W912BV23R0013 - 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)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

DOAU Replacement at Ft. Sill, Oklahoma

1. Amendment 0001 is hereby issued to include revisions to Section 00 22 00, Phase 1 Evaluation Criteria. All modif ications have been highlighted in red.

2. Point of Contact for this amendment 0001 is Shaw n Brady, shaw n.brady@usace.army.mil.

3. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 26

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 31-Mar-2023

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 W912BV23R0013

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

07-Feb-2023

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 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-Mar-2023

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:

W912BV23R00130001anical Repairs Fort Sill, OK

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been added by full text:

00 22 00 REVISED

SECTION 00 22 00

PHASE 1 OF 2 PHASE

DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.0 OVERVIEW OF PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 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 general scope of the project is to replace all Dedicated Outside Air Units (DOAU) at Building 5955 and 6050 as well as incorporate units into the chilled water plant loop at Fort Sill, OK. Each building is a three (3) story facility with penthouses, approx. 230,000 square feet in size, and constructed of concrete with a brick veneer.

The preliminary scope entails the replacement of DX type DOAU’s located throughout the penthouses of Buildings 5955 and 6050 and installing a chilled water loop for all new units.

1.3 Phase 1. The first phase is the “Request for Qualifications” or the acronym: “RFQ”, referred to in this solicitation as “Phase 1”. In Phase 1 of the 2 Phase design-build selection procedure, interested offerors may 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.

1.4 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 ratings received in Phase 1 and the evaluation rating received in Phase 2.

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 Who May Submit: Any legally organized business entity, either organized as design-build entity, or design firms and construction contractors that have associated specifically for this project, or other contractor team arrangements in accordance with FAR 9.601. Associations may be as joint ventures, partnerships, or as key team subcontractors.

2.2 What to Submit: Pro Forma Requirements to be provided for Phase 1: This information should be submitted as a separate .pdf file named “Pro Forma Requirements.pdf”, and shall consist of the following:

a. Cover letter containing:

i. Solicitation Number

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

iii. Names, title, telephone, and fax numbers of the person(s) authorized to negotiate on the

Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation

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

v. A statement specifying agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation

vi. Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Codes for the Offeror, and all teaming partners who participated in Factor 1 – Past Performance.

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

c. The completed Section 00 45 00 of the solicitation (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 verifies sufficient funds will be available to finance the work.

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

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

2.3 When and Where to Submit. Proposals shall be received by the Tulsa District no later than the time and date specified in Block 10 of Standard Form 1442 via the Solicitation Module of the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) suite at https://piee.eb.mil/ using the applicable solicitation number (see also paragraph 2.7.1).

2.4 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.

2.5 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).

2.6 Tabs. Proposal shall be organized and tabbed as shown in paragraph 3.0, “Phase I Proposal and Related Evaluation Factors”.

2.7 Proposal Submission Formatting Requirements.

2.7.1 Electronic copies of each volume shall be submitted through the Solicitation Module of the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) suite at https://piee.eb.mil/ using the applicable solicitation number.

Proposals submitted by mail or hand-carried will not be evaluated. Proposals sent through proprietary or third-party File Transfer Protocol (FTP) sites or DoD SAFE will not be retrieved. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to confirm receipt of proposals. All proposals received after the exact time specified for receipt shall be treated as late submissions and will not be considered except under facts and circumstances allowed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). For instructions on how to post an offer, please refer to the Posting Offer demo:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf.

It is the Offeror’s responsibility to obtain written confirmation of receipt of all electronic files of the full proposal by the DTRA Contracting office. In the event that the Solicitation Module is down, the alternate method for proposal submission is via email to: dtra.belvoir.al.mbx.fbo- notices@mail.mil ONLY. The Offeror must obtain prior approval from the Contracting Officer to use the alternate submission method. Offerors are responsible for ensuring electronic copies are virus-free and shall run an anti-virus scan before submission.

Electronic copies of each volume shall be compatible with the following software products: Adobe Acrobat Reader 11 and Microsoft Office Suite 2016. Narrative portions of the proposal shall be in Adobe Acrobat portable document file (pdf) searchable text format. Offerors shall not embed sound or video (e.g., MPEG) files into the proposal files.

Electronic files shall be clearly identified for each volume, section, and item. Proposals shall be tabbed and labeled in a manner to afford easy identification from a Table of Contents, including working bookmarks. Each page shall be identified with the appropriate page number centered at the bottom of the page.

2.7.2 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.

2.7.3 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.

2.7.4 A page is defined as text or information on one side of the paper. The Government will not evaluate any information beyond the total page limits specified in this RFP. 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.

2.7.5 The proposals shall contain a detailed Table of Contents.

2.7.6 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 except for the Past Performance Questionnaires PPQ-0. 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.

2.7.7 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.

2.7.8 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.

2.7.9 Each Volume of the proposal shall be identified by the Solicitation Number (W912BV23R0013), project title (6000 Area Mechanical Repairs, Ft. Sill, OK), name, address, and telephone number of the Offeror, and the following on the volume in bold letters:

Phase 1 – Volume 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

2.7.10 Proposal revisions shall be submitted as whole page replacements with revised text readily identifiable, e.g., bold face print, red text, and/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. Requirements of this paragraph are also applicable to proposal revisions as a result of Discussions.

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 Past Performance Most Important Factor

TAB C Factor 2 Organization and Technical Approach 2nd Most Important Factor

4.0 TAB A – STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

4.1 Submit the SF1442, completed and signed by a person authorized by the Offeror. Include the completed proposal data sheet (See Attachment 6, provided at the end of this section).

4.2 If the Offeror is a Joint Venture, a copy of the joint venture agreement shall be submitted with the proposal.

All members of the joint venture shall sign the SF 1442 and the bid bond unless a written agreement by the joint venture is furnished with the proposal designating one firm with the authority to bind the other member(s) of the joint venture. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements may eliminate the proposal from further consideration.

AM1* 4.3 If the Offeror has teaming agreements and / or letters of commitment, include a copy. *

5.0 TAB B – FACTOR 1 PAST PERFORMANCE

There are three aspects to the performance confidence evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality of past performance. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor's performance shall be considered. Relevance and quality of performance will be combined to establish one performance confidence assessment rating for each Offeror.

5.1 PAST PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW

5.1.1 Recency of Past Performance. The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine if the past performance is recent. Recent is defined as completed, or currently in progress with at least 75% construction completed, within the past six (5) years as of the date of this solicitation.

5.1.2 Relevancy of Past Performance. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how relevant the past performance is to this solicitation. Relevant past performance is past performance that has a significant and demonstratable relationship to this solicitation. Examples of attributes that may demonstrate relevance to this solicitation include but are not limited to:

a. Projects demonstrating experience with design-build delivery.

b. Projects involving the renovation of multi-story facilities.

c. Projects with a contract value equal to or exceeding $5M.

d. Projects constructed on military installations.

e. Projects involving the total replacement of mechanical systems.

f. Projects involving phased construction in occupied facilities.

g. Design-build projects executed with the same design and construction team.

Projects that demonstrate a combination of multiple relevant attributes will receive a higher relevancy rating than projects that demonstrate only one relevant attribute. The information presented in the offeror’s proposal, together with that from other sources available to the Government, will comprise the input for evaluation of this factor.

5.1.3 Quality of Past Performance. The third aspect of past performance is to establish the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. The Government determines the quality of the offeror’s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information, and incorporates these into the performance confidence assessment. Evaluation will include, but is not limited to, quality, management, schedule, safety, as well as the extent to which the offeror attained applicable goals for small business participation.

5.1.4 Performance Confidence Assessment. The past performance confidence assessment rating is based the offeror’s overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance. It will be based on the past performance of the firms or that of its predecessor, as defined in FAR 52.204-20, if applicable. An entity may not establish past performance based on the past performance of its key personnel apart from that of the entity.

5.1.4.1 In the case of firms for which there is no information on past contract performance, or where past contract performance information is not available, or has been determined not to be recent or relevant, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv).) In this case, the Government may not rate an offeror that lacks recent relevant past performance favorably or unfavorably with regard to past performance. The Government may determine that a “Substantial Confidence” or “Satisfactory Confidence” past performance rating is worth more than a “Neutral Confidence” past performance rating in a best value tradeoff as long as the determination is consistent with the stated solicitation criteria.

5.2 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS.

5.2.1 The offeror shall provide a brief introduction of the proposed team, identifying the roles and general responsibilities of each firm. The narrative shall be no longer than 1 page and will be utilized to improve the Government’s understanding of the proposed team and associated responsibilities. This narrative will not be separately evaluated.

5.2.2 The offeror shall submit up to ten (10) recent projects demonstrating the offeror’s relevant experience utilizing the Project Information Worksheet – (Attachment 1). The offeror may submit up to five (5) projects for the prime contractor and up to five (5) projects for the design team member. Failure to provide the required information in the Project Information Worksheet may negatively impact the Government’s ability to assess the relevancy of the project to this solicitation, as well as the overall confidence assessment. A “project” is defined as a task order or stand-alone contract. Indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts do not qualify as a project.

5.2.3 For each of the projects submitted, 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 of CPARS evaluations). The contractor shall submit complete past performance records to include all interim evaluations as well as the Final evaluations.

5.2.4 For each project that does not have a CPARS evaluation, Offerors shall provide a Past Performance Questionnaire form PPQ-0 (Attachment 2) 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 is included in the solicitation and is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the Offeror includes in its proposal. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. There is no page limit associated with this factor.

5.2.5 Form PPQ-0 shall be utilized, and Offerors shall submit the completed PPQ with their proposal submission to the Contracting Office designated in the request for proposal submission location. The Contract Specialist or Contracting Officer will not require the PPQ to be sent directly from the client. 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, which will provide contact 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 Government’s point of contact shown in Section 00 21 00, INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS.

5.2.6 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.

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

The Government may contact and interview the owner’s representative on Past Performance questionnaires and reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the owner’s representative if the owner’s representative is not available.

5.2.8 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 the purpose of evaluating past performance.

5.2.9 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), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), 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.

5.2.10 To improve the accuracy of database searches, the Offeror must also provide the CAGE Codes for the prime contractor, and all teaming partners (i.e., design firms, key subcontractors, Joint Venture Partners).

5.2.11 The Government may contact references for information regarding the Offeror’s past performance on the project and for purposes of assessing and verifying the scope of work performed. Offerors should provide accurate, current, and complete information for references provided in the project descriptions. Owners / references may be asked to comment on items such as quality of design and / or construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management, including timely payment to subcontractors 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, and warranty work. 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.

5.2.12 The Government places a higher value on projects which demonstrate successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation.

5.2.13 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.

5.2.14 Joint Ventures. If Offeror represents the combining of two or more companies for the purpose of this RFP, the proposal shall clearly identify the contractual responsibilities of each firm and the work to be performed by each;

describe the nature of the association; indicate whether the firms have experience working together in construction ventures, including how long and how many projects. If the joint venture has previously formed for purposes of executing similar type projects, the joint venture shall submit Project Information Worksheets for those combined efforts. If the joint venture is being formed specifically for this project and there is no prior experience as the joint venture, each member of the joint venture shall provide Project Information Worksheet(s) demonstrating the relevancy of their individual experience. The maximum number of Project Information Worksheets outlined in paragraph 5.2.2 is also appliable to joint ventures. If two entities form a joint venture, they will be limited to six (6) project information worksheets total, not per entity. Provide a copy of the commitment letter of the firms or the Joint Venture Agreement. Prior to award of any contract, a copy of the Joint Venture Agreement will be required. If approval of the Joint Venture Agreement is required by the Small Business Administration (SBA), failure to timely provide an approved Small Business Administration Joint Venture Agreement may prevent award of a contract.

a. Offerors submitting proposals as a Joint Venture (JV) shall obtain a DUNS number and be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) as the offering Joint Venture. The Joint Venture shall comply with the submission requirements outlined in paragraph 5.2.2.

b. If the Offeror cannot provide a sufficient number of projects as the Joint Venture, the Offeror must provide those recent, relevant projects that it has performed as the Joint Venture, and then supplement the record with additional recent, relevant projects performed by each Joint Venture member in their individual capacities. Limitations on total number of projects submitted shall be in compliance with paragraph 5.2.2

c. The Joint Venture shall provide a brief narrative stating the roles that each partner of the Joint Venture will perform on this project and how the presented projects demonstrate the Joint Venture member’s experience and past performance commensurate with their role on this project, or how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project. This narrative will be utilized to improve the Government’s understanding of the proposed team and will not be separately evaluated.

5.3 EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.3.1 The Government will perform a performance confidence assessment of the Offeror’s probability of successfully meeting the contract requirements. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s responsiveness to the solicitation regarding past performance using the sources identified above. New companies and Joint Ventures shall be evaluated on their own past performance, or that of its predecessor as defined in FAR clause 52.204-20 Predecessor of Offeror, if relevant, to determine the company’s ability to perform satisfactorily under the elements of evaluation.

5.3.2 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 past performance relevancy ratings are described below:

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

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

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

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

5.3.3 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.

5.3.3.1 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.

5.3.3.2 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

5.3.3.3 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.

5.3.3.4 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.

5.3.3.5 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.

5.3.4 Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor as defined in FAR Clause 52.204-20, Predecessor of Offeror, if relevant. 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”.

Offerors may be provided an opportunity to address any negative past performance information about which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. The Government will evaluate past performance based on the elements listed below:

QUALITY OF CONSTRUCTION. Based on all information available, the Government will assess the quality of the actual construction undertaken and the standards of workmanship exhibited by the Offeror.

TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror completing past projects within the scheduled completion times.

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror’s past customer satisfaction, cooperation with customers, and interaction on past projects.

SUBCONTRACTOR MANAGEMENT. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror’s management of subcontractors, including mitigation of conflicts and resolution of disputes at the lowest level. For large businesses, the Government will also evaluate compliance with subcontracting plans.

DOCUMENTATION. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror’s level of meeting customer satisfaction on timeliness and quality of the documentation, reports, and other written materials completed by the Offeror on past projects.

SAFETY RECORD. All information available with respect to the Offeror’s safety record, to include CCASS/CPARS rating for safety, lost time incident rate, safety incentive program, safety awards, and other indications of improvements in safety will be taken into consideration in evaluating the Offeror’s overall safety record.

6.0 TAB C – FACTOR 2 - ORGANIZATION AND TECHNICAL APPROACH. 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 firm(s) / teaming subcontractors.

6.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

6.1.1 Offeror’s Understanding. Describe the Offeror's understanding of the challenges, risks, and technical approach with respect to design and construction AM1*of the project. of the exterior hydronic piping, and the phased replacement of the mechanical equipment. * The response must clearly illustrate the Offeror's understanding of these documents; do not simply quote UFC and similar references.

6.1.2 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.

6.1.2.1 The Offeror shall document unequivocal teaming arrangements with its design firms(s)/teaming subcontractors for which they are seeking past performance credit under Factor 1 (see Attachment 5). A copy of the teaming or joint venture agreement(s) may be appended to the plan (not included in the page limitation).

6.1.2.2 Include a simple organizational chart, illustrating the organization, including the proposed quality control group(s), with appropriate lines of communication and authority.

6.1.2.3 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., foundations, walls, electrical, site work, utilities, etc.).

6.1.2.4 Identify the design firm(s) chosen for the project, if not to be self-performed.

6.1.2.5 Phase 2 Offerors will be required to identify the specific firms chosen for key subcontracting roles such as mechanical, electrical, structural, fire protection, roofing, etc.

6.1.2.6 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”. Specifically annotate within the key personnel organization chart any individuals that have experience in the same role on projects submitted for Factor 1.

6.1.3 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 project.

6.1.4 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.

6.1.5 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.

6.1.6 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.

6.1.7 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 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.

6.1.8 Self-Performed Work. Describe the items the Offeror will self-perform. All other items not self- performed will be assumed by the government to be subcontracted. It is the position of the government that self-performance of items allows the general contractor greater control of the work and yields in cost savings to the government as the amount of subcontracted markups are reduced and provide a cost savings to the government and government customers.

6.1.9 Key Personnel. (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 3) 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) pages.

6.1.9.1 Key personnel shall at a minimum include the following:

a. Prime Contractor’s Project Manager (responsible for design and construction)

b. Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO)

c. Onsite Contractor Quality Control (CQC) Manager

d. Construction Site Superintendent

e. Design Manager

f. Designer of Record for Architectural

g. Designer of Record for Electrical Engineering

h. Designer of Record for Mechanical and Plumbing Engineering

6.1.9.2 Designers of Record must be registered in accordance with contract clause: 52.236-25, Requirements for Registration of Designers.

6.1.9.3 Provide unequivocal letters of commitment from all proposed key personnel not currently employed by the team members. Use the form letter (Attachment 4) 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.

6.1.9.4 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. citizenship or other authorized documentation (See Contract Clause 52.0000-4515 Security Contract Language for All Corps of Engineers’ Unclassified Contracts).

6.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA – AM1* The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and any deficiencies in the organization and technical approach. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s understanding of the Design-Build RFP (and the requirements described in Division 01 of the solicitation) and the capability to execute the project. Some additional specific evaluation considerations are listed below. The list is not all-inclusive. *

AM1* The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, any deficiencies in the organization and technical approach, and the capability to execute the project. Some additional specific evaluation considerations are listed below. The list is not all-inclusive. *

6.2.1 Offeror’s Understanding. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding for clarity and conciseness of the challenges and risks of the proposed design and construction.

6.2.2 Organization. The Government will evaluate the 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 receive an “acceptable” rating. Joint venture participants’ contribution to the project should be commensurate with their skills and background. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s capability and intent to comply with the applicable requirements for self-performance of work by the prime contractor as applicable to the type of solicitation. See Section 00 73 00 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS, SCR entitled “Self- Performance of Work by the Prime Contractor”.

6.2.3 Technical Approach for Design and Construction. The Government places a higher value on an offer that provides proposed methods to streamline and improve the design and construction processes, manage labor, material procurement, and other resource constraints in an effort to reduce costs and support aggressive schedules. In addition, clear and concise proposed phasing plans for the design and construction elements required to complete the project will be viewed more favorably. The Government will also consider whether the approach reduces on-site craft labor and susceptibility to inclement weather delays.

6.2.4 Collaborative Approach for Design and Construction. The use of Building Information Modeling (BIM) technology in the design process is not a requirement of this project. The Government will evaluate the integration of the design and construction firms and the staff during design and construction. The Contractor must be actively involved in the design process, not just leaving it up to the designer. AM1* (see Section 00 73 00 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS, SCR: “Constructor’s Role During Design”).* The Offeror must have an effective configuration management system to control and track revisions to the designs. 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. Additional consideration will be given to a team that includes as many subcontractors as possible (e.g., the key subcontractors for electrical and mechanical, the fire protection subcontractor, fabricators, 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. A Contractor that includes mechanical commissioning agents at the design phase of their projects is important to the Government and demonstrates the contractor’s ability to resource and plan early in project stages to prevent costs growth and schedule creep during the later stages of project finishing and close out.

6.2.5 Subcontractor Approach and Management. The government will evaluate the general contractor’s ability to develop and maintain strong subcontractor and small business relationships. The Government will evaluate the general contractor’s subcontractor management model and processes.

6.2.6 Planning and Scheduling. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s scheduling capabilities to manage an integrated design-build schedule as it relates to design and construction.

6.2.7 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.

6.2.8 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.

6.2.9 Key Personnel. 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. Give additional consideration to previous design-build experience. Evaluate whether designers of record are registered (a requirement), experienced and qualified. see below for additional requirements.

6.2.9.1 Minimum Qualifications of Key Personnel:

a. Prime Contractor’s Project Manager. Must possess a bachelor’s degree and AM1 *seven five*(5) years of relevant industry experience in a similar role.

b. Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO). Shall meet the qualifications of EM 385-1-1.

A. OSHA 30-hour training card or equivalent.

B. Proof of employment for five (5) years of continuous construction industry safety experience in supervising / managing general construction – or – four (4) years of continuous construction industry safety experience with a Third Party Nationally Accredited (ANSI or National Commission for Certifying Agencies – NCAA / Safety and Occupational Health) related certification.

C. Professional development – minimum of 8 hours per year.

c. Onsite Contractor Quality Control (CQC) Manager. Must meet the qualifications of any of (A), (B) or

(C):

A. Licensed Professional Engineer with five (5) years of relevant construction experience B. Bachelor’s degree in Engineering or Construction Management (or equivalent) with seven (7) years of relevant construction experience C. Ten (10) years of relevant construction experience. Relevant construction experience includes any work requiring oversight of construction quality and adherence to plans and specifications. This could include work as a crew foreman, quality control manager, assistant quality control manager, superintendent, or combination thereof to meet the relevant construction experience requirement.

d. Construction Site Superintendent. Must possess ten (10) years of relevant construction experience with at least five…