard Form 1442 via AMRDEC SAFE or email ONLY (no mailed proposals).

AMRDEC SAFE web site: https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe

The following email address(es) must be entered for notification of proposal receipt and download availability:

Brian.C.Hutchison@usace.army.mil Julie.S.Hill@usace.army.mil

2.5 In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information containing sufficient detail to allow review and evaluation by the Government. Proposal clarity, organization, and cross-referencing are mandatory. Failures to submit and organize proposals as requested may adversely affect an Offeror's evaluation. Offerors should provide sufficient detail and clearly define all items required in this section.

2.6 The Contracting Officer may remove any Offeror from further consideration during any phase of the procurement if the Offeror fails to meet the submittal requirements of the RFP or to reduce the competitive range for purposes of efficiency pursuant to FAR 15.306(c)(2).

2.7 Tabs. Proposal shall be organized and tabbed as shown in paragraph 3.0, “Phase I Proposal and Related

Evaluation Factors”.

2.8 Size of Printed Matter Submissions.

2.8.1 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, 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 37 single-sided pages, 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, nor the letters of commitment for individuals or teaming subcontractors. The Government will not evaluate any information beyond the total page limitation noted above and in the individual Factor limitations noted in the paragraphs below. 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.

2.8.2 The proposals shall contain a detailed Table of Contents.

2.8.2.1 Proposals shall contain the entire proposal in .pdf format using Adobe Acrobat software to print to a

.pdf file; do NOT scan the document(s) into a .pdf file. The text portion of the complete proposal shall be contained as a single .pdf file, and the “find” function must be usable. The technical proposal will be appropriately organized using the tabs specified in the chart below. The Pro Forma requirements shall be submitted as a separate file as required by paragraph

2.2.1 above.

2.8.2.2 A cover sheet identifying the Offeror (name, address, point of contact), project description, and solicitation number shall be provided. The second sheet shall be a Table of Contents. Offers that violate these rules unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and may be rejected by the Government after the initial evaluation without receiving any further consideration.

2.8.2.3 Sections of the proposal shall be bookmarked (linked to the index) as detailed in this section. The SF

1442 may be scanned and shall be *Optical Character Recognition (OCR) compatible. All text must be legible and easily read. Submit the SF 1442, completed and signed by a person authorized by the Offeror. A page is defined as text or information on one side of the paper.

*OCR is a common method of digitizing printed texts so that they can be electronically searched, stored more compactly, displayed on-line, and used in machine processes such as machine translation, text-to- speech, key data extraction and text mining.

2.8.2.4 Each Volume of the proposal shall be identified by the Solicitation Number (W912BV18R0047), project title (KC-46A DEPOT FUEL MAINTENANCE HANGAR, Tinker AFB, OK), name, address, and telephone number of the Offeror, and the following on the volume in bold letters:

PHASE 1 - VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

2.8.3 Proposal revisions shall be submitted as whole page replacements with revised text readily identifiable, e.g., bold face print or underlining. The reason for 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. A revised copy of the entire proposal in .pdf format shall be provided.

3.0 PHASE 1 PROPOSAL AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

Location Factor Number Description Relative Importance

Tab A N/A SF 1442 and Proposal Data Sheet N/A

Tab B Factor 1 Specialized Experience Most Important Factor

Tab C Factor 2 Past Performance 2nd Most important factor

Tab D Factor 3 Organization and Technical Approach 3rd Most important factor

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 Company – Specialized Experience form – (Attachment 2), and Designer – Specialized Experience Form – (Attachment 3) at the end of the section. If any of the information required is not included in these forms, the Contractor will be considered non-responsive and evaluated as unacceptable. Offerors may identify state and local government and private contracts that are similar to the Government’s requirements as outlined in Section 01 10 00 STATEMENT OF WORK. If the Offeror is a joint venture, each firm shall provide information, demonstrating experience relevant to their role on this project. Offeror shall provide a copy of the joint venture agreement or letters of commitment for all teaming contractors, agreements and letters of commitment will not count towards the page limitations. Submit projects that are currently well underway (designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or completed and turned over no longer than seven (7) years preceding the date of this solicitation. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division or unit submitting the offer or by the team member. Design firms may list prime contractors they have worked for or government, private or commercial customers. The Offeror shall select the design firm(s). If projects were design-build (D- B), so identify them. The prime contractor must submit at least one large scale high bay aircraft hangar project valued at $35 million or greater constructed of conventional structural steel with a minimum interior clear span of 200 feet, minimum hangar door opening of 175 feet, and meet the height classification requirements of a Group I Aircraft Hangar per NFPA 409 (2016 Ed.) paragraph 4.1.1 which states: Group I Aircraft Hangar shall have at least one of the following featurews and operating conditions: An aircraft access door height over 8.5 m (28 ft) or Provision for housing an aircraft with a tail height over 8.5 m (28 ft). All other projects must have a value of $25 million or greater. The design firm(s) must submit at least one project for the design of a large scale high bay aircraft hangar with a construction value of $35 million or greater designed for conventional structural steel construction with a minimum interior clear span of 200 feet, minimum door hangar opening of 175 feet and meet the height classification requirements of a Group I Aircraft Hangar per NFPA 409 (2016 Ed.) paragraph 4.1.1 which states: Group I Aircraft Hangar shall have at least one of the following features and operatign conditions: An aircraft access door height over 8.5 m (28 ft) or Provision for housing an aircraft with a tail height over 8.5 m (28 ft). All other projects must have a construction value of $25 million or greater. Both the prime contractor and the design firm(s) shall each submit at least three (3) projects but no more than five (5) projects. Each project submitted for both the prime and design firms shall be limited to two (2) page per project.

5.1.2 The Offeror may provide a supplemental narrative (not project lists), not to exceed two (2) 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.

5.1.3 The Offeror should describe any previous teaming experience between current team members, if not described in 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 past seven (7) years preceding the date of this solicitation.

5.1.4 Total page count for Factor 1 shall not exceed 22 pages.

5.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.2.1 The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, related experience of the prime contractor and design firms 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 will place greater importance on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor.

To determine strengths and weaknesses, the agency will evaluate the following. This list is not all-inclusive:

a. Projects designed for and constructed on Military Installations.

b. Projects involving Design and Construction of large scale wide body aircraft fuel cell hangars.

c. Projects involving the Design and Placement of airfield pavement including hangar floors, hangar approach, aprons, runways, taxiways, etc.

d. Projects Designed for and Constructed in proximity to an active Military or Commercial Runway, taxiway, etc.

e. Projects with a value of $50 million or greater.

f. Projects completed after 2015.

g. Projects involving Design and Construction in conditions dealing with concurrent work from adjacent contractors.

h. Experience in projects that required High Performance and Sustainable Building (HPSB) Guiding

Principles certification per UFC 1‐200‐02 or third party sustainability certification.

i. Projects that demonstrate experience of the personnel proposed in Factor 3 in the same role as their proposed role on this project. (i.e. construction personnel will be evaluated on the projects submitted for the prime contractor and design personnel will be evaluated on the projects submitted for the design firms.)

j. Project examples demonstrating prior teaming experience of the prime construction contractor and the design firm.

To receive credit for items i. and j., the contractor shall clearly indicate on the Specialized Experience forms that the proposed personnel on this project acted in the same role on the submitted project.

Additionally the key personnel resumes shall show the projects submitted under this Factor indicating that they served in the same role as is being proposed for this project. Failure to provide these cross references shall result in no credit being given for items i and j.

5.2.2 The Offeror shall submit the requested information to demonstrate a record of recent, related experience in both design and construction, for the facility types (which may include similar state or local government or private counterparts) included in this contract, as described in this section. Recent experience includes projects well underway (see above criteria) or those completed and turned over within seven (7) years of the proposal issue date for this RFP for design or construction experience. Joint Venture partners or teaming 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. If any of the information required is not included in the forms

(Attachment 1 and 2), then the Contractor will be considered non-responsive and evaluated as unacceptable.

5.2.3 The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), other databases; or interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency 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. To receive credit for experience of a key teaming subcontractor under this factor the Offeror shall document unequivocal teaming arrangements with its teaming subcontractors under Factor 3 (see Attachment 7). A copy of the teaming or joint venture agreement(s) may be appended to the plan under Factor 3 (not included in the page limitation).

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 seven (7) years preceding date of Solicitation)

3) Firm's role and extent of work self-performed (brokering out all work and simply “placing 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.

6.1 TAB C – FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

6.2 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

6.2.1 There is no page limit for this factor. For each of the projects submitted under Factor 1, to ensure the agency has all relevant past performance information, the Offeror shall submit copies of Federal/DoD/Navy/Army performance reviews that are likely already in the agency’s databases or likely within the agency’s arm’s reach, (i.e., Contractor’s copy Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System, CPARS, evaluations).

6.2.2 For each project under Factor 1 that does not have a CPARS evaluation, Offerors shall provide a Past

Performance Questionnaire form PPQ-0 (Attachment 4) to a representative of the owner that can provide the owner’ s opinion of the Offeror’s past performance for the project. The Past Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ-0) 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 1. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Offerors should organize all Past Performance Information based on the Factor 1 Projects, which normally have project titles and are numbered 1-5, so that reviewers can match the owner’s opinion with the corresponding Factor 1 Project.

6.2.3 Form PPQ-0 shall be utilized, and Offerors shall submit the PPQ with their proposal submission to the

Contracting Office designated proposal submission location. The Contract Specialist or Contracting Officer will not require the PPQ-0 to be sent directly from the client, the Offeror may submit the completed PPQ-0. Completed PPQ-0s should be submitted with your proposal. However, if the

Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ-0 from a client for a project(s) before the proposal closing date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ-0, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client points of contact. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Brian Hutchison via email brian.c.hutchison@usace.army.mil, prior to proposal closing date. If you have questions regarding the attached questionnaire, or require assistance, please contact the contract specialist at (918) 669-7426.

6.2.4 Additionally, for each of the projects submitted under Factor [1], the offeror shall provide the final or most recent Individual Subcontracting Report (or SF 294 if report was prior to OCT 2005) prepared for submission through the Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System for government contracts. For non-government contracts, provide planned subcontracting goals and actual subcontracted dollars in terms of total contract dollars for Small Business (SB), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Women- Owned Small Business (WOSB), HUBZone Small Business (HUBZone SB), Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB), Service-Disabled Veteran- Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Minority Institutions (MI).

6.2.5 Offerors should organize all Past Performance Information based on the Factor 1 Projects, which normally have project titles and are numbered 1-5, so that reviewers can match the owner’s opinion with the corresponding Factor 1 Project. No additional information may be submitted under this factor, unless the Offeror is submitting proposals as a Joint Venture in which case the offeror shall provide the brief narrative as described in paragraph 6.1.15 below. Inclusion of additional information or failure to organize the past performance information in the same order as submitted under Factor 1 will result in the contractor being found unacceptable and may result in the contractor being removed from further consideration.

6.2.6 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.

6.2.7 The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that the completed questionnaires are submitted by the closing date.

6.2.8 The Government will evaluate the responses from the customers from which Past Performance

Questionnaires have been received. The Government may contact and interview points of contact on the Past Performance Questionnaires. The Government reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the listed references, if the listed reference is not available. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance.

6.2.9 Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases;

interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency.

6.2.10 To improve accuracy of database searches, the Offeror will also provide the CAGE Codes for the prime contractor and all teaming partners, i.e., design firms, key subcontractors, Joint Venture Partners, whose experience is being evaluated in Factor 1.

6.2.11 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.

6.2.12 No additional past performance information shall be submitted under this Factor. Offers that violate this rule unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and will be evaluated as unacceptable and may result in the contractor being removed from further consideration.

6.2.13 Joint Venture Submission Requirements.

6.2.14 Offerors submitting proposals as a Joint Venture shall obtain a DUNS number and be registered in the

Central Contractor Registration (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 under Factor 1.

6.2.15 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 a minimum requirement of two (2) projects, to include any performed as the JV.

6.2.16 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 JV 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 instances the combined experience projects, submitted by each member of the JV, shall not exceed the maximum number of projects stated in paragraph 5.1.1.

6.2.17 In addition to the examples of "Company Specialized Experience" and "Past Performance

Surveys", the Joint Venture shall provide a brief narrative not to exceed two (2) pages stating the roles that each partner of the Joint Venture will perform on this project and how the presented projects demonstrate the JV member's experience commensurate with their role on this project or how their experience qualifies them for their role 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.

6.2.18 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.

6.3 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

6.3.1 The Government will perform a performance confidence assessment of the Offeror’s probability of successfully meeting the contract requirements, considering the degree of success of the D-B team’s recent (well under way or turned over no longer than five (5) years preceding the date of this solicitation), relevant experience. See explanation of “well underway” and relevancy under the Factor “Specialized Experience”. The Government will assess the past performance on projects submitted under the Specialized Experience Factor and reserves the right to conduct telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the proposal and/or to review other recent projects rated in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases, review and/or contact Offeror-furnished references, or to review personal knowledge.

6.3.2 The Government will first assess and rate the relevancy of recent projects accomplished by the offeror to the scope of this contract for overall application to the performance confidence assessment ratings described hereinafter. The projects will include those submitted under the Specialized Experience Factor as well as from other sources described above. The past performance relevancy rating are described below:

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

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

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

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

6.3.3 The Government will next consider how well the Offeror performed on the 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. With respect to relevancy, past performance on projects with more relevance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment rating than past performance on projects of lesser relevance.

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 design or construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and designer or contractor, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting design or construction errors, warranty work, etc. The Government will target areas covered in the requirements of this proposal including records of confirming quality, schedule, cost control, customer satisfaction, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M Manuals, training, problem resolution for design or construction errors, warranty work, and safety. The Government will not release the Interview Forms 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 databases, Offeror-furnished references, or personal knowledge. The Government also places a higher value on projects, which provided particularly difficult or unique challenges and the innovative methods the contractor used to resolve problems successfully. The rating for this factor will be expressed as a degree of confidence in the Offeror’s ability to successfully accomplish the contract requirements. The rating system used for the performance confidence assessment is described below.

6.3.3.1 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.

6.3.3.2 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

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

6.3.3.4 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.

6.3.3.5 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.

6.3.4 Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor, if relevant. An entity may 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 confidence assessment will be considered “Unknown Confidence”.

7.1 TAB D – FACTOR 3 - ORGANIZATION AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

7.2 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

7.2.1 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 15 pages or less clearly but concisely describe the organizational and technical approach to project management and execution. The 15 page limit does not include resumes, unequivocal letters of commitment submitted for key personnel, or unequivocal letters of commitment for design firms(s)/teaming subcontractors, below.

7.2.2 Offeror’s Understanding: Describe the Offeror's understanding of the challenges, risks and technical approach with respect to design and construction of fuel cell hangars and the life safety engineering aspect for these facilities. The response must clearly illustrate the Offeror's understanding of these documents;

do not simply quote UFC and similar references.

7.2.3 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)/teaming subcontractors for which they are seeking experience credit under Factor 1 (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 a n d construction activities for each major feature (i.e., foundations, walls, electrical, site work, utilities, etc.). Identify the design firm(s) chosen for the project, if not to be self-performed. Phase 2 Offerors will be required to identify the specific firms chosen for mechanical, fire protection and electrical installation. Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing how the design and construction process will be managed and the authorities and the delegations of authority within the team. Include a key personnel organization chart that clearly depicts the key positions and the names of the personnel, their firm affiliations and their job locations, their job/position title within the organization. The key personnel organization chart shall be consistent with the corporate organization chart, with the matrix of responsibilities assigned to the D-B team firms, and with the list of key personnel to be provided under the Tab “Key Personnel”.

7.2.4 Technical Approach for Design and Construction: Describe the technical approach to design and construction for the facility. Describe your proposed phasing plan for design and construction of the Depot Fuel Maintenance Hangar.

7.2.5 Collaborative Approach for Design and Construction: Describe interactions within the team and with the Corps of Engineers during design and construction. 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;

shop drawing and submittal reviews and approvals; progress meetings; site visits, if any;

contract completion, commissioning, closeout, as- built and completion documentation.

7.2.6 Subcontractor Approach and Management: Describe how subcontractors are managed by the contractor. Discuss how subcontract relationships are structured to assure proper balance and flow-down of contract requirements, duties, responsibilities, and properly balanced and proportioned risk management. Discuss how non-performance by subcontractors is handled by the general contractor.

Discuss the types of relationships the general contractor has with local small business subcontractors and how the general contractor promotes the development of small business subcontractors to include training, development, and mentoring. The Government wants to understand that the general contractor places emphasis on strong business relationships with subcontractors to maximize the number of quotes the general contractor obtains during proposal preparations that demonstrates market competition and the best valued prices are being provided to the Government. General Contractors that do not maintain solid business practices with small business subcontractors increase business costs to the Government.

7.2.7 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”. Discuss experience with interfacing scheduling software with the Resident Management System (RMS), if applicable. Limit discussion to one (1) page.

7.2.8 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 an organizational chart showing lines of communications and authority. 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, commissioning, 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.

7.2.9 Key Project Personnel Capabilities and Experience: (Resumes not included in the 15 page limit above.) Provide a consolidated list of key personnel with name, position title and description of project responsibility for each. Provide past performance experience and evaluations of these key individuals.

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.

For each person provide a brief resume, using the Key Personnel Resume forms (Attachment 5) at the end of this section, minimum years of experience must be verifiable, with example projects from the present back the minimum number of years, to include dates of work performed. Limit each resume to not more than two (2) page. Key personnel shall at a minimum include prime contractor’s project manager (responsible for design and construction), site safety health officer (SSHO), the on-site CQC manager, construction site superintendent, design manager, the designers of record (DOR) for structural, civil, architectural, geotechnical, fire protection, electrical, and mechanical/plumbing, and permit preparers. Offeror shall submit resumes of additional key personnel who can be employees of either the Prime or a Subcontractor to include Materials Technician (do not provide company capabilities) and Airfield Paving Inspector. Project Managers with professional certification to include Project Manager Professional (PMP) or equivalent are preferred. Permit preparers must be a professionally registered Engineer 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. Provide unequivocal letters of commitment from all proposed key personnel not currently employed by the team members.

Use the form letter (Attachment 6) at the end of this section. In connection with this contract, any in-house personnel, subcontractors, and outside associates or consultants will be limited to individuals or firms that were specifically identified in the Contractor’s accepted Phase I Proposal for the Phase II Proposal submittal.

All personnel, including subcontractor personnel, working on this project must be U.S. citizens or documented U.S. workers and must be able to provide proof of U.S.