W912DR-15-R-0007_SF30_Amendment_02.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

This amendment to the Solicitation w ill incorporate RFI Questions and Answ ers, extend the proposal due date to 27 October 2015, and update provision 52.204-8 -- Annual Representations and Certif ications.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 25

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 15-Oct-2015

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 W912DR-15-R-0007

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

18-Sep-2015

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 X is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

15-Oct-2015

CODE

REAL PROPERTY SERVICES F.O.

300 SENTINEL DRIVE

STE 400

ANNAPOLIS JUNCTION MD 20701

W912DR 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912DR-15-R-0007

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 19-Oct-2015 11:00 AM to 27-Oct-2015 11:00 AM.

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been added by full text:

RFI Q&A AMENDMENT 02

RFI Questions/Answers 02

1. Q: (An update to Amendment 01) Will the prime firms be required to provide cultural resources impact assessments as part of this contract? Will they be required to provide their own cultural resources monitors during construction?

A: No, if required, these services will be addressed as a non-pre-priced item.

2. Q: The RFP states that it is mandatory that the prime contractor have an active Top Secret Facility Site Clearance during the duration of this contract. Is the contract requiring that our facility be a “top secret facility” or just to provide personnel with TS clearance, or may we have a TS cleared escort(s) to oversee employee functions?

A: It is mandatory that the name of the contractor under its CAGE code have a TS Facility Site Clearance and provide personnel that are TS cleared to be able to work on classified projects or secured locations.

3. Q: Reference page 33 – Attachment B. Is the Owner of the Project considered the end-user or is the Owner of the Project the contracting entity for the Project?

A: The owner of the project is considered the end-user.

4. Q: Does the Environmental Engineer need to be a registered P.E. in environmental engineering or can they be a registered engineer of any type with an expertise in environmental engineering?

A: The Environmental Engineer must be a registered P.E with suitable environmental experience.

5. Q: Is it required for subs to hold a secret clearance at the time of submission?

A: It is mandatory that sub contractors identified to work on classified projects or in secured locations poses the appropriate clearances at the time of submission.

6. Q: (An update to Amendment 01) Please clarify whether the Solicitation Contract Form is to be submitted as part of Phase 1 or Phase 2.

A: The Solicitation Contract Form, such as, SF 1442s and SF 30s are to be submitted under Tab D of Binder 2 for Phase 1. See Proposal Instruction, Section 00100, 3.8, Binder 2 – Solicitation Information, Tab D.

7. Q: Will the Phase 2 sample project require Top Secret storage capabilities?

A: No

The following have been modified:

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTION

SECTION 00100

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS – PHASE 1

1. OVERVIEW.

1.1 This Request for Proposal (RFP) solicits for a single award task order contract (SATOC) for The Real Property Services Field Office (RSFO) of the Baltimore District Corps of Engineers. This will be an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Firm Fixed-Price Task Order Contract. The resultant contract will have a five year period of performance with a maximum dollar value of $103,000,000.00.

1.2 The award will be an IDIQ contract that will be funded per task order. Task orders may be either Design-Build or Design-Bid-Build. The individual projects will be a variety of construction types from mechanical and electrical to new construction. The task orders will range in size and complexity from small to large and from non-complex to non-technical. Projects may be classified or unclassified. Funding may be either Military Construction funding (MILCON) or Operations and Maintenance (O&M) funding. Occasionally, there may be other types of funding that could be utilized if authorized for constructions projects. All task orders will be Firm Fixed-Priced task orders. The period of performance for the task orders will be determined during the negotiations of the task orders, A Top Secret Facility Site Clearance (TSFSC) is required for the awardee. The Offeror successful in obtaining this contract award will be that Offeror whose proposal represents the best value and is determined to provide the most benefit to the Government.

Further details regarding this project include the following: This contract is for a broad variety of major and minor repair, modifications, renovations, rehabilitation, alterations, Design-Build, Design-Bid-Build and new construction projects in a Secure Environment that includes working in Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIF) in support of customers in the Intelligence Community, Department of Defense organizations and other agencies that are supported by the Real Property Services Field Office or any Corps of Engineers District. The work will consist of very technical electrical work to include but not limited to constructing or renovating server rooms, UPS, generators, redundant power, high volume office spaces, power whips and terminations, receptacles, panel breakers, grounding, under raised access floor, and technical mechanical work to include a variety of mechanical systems, server rooms, HVAC, SCADA and BMS tie-in. Further projects may include demolition; infrastructure; interior fit-up; communications, security, and counter terrorism (including weapons of mass destruction), and anti-terrorism/force protection (AT/FP) requirements. The prime contractor will be responsible for integrating, managing, and executing all aspects of the design, and construction ordered under this contract.

The geographic area for this contract is anticipated to be for services primarily located within the Washington/ Baltimore corridor, but may be used throughout the Continental United States (CONUS) and Hawaii. Work performed may be either in secure or non-secure sites.

The Contractor and RSFO will be required to respond rapidly to Government requirements with outstanding professionalism and top quality craftsmanship, without compromising safety standards, current mission requirements, and readiness. It is imperative that the Contractor provide a flexible and multi-disciplined work force.

Work to be accomplished will be in areas where classified Top Secret operations are conducted. It is mandatory that the Contractor maintain a balanced work force of cleared Top Secret personnel to work in such areas. Also, it is mandatory that the prime contractor has and maintains an active Top Secret Facility Site Clearance for the life of the contract.

For Design-Build task orders, no separate task order or pricing proposal will be issued for design. The coefficient for that task order will be applied to the overall project that will include the cost for the design.

1.3 The purpose of these instructions are to establish a uniform evaluation procedure for the proposals by the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) and the development of the Best Value Decision by the Source Selection Authority (SSA) using the Trade-Off Process (See Federal Acquisition Regulation 15.101-1). In as much as the proposal shall describe the capability of the Offeror to perform the resulting contract, the proposal shall be specific and complete in every detail as well as be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the contract.

1.4 For the purposes of this solicitation, the Government will utilize the Two Phase Process. In Phase 1 of the 2 Phase selection procedure, interested Offerors submit performance capability proposals for review and consideration by the Government.

1.5 The Government will evaluate the performance capability proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein and will select up to three of the highest rated Offerors to participate in Phase 2.

1.6 In Phase 2 of this process, the Government will evaluate technical approach to the sample project, a small business participation plan and price factors.

1.7 Only those Offerors who receive a written notification from the Procuring Contracting Officer that their firm has been selected to participate in Phase 2 of this solicitation are invited to submit a Phase 2 proposal. Those Offerors selected for Phase 2 will be provided the Phase 2 solicitation and submission requirements.

1.8 Offerors that are not selected to participate in Phase 2 will be notified and may request a pre-award or post-award debrief.

2. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 Firms formally organized as design-build entities, design firms and/or construction contractors that have associated specifically for this project, consortia of firms, or any other interested parties may submit proposals. A design firm or construction contractor may offer more than one proposal by entering into more than one association.

Associations may be joint ventures or include key team subcontractors. Any legally organized Offeror may submit a proposal.

2.2 Contractor Team Arrangements. Contractor Team Arrangements are considered an arrangement in which (1) two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor; or (2) a potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program. In accordance with FAR Subpart 9.6, the Government will recognize the integrity and validity of contractor team arrangements; provided, the arrangements are identified and company relationships are fully disclosed in the offer. The Offeror shall identify the major or critical aspects of the requirement to be performed by those identified in the Contractor Team Arrangement. The submission must contain a narrative that clearly explains the relevance to a particular factor of information concerning a company that is part of a Contractor Team Arrangement. The Government will consider the adequacy of this explanation in deciding the relevance of the information to this procurement. The teaming agreements shall be provided and submitted in Tab A of Binder 1. Failure to submit a valid teaming agreement shall render an offer technically unacceptable.

2.3 If applicable, the Offeror shall submit evidence from the Offeror’s SBA Servicing Agency that the Offeror has notified and discussed the proposed joint venture for this project with the appropriate SBA personnel.

2.4 Information submitted about any company other than the Offeror, whether a predecessor company, affiliated company, subsidiary (including wholly owned subsidiaries), subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of this requirement, or other associated business, will not be evaluated for any factor unless the proposal contains a detailed narrative explaining why this submitted information is relevant to this acquisition. The Government will consider the adequacy of this explanation in deciding the relevance and weight of the information to this procurement. Information about subcontractors may not be given much weight unless the proposal contains evidence that the subcontractor is committed to perform the work. If information about a subcontractor is properly submitted and given weight during the evaluation, the expectation is that this subcontractor will perform this work.

Before utilizing another subcontractor for this work, the Government must consent.

2.5 SPECIAL NOTE: This contract requires the firm to possess, at the time of proposal and the time of award, an active Top Secret Facility Site Clearance. This requirement is mandatory for the exact entity submitting the proposal. This means that the entity identified in block 14 of the Standard Form 1442 must have the Top Secret Facility Site Clearance in that name along with the matching Cage Code. For example, if Company A and Company B form a Joint Venture called Company AB, then Company AB must have an active Top Secret Facility Site Clearance. Even if both Company A and Company B each individually posses the clearance, unless Company AB possesses its own Top Secret Facility Site Clearance, the proposal will not be eligible for award.

2.6 It is the intent of the Government to disqualify any proposal that, at the time of proposal, does not possess an active Top Secret Facility Site Clearance immediately and not further evaluate it. Any offeror not possessing an active Top Secret Facility Site Clearance at the time of award will be removed from consideration and not awarded the contract.

2.7 Offerors shall submit their proposal to the address shown in Block 7 of Standard Form 1442.

2.8 Proposals are due no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

3. GENERAL PROPOSAL FORMAT:

3.1 Title Page. Include the title of the solicitation, solicitation number, Offeror name, and date of the submittal.

3.2 Table of Contents. Each binder of the proposal shall contain a detailed table of contents. The complete table of contents shall be included in each binder.

3.3 Printed Matter Submissions. Written material shall be on 8 ½ x 11 inch paper printed in no less than a 10 point font. For organization charts or schedules, a folded 11” x 17” format may be used. This size is also encouraged for Attachment B (landscape). The page count is at the discretion of the contractor (this means that while you should put page numbers on the proposal submission, the Government will NOT be counting the pages). However, it is anticipated this should be approximately 40 - 50 pages in total.

3.4 Binders. Proposals shall be submitted in tabbed, three ring binders.

3.5 Number of Copies. Offerors shall submit the following:

Binder 1: Technical Proposal - an original and five copies Binder 2: Solicitation Information - an original and one copy

3.6 Proposals shall be marked:

Date of Closing: _________________

Time of Closing: 11 a.m.

Solicitation RFP: W912DR-15-R-0007

3.7 Electronic Submission. In addition to the hard copies required in paragraph 3.5, all Offerors shall submit their proposal on a CD-ROM. Written portions of the proposal shall be in MS Word or Adobe Acrobat PDF format. The electronic version shall be either a single file tabbed in the same order as the hard copy or multiple files hyperlinked to a single table of contents. Any portion of the proposal not available in electronic format, i.e. cut sheets, if applicable, should be scanned in Adobe Acrobat PDF format, thus making it available electronically. The CD-ROM must be clearly labeled by solicitation number, project name, installation, and Offeror’s name. The CD-ROM shall be marked with a label stating “Unclassified//Controlled Unclassified Info.” In the event of any conflict between the electronic submission and the hard copy submission, the hard copy submission will govern and will be the material upon which the Government bases its evaluation and ultimately, its decision. Electronic media may be submitted in an un-editable format.

3.8 The proposal shall be organized and tabbed as follows:

Binder 1 - Technical Proposal:

TAB A: Teaming Agreement(s), if applicable. See paragraph 2.2. Note to 8(a) companies - The Small Business Administration (SBA) must approve a joint venture agreement prior to the award of an 8(a) contract on behalf of the joint venture. See paragraph 2.3.

TAB B: Factor 1 Past Performance of Task Order Contracts

TAB C: Factor 2 Work Plan

Binder 2 - Solicitation Information:

The CD with the electronic submissions should be included in this binder.

TAB D: Standard Form 1442 and Standard Form 30 are completed and signed by authorized individual(s) of the Offeror. Offers submitted in the name of a Joint Venture must be signed in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the joint venture agreement as evidenced in the proposal.

TAB E: Bond Surety Letter: Offeror must provide a letter or other documentation from a surety appearing on the Department of Treasury Circular 570 (list of approved sureties) stating that the offeror is able to provide a bid bond for Phase 2 (Source Selection) and obtain performance and payment bonds should they win the contract.

TAB F: Memo identifying the Cage Code for the Prime Contractor to verify the Top Secret Facility Site Clearance.

TAB G: Certificate of Corporate Principal/Authority.

Sample: CERTIFICATE OF CORPORATE AUTHORITY

(This Certificate shall be submitted as part of the proposal or signed contract if the Offeror is a corporation.)

CERTIFICATE

I, _______________________________, certify that I am the ______________________________ of the corporation named as bidder/Offeror therein, that _________________________________, who signed this bid/proposal on behalf of the bidder/Offeror, was then _______________________ of said corporation;

that said bid/proposal was duly signed for and in behalf of said corporation by authority of its governing body, and is within the scope of its corporate powers.

By: ___________________________________(Corporate Seal)

(Signature) (Typed Name of Corporation)

TAB H: Compliance Statement. The Offeror is required to sign and certify that all items submitted in the proposal comply with the RFP requirements and any differences, deviations or exceptions must be stated and explained in this section. Even if there are no differences, deviations or exceptions, the Offeror must submit the signed Compliance Statement stating that no differences, deviations or exceptions exist.

Sample: Statement of Compliance: “This Offeror hereby certifies this proposal is in compliance with the solicitation and its requirements. There are no exceptions, deviations or differences.”

4. EVALUATION RATINGS

4.1 Proposal Ratings: Factors 1 and 2 will be adjectivally rated. Offerors submitting proposals for this project should limit submissions to data essential for the evaluation of proposals.

FACTORS 1 and 2 will be evaluated by a Technical Evaluation Board (TEB) approved by the Source Selection Authority (SSA).

See paragraph 6 below for a discussion of the evaluation criteria applicable to these factors.

4.2 Technical Rating Definitions.

The following combined technical/risk rating definitions will be utilized in the evaluation of Factor 2.

4.3 Past Performance Assessment Definitions. Factor 1 will be evaluated using the following Performance Confidence Assessments:

RATING DESCRIPTION

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

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

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

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

Unknown Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance (Neutral) record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

See Section 6 “Evaluation Criteria,” 6.2 for guidance on the Unknown Confidence (Neutral) rating.

Past Performance shall also be rated in accordance with the relevancy of the past performance. The following will be used for Factor 1:

RATING DESCRIPTION

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description

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

Purple Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies.

Proposal is unawardable.

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

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

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

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

5. PHASE I SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

For purposes of this RFP, an “Offeror” may include a group of two or more entities that have formed a “contractor team arrangement,” as that term is defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Section 9.601. In the case of entities that have formed a contractor team arrangement, the experience and performance history of any member of the team, whether or not gained while working with the other member(s) of the currently proposed contractor team arrangement, may be considered as a part of the evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal.

In the case of contractor team arrangements involving a prime contractor and subcontractor(s), where the prime contractor submits the proposal in response to this RFP, the prime contractor must have completed at least three of the total number of projects/contract submitted for Factor 1 for consideration in response to the past performance requirements of this RFP.

An Offeror that relies upon the performance history of a member or members of a proposed contractor team arrangement will be expected to maintain that arrangement during performance of any contract awarded to that Offeror under this RFP. As a part of their proposal, the Offeror must provide a contractor team agreement signed by all parties, identifying the legal name(s) of all entities and describing the nature of each entity’s relationship (teaming/partnering, joint venture, etc.) and its role on this project. Past Performance information will not be considered without the teaming arrangements. In the case of joint ventures, at least one project/contract shall be submitted from each member to demonstrate past experience and past performance. This documentation shall be provided in Binder 1 of the Offeror's proposal.

In Phase 1, Factors 1 and 2 are of equal importance to one another.

5.1 FACTOR 1: PAST PERFORMANCE OF TASK ORDER CONTRACTS:

The Offeror shall provide information that demonstrates the Offeror’s past performance with relevant projects. The Government is looking for both an overall performance evaluation on the basic contract as well as individual performance evaluations on the task orders. This should include both design-build and design-bid-build experiences. The Offeror should provide information on a minimum of three and a maximum of five construction contracts/projects that have had a performance period within the past six years (any task orders active within the last six years) from the date of the original issuance of this solicitation. At least three of the submitted contracts/projects must document the prime contractor’s experience. The remaining contract(s) may come from other members of the contractor team arrangement, as defined above. All experiences should be submitted from construction contracts and not Architecture-Engineer contracts.

Information shall include: the contract number, the contracting agency, contact information for each contract, overall capacity of the contract. Additionally, for each contract provide a matrix that includes: all task orders issued, the description of all projects, dollar value of the initial task order, dollar value of completed task order, period of performance of each task order (or date) and actual period of performance completion (or date). Offerors may use the form entitled “TASK ORDER BASE CONTRACTS” (Attachment A) if desired for the base contract.

Offerors may use the form entitled “TASK ORDER MATRIX” (Attachment B) if desired for the task order matrix.

These formats are highly encouraged.

Similar contracts may include those that include task orders issued for construction projects in a variety of sizes, a variety of construction disciplines, varying degrees of technical complexity and both design-bid-build type task orders as well as design-build task orders. The Offeror may submit other types of projects, but must explain the relevancy of those projects to the project that is being solicited in this RFP.

Project should demonstrate a variety of construction types and methods to assist in evaluating the Offeror’s ability and approach to perform work, as described in the Statement of Work, including:

• Electrical systems repair, construction or replacement

• Structural, Mechanical, Electrical, and foundation systems repair, construction, or replacement

• Utility Infrastructure and Systems repair, construction or replacement

• Renovations, HVAC upgrades, Paving, Fencing.

• Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection (AT/FP) features

• Fire protection, Sprinkler, and alarm systems repair, construction or replacement

• Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIF) with Electro Magnetic Radiation (EMR) shielding

• Supervisory Control and Data (SCADA) and Energy Management System (EMS)

• Security Systems

• Contracts priced with R.S. Means pricing or similar price book

The Offeror shall provide the performance evaluations for the submitted projects that demonstrate the Offeror’s performance on recent and relevant projects. PPQs and/or DD2626s can be submitted for projects/contracts relevant to the RSFO requirements. The Offeror shall provide formal performance evaluation if available. Formal performance evaluations are those similar to the Department of Defense Performance Evaluation (Construction) Form DD 2626. The Government’s preference is the formal evaluation. If the formal evaluation is included, a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) is NOT required or desired.

If a formal evaluation is unavailable, the Offeror shall obtain the information using the form entitled, “NAVFAC/ USACE Past Performance Questionnaire” included (Attachment C). The Past Performance Questionnaire included in the solicitation is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the Offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1, Past Performance of Relevant Projects. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal. 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 contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Gregory Hodgson via email at gregory.hodgson@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. Offerors may use previously completed PPQs and do not need to have one completed specifically for this project but must include it as a hardcopy.

Offerors may include performance recognition documents received within the last six years such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

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

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 FACTOR 2: WORK PLAN

To facilitate evaluation, the Offeror should organize the submitted material sequentially under tabs. Submit this information in the form of narratives and an organization chart.

5.2.1 Contract Team Organization: The Offeror shall identify the construction portion the Offeror intends to self perform and the items to be subcontracted. The Offeror shall discuss its overall organizational structure to manage multiple construction projects with concurrent periods of performance. The Offeror shall provide an Organization Chart. The proposed organizational chart shall identify the members or entities of the organization and show the lines of authority and communication of all members of the design and construction entities.

The narrative shall state why your team is uniquely qualified to undertake this contract, its approach to design and construction.

5.2.2 Design Team: This contract may involve a wide variety of construction projects, some of which will be executed in a Design-Build method. This section shall discuss how design will be managed and executed throughout the life of this contract. Multiple design firms may be necessary. The names of the design firms shall be included with teaming arrangements, if applicable. The narrative shall state your design team(s) qualifications, their approach to sustainable design and process of working with the customer(s) during the design and construction phases.

5.2.3 Key Personnel: Identify key personnel for this SATOC. Key Personnel shall include at minimum: Overall Program Manager, two Construction Project Managers, two Construction Superintendents, two Estimators, Contract Safety Manager, Contract Quality Control Officer, Architect, Structural Engineer, Environmental Engineer, Civil Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, Electrical Engineer, Project Scheduler, and Fire Protection Engineer. Resumes shall be provided and should at a minimum include the following:

1. Job Title for this project

2. Number of years with this firm and with other firms

3. Number of years in this position or role

4. Current position and current title in this role

5. Professional Registration (Type and State Registration), if applicable

6. Personnel’s specific experience and qualifications relevant to this project

5.2.4 Quality Management Control System: The Offeror shall describe how they intend to manage quality throughout the contract. Discuss quality management methods proposed throughout the design and construction process. Discuss how you will implement the USACE Three Phase Quality Control Program.

5.2.5 Safety. The Offeror shall discuss how they intend to manage and execute their Safety program for the contract and each task order. Discuss the management of multiple projects under $500,000 as well as larger projects. Include a discussion of the safety risks. Discuss how your program implements and/or adheres to EM 385-1-1.

5.2.6 Schedule: The Offeror shall describe how it will manage the design and construction of multiple projects with concurrent periods of performance. The Offeror must discuss its scheduling capabilities and procedures to be used for this contract, which must include schedule updates, incorporating modifications into the schedule, and other steps to be taken to maintain the construction project schedule.

5.2.7 The Offeror shall describe their past use of and experience with using RS Means (or similar) pricing methods for task orders. The Offeror may also describe alternative pricing methods in IDIQ type construction contracts. The purpose of this inclusion is to give the Government information on the Offerors' familiarity with Means (or similar) based pricing for assurance that the Offeror understands how to properly propose pre-priced and non-pre-priced line items.

6. EVALUATION CRITERIA

6.1 FACTOR 1: PAST PERFORMANCE OF TASK ORDER CONTRACTS: Past performance will be rated in terms of how likely there is a performance risk to the Government; that is, high confidence performance ratings will be taken as indicators of a low risk that the Offeror will successfully perform the work. The more relevant a proposed contract is, the more weight it will be given in the overall confidence assessment rating. If an Offeror has no record of relevant past performance, or if information on the Offeror’s past performance is not available, the Offeror must state that fact. That Offeror may be rated as Unknown Confidence/ Neutral. As stated in FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv), an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

6.2 FACTOR 2: WORK PLAN: The Offeror will be rated on an adjectival basis. To achieve an “acceptable” the Offeror will submit the information listed in paragraph 5.2 that demonstrates a sound approach capable of meeting all requirements and objectives.

7. PHASE 1 EVALUATION PROCEDURE

7.1 Source Selection Evaluation Board: The Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will review all prepared reports. The SSEB will conduct a review of the Technical Evaluation Boards (TEB) evaluations of proposals against the solicitation requirements and the approved evaluation criteria to ensure an equitable, impartial, and comprehensive evaluation against the solicitation requirements. The SSEB does not compare proposals against each other. The fundamental responsibility of the SSEB is to provide the Source Selection Authority with information to make an informed and reasoned selection. The SSEB will therefore prepare a summary report containing adjectival assessments for each factor and their supporting rationale; brief the SSA; and prepare any necessary items for discussion. A Source Selection Advisory Committee will be briefed prior to the SSA being briefed and may provide a comparative analysis to the SSA as well as any necessary items for discussion.

7.2 Ratings on individual factors, to include all supporting documentation, will be provided to the Source Selection Authority. The Source Selection Authority, independently exercising prudent business judgment, will determine which Offerors will participate in Phase 2 of the solicitation.

7.3 Discussions: Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details in their Phase 1 proposals, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of Phase 1 proposals. Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in their proposal after submitting it in response to Phase 1 -the Government may evaluate Phase 1 proposals as submitted, without further exchanges. However, the Government reserves the right to talk with Offerors during Phase 1 and to request Phase 1 proposal revisions, if determined to be necessary and in the best interests of the Government by the Contracting Officer.

7.4 Miscellaneous: The Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals at any time prior to award, to negotiate with Offerors in a competitive range, if one is established, and to award a contract to the Offeror with the most advantageous proposal to the Government.

7.5 The Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals at any time prior to award.

7.7 Failure to submit all the data in the format indicated in this section may be cause for determining a proposal incomplete and, therefore, not considered for evaluation, and for subsequent award. Exceptions to the contractual terms and conditions of the solicitation (e.g., standard terms and conditions) may result in a determination to reject a proposal.

7.8 The Basis of Selection of the Most Highly Rated Offerors are: Factor 1 and 2 are of equal importance.

7.9 The maximum number of Offerors chosen during Phase 1 shall not exceed three.

7.10 The SSA may select up to three Offerors to advance to Phase 2. Phase 2 will be issued via Amendment to the Offeror’s selected to advance to Phase 2.

8. BASIS OF PHASE 2 AWARD

PHASE 2

Non-Price Factors

Factor 1 Past Performance of Task Order Contracts (Advanced from Phase 1)

Factor 2 Work Plan (Advanced from Phase 1)

Factor 3 Sample Project Narrative

Factor 4 Small Business Participation Plan

Price Factors

Factor 5 Price: Sample Project Price Schedule and Coefficient Schedule

When combined all non-price factors are approximately equal to price.

The order of importance for the non-price factors are as follows: Factor 1, Factor 2, Factor 3 and Factor 4. This means that Factor 1 is the most important factor and

Factor 4 is the least important factor.

Trade-Off Analysis: After all of the evaluations have been completed, the SSA will consider all factors to determine which offeror submitted the proposal that represents the "best value" to the Government for this project

When combined all non-price factors are approximately equal to price. The order of importance for the non-price factors are as follows: Factor 1, Factor 2, Factor 3 and Factor 4. This means that Factor 1 is the most important factor and Factor 4 is the least important factor.

Trade-off Analysis: After all of the evaluations have been completed, the SSA will consider all factors to determine which Offeror submitted the proposal that represents the “best value” to the Government for this project.

9. FORMS

Forms for offeror’s use in responding to this RFP are provided on the following pages. They include:

Attachment A: Task Order Base Contract Attachment B: Task Order Matrix Attachment C: Past Performance Questionnaire

Attachment A

TASK ORDER BASE CONTRACTS

Contractor’s Name: ______________________ _____________________________________________________

Contract Owners Point of Contact and Title: ________________________________________________________

Contract Owner’s Email: _______________________________________________________________________

Contract Owner’s Phone number: ________________________________________________________________

Type of Contract (SATOC, MATOC, JOC, SABER, etc): __________________________________________

Capacity of Contract: $_________________________________________________________________________

Number of Task Orders Issued to Date: ____________________________________________________________

Available Capacity: $__________________________________________________________________________

Detailed Scope of Base Contract: _________________________________________________________________

Narrative on ability and success at managing multiple task orders concurrently: _____________________________

Attachment B

Task Order Matrix

Task Order Number

Scope of Work

Dollar Value of Task Order

Period of Performance of Task Order

Subcontractors Used on Task Order

Lost Time Accidents

Owner Of The Project

Additional Information

Attachment C

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0) CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm-Fixed-Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND

SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED

QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT

QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED

DIRECTLY TO USACE. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR USACE POC INFORMATION. THE

GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating.

Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract.

There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not Applicable No information or did not apply to your contract Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts E VG S M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E VG S M U N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes; responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort

E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines

E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes

E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to E VG S M U N effectively lead, manage…