Amendment_W912DQ_17_R_4004_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

JOB ORDER CONTRACT (JOC), FORT LEAVENWORTH KANSAS

See SF30 Continuation Page for Details

Proposal due date remains May 8, 2017 at 2:30 p.m. local time.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 52

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 27-Apr-2017

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 W912DQ-17-R-4004

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

06-Apr-2017

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

27-Apr-2017

CODE

USACE, KANSAS CITY +

FEDERAL BUILDING CT-M, RM 647 601 EAST 12TH S

KANSAS CITY MO 64106-2896

W912DQ 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912DQ-17-R-4004

0001Page 2 of 52

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The following have been added by full text:

The SOLICITATION is amended as follows:

Note: Changes are shown as GREEN, Strikethroughs are shown in RED

1. SECTION 00 11 00 - Solicitation/Contract Form has a change to the Notes to the Proposal Schedule – “(d) Offeror’s coefficient shall contain all costs…….”

2. SECTION 00 22 11 - Best Value Evaluation Factors One Step is replaced in its entirety.

3. The Wage Determination Rates have been updated.

4. The Proposal due date remains May 8, 2017, 2:30 p.m. local time.

5. All other terms and conditions remain the same and in full effect.

0001Page 3 of 52

SECTION 00 11 00 - Solicitation/Contract Form

NOTES TO THE PROPOSAL SCHEDULE

(d) Offeror's coefficients shall contain all costs other than pre-priced unit prices and shall include, but not be limited to:

• General and Administrative and other Overhead

• Profit and risk

• Interest associated with funding of equipment and payroll

• Depreciation of mobile office, office equipment, tools, heavy equipment, and other infrastructure owned by the contractor

• Bond premiums to include other required permits, licenses and fees in support of this contract

• Social security contributions

• Insurance Costs

• Employee Payroll Taxes

• Insurance and Fringe Benefits

• Traffic and work signs and barricades

• Subcontractors’ Overhead and Profit

• Removal, handling, transport and disposal of fluorescent lighting lamps, aerosol cans and paint cans.

• Site cleanup

• Barriers and Fencing

• Supervision

• Quality control

• Transportation of contractor’s personnel to, from, and within the job site

• Furniture Moving, Storage, Care and Return

• Mobilization and Close out for the Contract and Task Order

• Shipping of all materials to the jobsite

• Lodging and per-diem

• Adjustment factors to account for small jobs

• Submittals

• Shop Drawings

• As Built Drawings

• Purchasing and installing equipment warranty identification tags

• Task Order preparation costs

• Waste and excess material

• Sales tax on material and equipment costs

• Compliance with EPA/OSHA regulations and protection and safety laws and all contingencies, “Using the

Construction Task Catalog”.

• Daily and Final Cleanup

• Protection of and / or moving of Government Property

All costs included in the offerors' coefficient shall be fully identified (See Section 00 22 11) as no allowances will be made later.

0001Page 4 of 52

SECTION 00 22 11 - Best Value Evaluation Factors One Step

APPENDIX C

SECTION 00 22 11

BEST VALUE EVALUATION FACTORS

1.0 OVERVIEW

This solicitation is for a firm-fixed price contract to acquire construction services to provide maintenance, repair, upgrade and construction of real property facilities at Fort Leavenworth, KS, through a job order contract (JOC).

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15, the Contracting Officer will award a single firm fixed price contract to the offeror whose proposal offers the best value - Trade Off proposal to the Government, considering the price and non-price factors described in the Request for Proposal and evaluation criteria.

The primary NAICS code is 236220 with a small business size of $36.5 million.

2.0 GENERAL PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

All Offerors shall be required to submit a proposal with the minimum content as specified herein. Proposals without the minimum content may be rejected. Proposals will be received until the date and time indicated on Standard Form 1442 at the following address:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City District Federal Building Room 647 ATTN: CECT-NWK-M/Carmen E. Hopkins 601 East 12th Street Kansas City, Missouri 64106-2896

3.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT AND SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

1. In order to be considered for award of a contract for the requirements of this solicitation, the offeror must submit a proposal with its offer. Failure to submit a complete proposal may result in the entire offer being rejected. The proposals shall be submitted in Volumes as follows:

Submit the proposal in a tabbed, three-ring binder identified by the Solicitation Number W912DQ-17-R- 4004, project title, Job Order Contract (JOC), Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, name, address, and telephone number of the offeror(s). Arrange tabs as follows:

(1) Volume 1, Technical Proposal (Tabs A thru D):

Tab A: Factor 1: JOC/SABER Experience Tab B: Factor 2: Management Approach Tab C: Factor 3: Historic Building Renovation Experience Tab D: Factor 4: Past Performance

(2) Volume 2, Price Proposal, (Tab A), consists of an original signed Standard Form 1442 “Solicitation, Offer, and Award,” providing completed list of all cost included in the Offeror’s coefficients, acknowledgment of all amendments to the solicitation, and Pro Forma information required by Paragraph 3.

2. Proposal Characteristics

0001Page 5 of 52

a) Submit original and number of copies of the proposal as identified below. Electronic copies shall be provided on one CD/DVD in PDF format and be optical character recognition (OCR) compatible. All text must be legible and easily read. Each Volume shall contain a table of contents and all pages of each factor shall be sequentially numbered.

The page size of the Offeror’s proposal shall not exceed 8-1/2 by 11 inches. Diagrams, charts and tables shall conform to the paper size. All text shall be typed single-spaced. Font size no smaller than eleven (11). Margins (1-inch) shall be clean and clear. If fold-out charts are unavoidable, and are to be utilized, all sheets shall be reproduced on 11 by 17 inch, and folded to 8-1/2 by 11 inch size. Submit the SF 1442, completed and signed by a person authorized by the offeror.

*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.

b) Each Volume of the proposal shall be identified by the Solicitation Number W912DQ-17-R-4004, project title “Job Order Contract (JOC), Fort Leavenworth, Kansas”, name, address, and telephone number of the offeror, and the following on the volume in bold letters:

VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (Original & 4 Copies) (1 CD/DVD) VOLUME 2: PRICE PROPOSAL (Original & 2 Copies) (1 CD/DVD)

c) The Proposal’s clarity, organization and cross referencing are mandatory. No material shall be incorporated by reference. General cross-references or cross referencing guides will not be considered appropriate cross-references.

3. Additional Information to be provided:

Pro Forma Requirements to be provided in Volume 2: This information should be submitted in an envelope labeled “Pro Forma Requirements”. Electronic copies shall also be provided on one CD/DVD in PDF format and be *Optical Character Recognition (OCR) compatible.

This information consists of the following:

1) The offeror will submit a cover letter containing:

a. Solicitation number.

b. Name, address, email, and telephone and fax numbers of the offeror.

c. 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.

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

e. A statement specifying agreement with all terms, conditions and provisions included in the RFP.

f. DUNS Number, Tax ID (TIN) and CAGE Codes for the offeror and all teaming partners who participated in the Factor 1 – JOC/SABER Experience projects and Factor 3 – Historic Building Renovation Experience projects.

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

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

4) Bid Guarantee. See FAR 52.228-1.

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

6) For Joint Ventures, the information required by paragraph 5.0, “Joint Ventures”.

The government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits specified within each evaluation factor.

Elaborately prepared proposals are not required, and any material in excess of what is requested, such as corporate marketing information, will not be considered.

0001Page 6 of 52

Failing to submit or completely fill out attachments properly may result in rejection of the offer without further evaluation. Therefore, Offerors are urged to follow instructions and raise questions through inquiries if instructions are not understood.

4.0 INQUIRIES/QUESTIONS

Technical inquiries and questions relating to this solicitation shall be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at (https://www.projnet.org). To submit and review inquiry items, prospective offerors will need to use the Bidder Inquiry Key presented below and follow the instructions listed below the key for access. A prospective offeror who submits a comment /question will receive an acknowledgement of their comment/question via email. Another email to the same address will notify the prospective offeror once the reply is available for viewing.

***Please Note: Offerors shall only submit one question per inquiry. All inquiries containing multiple questions shall be rejected. ***

The Solicitation Number is: W912DQ-17-R-4004 The Bidder Inquiry Key is: D9S48I-KIUG93 The Plan Room Key: DJ7F22-2GFBDH

Instructions for first-time ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

1. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

2. Identify the Agency. Select agency USACE.

3. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

4. Email. Enter the email address you would like to use for communication.

5. Click Continue. A page will then open saying that a user account was not found and will ask you to create one using the provided form.

6. Enter your First Name, Last Name, Company, City, State, Phone, Email, Secret Question, Secret Answer, and Time Zone. Make sure to remember your Secret Question and Answer as they will be used from this point on to access the ProjNet system.

7. Click Add User. Once this is completed you are now registered within ProjNet and are currently logged into the system.

Instructions for future ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

1. For future access to ProjNet, you will not be provided any type of password. You will utilize your Secret

Question and Secret Answer to log in.

2. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

3. Identify the Agency. Select agency USACE.

4. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

5. Email. Enter the email address you used to register previously in ProjNet.

6. Click Continue. A page will then open asking you to enter the answer to your Secret Question.

7. Enter your Secret Answer and click Login. Once this is completed you are now logged into the system.

The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquiries ten (10) calendar days before proposal due date in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response to inquiries and amend the solicitation if necessary.

Offerors are requested to review the specification in its entirety, and review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry.

The ProjNet call center operates weekdays from 8AM to 5PM U.S. Central Time Zone (Chicago) or by appointment for OCONUS. The telephone number for the Call Center is 1-800-428-HELP. Email to staff@rcesupport.com.

5.0 JOINT VENTURES

https://www.projnet.org/ mailto:staff@rcesupport.com

0001Page 7 of 52

An offeror may be a Joint Venture that includes an 8(a) Program participant, but to receive award the joint venture must meet the requirements of the Small Business Administration regulations at 13 CFR section 124.513. Those regulations include specific requirements for the contents of a joint venture agreement, and approval of the joint venture by the SBA prior to award of the 8(a) contract.

Joint Ventures shall submit the following additional documentation regarding their business entities:

1) A certified copy of their Joint Venture agreement.

2) A detailed statement outlining the following in terms of percentages, where appropriate.

a. The relationship of the joint venture parties in terms of business ownership, capital contribution, and profit distribution or loss sharing.

b. The management approach of the joint venture in terms of who will conduct, direct, supervise and control the project and have custody and control of the assets of the Joint Venture and perform the duties necessary to complete the work.

c. The structure of the joint venture and decision-making responsibilities of the Joint Venture parties in terms of who will control the manner and method of performance of the work.

d. The bonding responsibilities of the Joint Venture parties.

e. Identification of the key personnel having authority to legally bind the Joint Venture to subcontracts and state who will provide or contract for the labor and materials for the Joint Venture.

f. Identification of party maintaining the Joint Venture bank accounts for the payment of all expenses and the deposits of all receipts, keep the books and records, and pay applicable taxes for the Joint Venture.

g. Identification of party furnishing the facilities, such as office supplies and telephone service.

h. Identification of party having overall control of the Joint Venture.

Other sections of the proposal shall identify, where appropriate, whether key personnel are employees of the individual Joint Venture parties and identify the party, or hired as employees of the Joint Venture.

If one of the Joint Venture parties possesses experience and/or past performance as a Federal Government contractor or as a Corps of Engineers contractor, that experience and/or past experience will be included as the experience and/or past experience of the Joint Venture.

6.0 OBTAINING A D.U.N.S. NUMBER

Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number. The Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number is a unique nine-character identification number provided by the commercial company Dun & Bradstreet (D&B). Call D&B at 1-866-705-5711 or access their website if you do not have a DUNS number. The site addresses are http://fedbgov.dnb.com/webform OR http://www.dnb.com/us/. The process to request a DUNS number via phone takes about 10 minutes and is free of charge. Internet request are fulfilled within 24 hours. You must have a different nine-digit DUNS number for each physical location or different address in your company as well as each legal division that may be co-located.

7.0 SUBCONTRACTORS

If an offeror wishes to receive credit for the experience or past performance of a subcontractor or teaming partner, the offeror must submit a letter of commitment to use the proposed firm on the project, signed both by the http://fedbgov.dnb.com/webform

0001Page 8 of 52 subcontractor/teaming partner and the offeror. The commitment letter must be submitted even if the subcontractor/teaming partner is in some way affiliated with the offeror (for example, the subcontractor/teaming partner is a subsidiary of a joint venture partner, or a subsidiary of a firm to which the joint venture partner is also a subsidiary).

Include the subcontractor letters of commitment in Volume 1, Factor 1, JOC/SABER Experience or Volume 1, Factor 3 - Historic Building Renovation Experience as appropriate.

SAMPLE LETTER OF COMMITMENT to USE SUBCONTRACTOR

[COMPANY LETTERHEAD]

TO: Contracting Officer, Kansas City District, United States Army Corps of Engineers

SUBJECT: Letter of Commitment for Proposed Fort Leavenworth JOC

Dear Sir or Madam:

[Insert name of offeror] and [insert name of subcontractor] hereby make the unequivocal commitment that, in the event that the company receives award of the contract, [insert name of subcontractor] will perform the following work or provide the following resources required to successfully perform the contract.

[Detail the work or resources (workforce, management, facilities, or other resources) that will be provided by the subcontractor for this contract, and which demonstrates how said resources will be provided or relied upon by the offeror in its contract performance.]

Sincerely, [Authorized Official]

[Legal Name of Offeror]

Date: __________

[Subcontractor]

[Legal Name of Subcontractor]

Date: ______

0001Page 9 of 52

8. DEBRIEFING OF UNSUCCESSFUL OFFERORS

Unsuccessful offerors will be notified in accordance with FAR Subpart 15.5. An unsuccessful offeror may request a preaward debriefing or a delayed debriefing after award by submitting a written request to the contracting officer within three (3) days after receipt of the notice excluding the offeror from the competition and award. Offerors are entitled to no more than one debriefing for each proposal.

9. BASIS OF AWARD

The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed-price contract to that responsible Offeror whose proposal the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the RFP, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, considering the non-price factors described herein, and price (coefficient). All evaluation factors, other than price (coefficient), when combined, are considered significantly more important than the price (coefficient). The intent of this RFP is to obtain the best value proposal. After the Government individually evaluates each proposal, the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority will compare proposals to determine which proposal represents the best value. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced (coefficient) offer or to reject all offers. The Government will not award a contract to an Offeror whose proposal contains a deficiency, as defined in FAR 15.001. If there is a lower priced (coefficient), conforming offer(s), the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Official must determine that the added value of a more expensive proposal would justify award to that Offeror.

Table 1: Relative Importance of Factors

Factor Number

FACTOR RELATIVE IMPORTANCE

1 JOC/SABER Experience The most important factor 2 Management Approach Less important than factor 1; more important than factors 3 and 4 3 Historic Building

Renovation Experience Less important than factors 1 and 2;

more important than factor 4

Past Performance Less important than factors 1, 2 and

5 Price Significantly less important than 1, 2, 3 and 4 when combined

10. EVALUATION FACTORS

All of the submission items to be evaluated pertain to the prime offeror, whether a single contractor entity, partnership, or a joint venture.

11. SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS

All offers received in response to this solicitation will be evaluated in accordance with informal source selection procedures. The principal objective of this process is to select a responsible offeror who submits the offer that is the Best Value to the Government. The process is designed to ensure the impartial, equitable, and comprehensive evaluation of all technically acceptable, responsible proposals received in response to this particular solicitation.

Source Selection Team

The Source Selection Team (SST) is established as a separate organization and management chain of command whose only purpose is to accomplish the objective above. The organization consists of a Source Selection Authority (SSA), a Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC), and a Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). The SSEB is comprised of separate Technical and Price teams. The organization is designed to ensure active ongoing involvement

0001Page 10 of 52 of appropriate contracting, technical, logistics, legal, price analysis, small business, and other functional staff management expertise.

Source Selection Procedure

The source selection procedures will begin with an initial review of proposals and continue with a technical and price evaluation conducted by the SSEB. The SSEB will evaluate the proposals based solely on the evaluation criteria identified above. The results of the SSEB evaluations will be presented to the SSAC who will review the evaluations conducted by the SSEB. The SSAC will provide their evaluation and recommendations to the SSA, who will make the final source selection decision or determine whether it is appropriate to engage in clarifications or communications prior to the establishment of a competitive range, or to establish a competitive range and conduct discussions with those offerors that are included in the competitive range. The Government intends to award without discussions. All communications leading to establishment of the competitive range will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.306b.

If a competitive range is established, discussions will be conducted with Offerors who are included in the competitive range. After conclusion of discussions and receipt of final revised proposals, the SSEB will complete the evaluation and establish the final technical ratings and present them to the SSAC. The SSAC will consolidate the advice and recommendations from the SSEB into a written comparative analysis and recommendation for use by the SSA in making the best value source selection decision based on the Best Value to the Government, price, and other factors considered. The SSA will make the final source selection decision.

The proposals received in response to this solicitation will be evaluated individually to select the most advantageous proposal.

The Government is not responsible for information overlooked during the evaluation which is not located in the appropriate proposal section. To ensure the evaluation credit is appropriately received for proposal material submitted, do not incorporate by reference documents not contained in the proposal. References to sections of the proposal shall be by specific paragraph number (and name, if applicable), page number, and section.

12. TECHNICAL RATING

The SST will use a combined technical/risk rating system that includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

Assessment of technical risk, which is manifested by the identification of weakness(es), considers potential for disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and/or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Combined technical/risk evaluations will utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in Table 2 and the risk descriptions set forth in Table 3.

Table 2. Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

Color Rating Description

Blue

Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple

Good

Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green

Acceptable

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

0001Page 11 of 52

Yellow

Marginal

Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red

Unacceptable

Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

Table 3. Technical Risk Rating Method

Rating Description

Low

Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Unacceptable

Proposal contains a material failure or a combination of significant weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level.

Ratings will be assigned for each of the technical evaluation factors for each offeror. No overall rating will be assigned. An offeror will not be considered for award if the offeror is assigned a rating of Unacceptable for any individual evaluation factor.

13. DEFINITIONS

Rating: The rating for the Technical factor will be expressed as an adjectival assessment of Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, or Unacceptable.

Deficiency: A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Strength: Any aspect of an offeror's proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

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

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

Significant Weakness: A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

14. TECHNICAL FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

Factor Location Description

Factor 1 Vol. 1 Tab A JOC/SABER Experience Factor 2 Vol. 1 Tab B Management Approach

0001Page 12 of 52

Factor 3 Vol. 1 Tab C Historic building Renovation Experience Factor 4 Vol. 1 Tab D Past Performance

TECHNICAL FACTORS

VOLUME 1, TAB A – FACTOR 1 – JOC/SABER Experience

Submission Requirements

Page Limit: 30 pages

The offeror shall submit a project portfolio containing up to five example JOC/SABER contracts to demonstrate the offeror’s relevant military or commercial construction experience. If more than five JOC/SABER contracts are submitted, only the first five JOC/SABER contracts will be evaluated. Limit each example JOC/SABER contract to two (2) pages each, with a total of no more than ten (10) pages for this factor.

The Government will evaluate how the JOC/SABER contracts identified by the Offeror demonstrate the extent of the offeror’s JOC/SABER Experience that is similar to the JOC solicitation requirements.

For a JOC/SABER contract to be considered similar and evaluated, it must meet the following minimum criteria:

a) A firm fixed price construction indefinite delivery indefinite quantity contract for the maintenance, repair, upgrade and construction of real property facilities. (MATOCS, SATOCS, MACCs are not considered similar);

b) JOC/SABER contract averages $7 5 million of task orders awarded annually;

c) JOC/SABER contract includes task orders covering a variety of maintenance, repair, upgrade and construction scopes, such as: mechanical/electrical/plumbing (MEP) work; architectural; structural; fire suppression and detection;

d) Completed or substantially complete within the last 6 years as of the proposal submission date. For multi-year JOC/SABER contracts, the JOC/SABER contract will be considered substantially complete if the contract duration is 50% or more complete. For JOC/SABER contract durations of one year or less, the project will be considered substantially complete if the contract duration is 90% or more complete. If an Offeror presents a multi-year JOC/SABER contract that is less than 50% complete, the proposal must include an explanation as to why that contract should be considered substantially complete. If an Offeror presents a JOC/SABER contract with a duration of one year or less that is less than 90% complete, the proposal must include an explanation as to why that contract should be considered substantially complete.

The Government will determine whether the explanation is sufficient to consider the proposed JOC/SABER contract substantially complete.

Use the following format to provide project information:

(a) Project Title

(b) Location

(c) Contract Number

(d) Contract Type (fixed price or other; JOC or Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineer Requirements

(SABER))

(e) Role of Offeror (address type of work performed, including design, percentage of work performed by the offeror, as applicable, and any proposed team members that were directly involved in this project, including work performed, roles and responsibilities)

(f) Total dollar amount of task orders awarded

(g) Total dollar amount of task orders completed

0001Page 13 of 52

(h) Contract award date

(i) Contract completion date

(j) List of task orders received to include dollar value of task order and a brief description of the scope sufficient to understand work involved, and percent complete of the task order. If the task order is not complete, indicate anticipated completion date. Customer Primary Point of Contact (name, relationship to project, agency/firm, phone number, and e-mail address). The Government may contact and interview project references. Reference information will not be revealed to other parties.

If the offeror represents the combining of two or more companies, state if the example contract represents a joint venture of the listed parties. If an offeror wishes to receive credit for the experience or past performance of a subcontractor or teaming partner, the offeror must submit a letter of commitment to use the proposed firm on the project, signed both by the subcontractor/teaming partner and the offeror. The commitment letter must be submitted even if the subcontractor/teaming partner is in some way affiliated with the offeror (for example, the subcontractor/teaming partner is a subsidiary of a joint venture partner, or a subsidiary of a firm to which the joint venture partner is also a subsidiary).

Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate the content of each Offerors' submitted JOC/SABER Experience and will assign strengths and weaknesses based on how well each Offeror’s proposal demonstrates the following

a) Multiple JOC or SABER contracts

b) JOC/SABER contracts in which the offeror was the prime contractor on the project.

c) The extent to which JOC/SABER contracts that exceed the an minimum requirements average of $7 million of task orders awarded annually

d) JOC/SABER contracts with task orders covering a variety of maintenance, repair, upgrade and construction scopes, such as: mechanical/electrical/plumbing (MEP) work; architectural; structural; fire suppression and detection;

e) JOC/SABER contracts completed or substantially complete within the last 6 years.

VOLUME 1, TAB B – FACTOR 2 – Management Approach

Submission Requirements

Page Limit: 25 pages.

Offerors shall describe its plan for execution of this Job Order Contract (JOC). Offerors shall possess an overall management capability to manage and execute JOC task orders. Describe management of work scope systematically and efficiently in order to maximize operational performance and financial performance, and minimize project risk. Describe (via illustration and/or narrative) how Offeror will manage the contract and administer task orders. The proposal shall address the information below.

Task order pre-award activities. The Offerer shall describe its pre-award plan and capabilities to estimate, prepare, submit and negotiate multiple task order proposals of varying complexity and size ranging from $2500 to $2 million concurrently.

Subcontractor Management. The Offeror shall describe its capability and capacity to develop and maintain a subcontractor base. The Offeror shall describe how it will ensure adequate oversight and coordination of multiple subcontractors on concurrent task orders at various locations and of varying degrees of complexity, to include performance monitoring and timely resolution of any issues that may arise.

Resourcing/Staffing Plan. Describe how the Offeror's corporate and on-site staff will interface with the Government and what means and methods will be used to keep Government staff informed and up to date regarding task order status, daily work locations and similar information. Describe the plan of action for providing corporate

0001Page 14 of 52 support in a timely manner by providing resources from other parts of the corporation or otherwise augmenting staff for situations such as increased workload in a compressed timeframe. Describe the measures that will be taken by the Offeror's staff to ensure that response times and critical deadlines are met. Demonstrate the ability to manage/construct multiple (i.e. as many as 20 or more) small to medium-scale construction, maintenance and repair task orders simultaneously. Include type, number and location (Fort Leavenworth or other) of staff positions to be utilized and roles, responsibilities and contractual authority of proposed personnel.

Quality Control and Safety Plan. Describe the Offeror’s corporate quality control and safety programs and how these will be implemented on this contract. Describe how the requirements of Occupational Safety Health Administration (OSHA) and EM 385-1-1 will be implemented and met. Describe how the Offeror proposes to ensure that quality control and safety measures will be enforced at all levels, to include subcontractors. Describe the positions required to implement the quality control and safety plans and the educational requirements, experience, and specialized training required for these positions (not looking for resumes).

NOTE: The Offeror is not required to submit a Quality Control Plan or Safety Plan as part of the proposal; but to describe how these plans will be implemented. The Quality Control Plan and the Safety Plan must be submitted to, and approved by, the Contracting Officer prior to issuance of the first task order.

EVALUATION CRITERIA - The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which it:

a) Demonstrates the ability to successfully negotiate multiple task orders of varying size and complexity concurrently.

b) Demonstrates the ability to successfully coordinate and manage multiple subcontractors on multiple task orders at various locations, simultaneously.

c) Demonstrates the offeror’s understanding of internal and external communication requirements, roles and responsibilities.

d) Demonstrates the offeror has a well-thought out feasible plan for providing resources from other parts of the corporation or otherwise augmenting staff for situations such as increased workload in a compressed timeframe;

includes consideration of expected staffing.

e) Demonstrates the offeror’s ability to handle multiple task orders of varying size and complexity concurrently and on schedule; includes management controls and needed staffing.

f) Demonstrates the offeror has a formal corporate process in place to control quality and safety throughout the course of the project and whether the offeror has implemented a process of checks and balances to achieve quality construction in a safe manner.

VOLUME 1, TAB C – FACTOR 3 – Historic Building Renovation Experience

Submission Requirements

The offeror shall submit a project portfolio containing up to ten example projects to demonstrate the offeror’s relevant military or commercial historic renovation construction experience. If more than ten projects are submitted, only the first ten projects will be evaluated. Limit each example project to two (2) pages each, with a total of no more than twenty (20) pages for this factor.

Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOCs) or any other type of task-order contracts that provide for the issuance of orders for the performance of tasks will not be considered projects for the purposes of this evaluation;

only individual task orders issued under such contracts will be evaluated as projects.

The Government will evaluate how the projects identified by the Offeror demonstrate the extent of the Offeror’s historic building renovation experience that is similar to the target requirements.

For a project to be considered similar and evaluated, it must meet the following minimum criteria:

a) Contract includes work covering a variety of scopes of work, such as: replacement of building systems (mechanical/electrical/plumbing (MEP)); fire suppression and detection; interior and exterior architectural repair and restoration (masonry and/or wood); structural (masonry and/or wood); seismic upgrades; and anti-terrorism force protection upgrades.

0001Page 15 of 52

b) Work completed in accordance with The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (36 CFR 68, as amended and annotated).

c) Completed or substantially complete within the last 6 years as of the proposal submission date. The project will be considered substantially complete if the contract or task order is 90% or more complete. If an Offeror presents a project that is less than 90% complete, the proposal must include an explanation as to why that project should be considered substantially complete. The Government will determine whether the explanation is sufficient to consider the project substantially complete.

Use the following format to provide project information:

(a) Project Title

(b) Location

(c) Contract Number

(d) Contract Type (fixed price or other; task order or stand-alone contract)

(e) Role of Offeror (address type of work performed, including design, percentage of work performed by the offeror, as applicable, and any proposed team members that were directly involved in this project, including work performed, roles and responsibilities)

(f) Total Dollar Amount

(g) Contract award date

(h) Contract completion date. If the contract is not complete, indicate anticipated completion date.

(i) Customer Primary Point of Contact (name, relationship to project, agency/firm, phone number, and e-mail address). The Government may contact and interview project references. Reference information will not be revealed to other parties.

(j) Scope provided in sufficient detail to determine similarity with the target experience, to include compliance with The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (36 CFR 68, as amended and annotated)

If the offeror represents the combining of two or more companies, state if the example project represents a joint venture of the listed parties. If an offeror wishes to receive credit for the experience or past performance of a subcontractor or teaming partner, the offeror must submit a letter of commitment to use the proposed firm on the project, signed both by the subcontractor/teaming partner and the offeror. The commitment letter must be submitted even if the subcontractor/teaming partner is in some way affiliated with the offeror (for example, the subcontractor/teaming partner is a subsidiary of a joint venture partner, or a subsidiary of a firm to which the joint venture partner is also a subsidiary).

To be considered historic building renovation, the building renovation has to be done in accordance with The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (36 CFR 68, as amended and annotated).

Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate the content of each Offeror’s' submitted historic building renovation experience and will assign strengths and weaknesses based on how well each Offeror’s proposal demonstrates the following

a) The portfolio should contain projects which collectively cover a majority of the following scopes of work:

replacement of building systems (mechanical/electrical/plumbing (MEP)); fire suppression and detection;

interior and exterior architectural repair and restoration (masonry and/or wood); structural (masonry and/or wood); seismic upgrades; anti-terrorism force protection upgrades

b) Projects documenting they were completed in accordance with The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (36 CFR 68, as amended and annotated).

c) Projects in which the offeror was the prime contractor on the project.

d) Projects completed or substantially completed within the last 6 years.

0001Page 16 of 52

VOLUME 1, TAB D – FACTOR 4 – Past Performance

Submission Requirements

For each of the projects submitted under Factors 1 and 3, the offeror shall provide a Past Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ-0, included in the solicitation) to a representative of the owner who can provide the owner’s opinion of the Offeror’s past performance for the project. Completed PPQ-0 forms should be submitted with your proposal. A copy of a previously completed PPQ can be submitted if it reflects a substantially complete evaluation of the project. The PPQ-0 does not have to be sent directly from the client. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ-0 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-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 point 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, Carmen Hopkins, via email at Carmen.E.Hopkins@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. The offeror is responsible for ensuring that the completed questionnaires are submitted by the closing date. If you have questions regarding the attached questionnaire, or require assistance, please contact the Contract Specialist at (816) 389-3264.

For each of the projects submitted under Factors 1 and 3, to ensure the agency has all relevant past performance information, the offeror also should 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 CCASS or CPARS evaluations. To improve accuracy of database searches, the offeror will also provide the CAGE Codes for the prime contractor whose experience is being relied on Factors 1 and 3. If a submitted proposal includes a final CCASS/CPARS evaluation for a Factor 1 or 3 project, do not submit a completed PPQ for the same project as only the final CCASS/CPARS rating will be evaluated.

Offerors should organize all Past Performance Information based on the Factor 1 and 3 projects, which normally have project titles and are numbered, so that reviewers can match the owner’s opinion with the corresponding Project. All Past Performance Information presented will be identified in the top left hand corner of each page with the Corresponding Project Number and Title from Factors 1 and 3. There is no page limit for this factor.

The Government will evaluate the responses from the customers from which Past Performance Questionnaires have been received. The Government may contact and interview the owner’s representative on the PPQ-0, and reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the owner’s representative, if the owner’s representative is not available.

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.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. 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), 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.

At no time during this process, nor during the debriefing, nor after award, will the names of the individuals providing reference information about an Offeror’s past performance be revealed to the Offeror’s or to any other party. If discussions are held, Offeror’s may be afforded the opportunity to respond to adverse comments made by references in accordance with guidelines identified in FAR Part 15.3. In this case, comments will be extracted and provided to the offeror. Copies of the questionnaires will not be furnished to the offeror and will remain confidential.

Evaluation Procedure

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT

0001Page 17 of 52

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

In reviewing each past performance effort by the offeror, the SST will first evaluate recency. For a project to be considered recent it must be completed within the past 6 years or be substantially complete (at least 90%).

In reviewing each past performance effort by the offeror, the SST will then evaluate how relevant the recent effort is to the work required by this solicitation. The relevancy determination will be based on the factor 1 and 3 evaluation criteria above. Each past performance effort will be assigned one of the levels of relevancy shown in Table 5:

Table 5. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition Very Relevant Past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

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

Quality of Products or Services.