Solicitation.pdf

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: East Campus Building 2 (ECB2) project located at Fort Meade, MD. The project consists of construction of a new multi-story 826,114 square foot facility, a 1,121,000 square foot parking structure, a 72,268 square foot mechanical plant, and an additional 500 spaces in a surface parking lot. This is an unrestricted acquisition utilizing a tw o phase best value tradeoff process.

NAICS CODE: 236220 (Size Stanard: $36.5M)

MAGNITUDE: Over $500M

Funds are not presently available for this acquisition. No contract or aw ard w ill be made until funds are appropriated and made available. There is no legal liability on the part of the Government for any payment until funds are made available to the Contracting Officer, including proposal costs.

ASHLEY WILLIAMS 4109623557

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

30-Sep-2015

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______10 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________1514 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________12 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________30 Oct 2015 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______180 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

USACE BALTIMORE

10 S. HOWARD STREET

BALTIMORE MD 21201

W912DR

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

12:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

W912DR-15-R-0024 87

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

W912DR-15-R-0024

Section 00010 - Solicitation Contract Form

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 1 Job East Campus Building 2 Project

FFP

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE TERMS

Supplies/services will be inspected/accepted at:

CLIN INSPECT AT INSPECT BY ACCEPT AT ACCEPT BY

0001 N/A N/A N/A Government

PRICING REQUIREMENTS

No pricing will be required in Phase 1. Pricing will be required with the Phase 2 submission.

This is an incrementally funded project with increments from award through fiscal year 2019. The actual increments will be provided in Phase 2.

Section 00100 - Bidding Schedule/Instructions to Bidders

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This project is for the construction of a new multi-story 826,114 square foot facility, a 1,121,000 square foot parking structure, a 72,268 square foot mechanical plant, and an additional 500 spaces in a surface parking lot. The primary facility will be comprised of a multi-story structure with full basement. The facility includes open office areas and operations floor, analyst/planner collaboration areas, cafeteria and other operations. The construction will consist of core and shell structure and foundations; elevator conveyance systems; electrical/mechanical service and distribution components and systems; fire protection, alarm and suppression; information technology infrastructure, communications, and security systems support infrastructure; exterior finishes and weatherproofing. Interior build out will provide raised access floor systems, acoustically-rated interior partitions and ceiling, power, lighting, environmental control and communications. The primary facility is not a standard design. The entire structure will be built to Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF). The project includes redundant primary power and Uninterruptable Power Supply (UPS) systems to ensure continuity of operations. The project requires comprehensive interior design.

The site infrastructure will include primary electrical services to the site, water, sewer, and telecommunications pathways. The supporting facility includes site preparation and infrastructure improvements, utility services, and perimeter security measures. Site preparation will include standard clearing, grubbing, cut, fill, grading and environmental protection structures. Additional site work consists of curb and gutter, walkways, patios and roads.

Utility site construction will provide emergency backup power generation and cooling equipment. Perimeter security construction will extend existing perimeter fence line and surveillance capabilities.

The facility will be required to be LEED Silver certifiable and comply with the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Low Impact Development will be included in the design and construction of this project as appropriate.

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

SECTION 00100

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS – PHASE 1

1. OVERVIEW.

1.1 This RFP solicits for the Design and Construction of the ECB2 located on Fort Meade, MD. The resultant contract will be a single Firm-Fixed Priced contract.

1.2 The purpose of the Source Selection Plan is 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 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.

1.3 For the purposes of this solicitation, the Government will utilize the Two Phase Design-Build Process. In Phase 1 of the 2 Phase Design-Build selection procedures, interested Offerors submit performance capability and technical/management approach proposals for review and consideration by the Government.

1.4 The Government will evaluate the performance capability and technical/management approach proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein and will select three of the highest rated Offerors to participate in Phase 2.

1.5 In Phase 2 of this process, the Government will evaluate technical solutions, drawings, past performance of subcontractors, price, and small business factors.

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

1.7 Offers that are not selected to participate in Phase 2 will be notified and may request a pre-award debrief.

1.8 The use of Contractors in the Evaluation of Proposals and other aspects of this procurement may be utilized. Be advised that the following companies may take on a limited role in the evaluation of portions of Offerors proposals:

AECOM, Parsons, and MOCA.

2. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 Firms formally organized as design-build entities, design firms and 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.

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

2.6 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. Any materials submitted but not required by this solicitation (such as company brochures) shall be relegated to appendices.

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. The anticipated page count is approximately 100 pages, but shall not exceed 200 pages in total.

3.4 Binders. Proposals shall be submitted in tabbed, three ring binders. In addition to hard copies, all Offerors shall provide one (1) electronic copy of their submission on a CD-ROM. All files shall be submitted in PDF format and shall not be password protected.

3.5 Number of Copies. Offerors shall submit the following:

Binder 1 (Volume I – Phase I Technical Proposal): an original and twelve (12) copies

3.6 Proposals shall be marked:

Date of Closing: _________________

Time of Closing: 11 a.m.

Solicitation RFP: W912DR-15-R-0024

3.7 Phase 1 proposal shall be organized and tabbed as follows:

Volume I: Technical Proposal

TAB A: Standard Form 1442, 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 B: Consent Forms from AECOM, Parsons, and MOCA.

Potential Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI)

(a) Offerors are invited to review FAR 9.505 regarding organizational conflicts of interest;

(b) Offerors are advised that employees of the firms identified below may serve as technical advisors to the Source Selection Evaluation Board in the source selection process. In addition some of the employees of the firms identified below have served in the conceptual development of this project, the development of the RFP and may have been involved in the value engineering process of this project.

(c) These individuals will be authorized to access only those portions of the proposal data and discussions that are necessary to enable them to perform their respective duties. Such firms and their subcontractors that worked on this project are expressly prohibited from competing on this acquisition and from rating proposals or recommending the selected source:

AECOM, Parsons and MOCA

Points of Contact for these companies are as follows:

AECOM:

Franklin P. Mastel

(410) 379-6279 Frank.Mastel@aecom.com

Parsons:

Keith Hutchinson

(443) 654-7917 kmhutch@nsa.gov

MOCA:

Steve Essig 850-737-1814 swe@mocasystems.com

(d) In accomplishing their duties, the aforementioned firms may require access to proprietary information contained in the Offeror's proposals. Therefore, pursuant to FAR 9.505-4 – if access to proprietary information is required, these firms must execute an agreement with each Offeror that states that they will (1) protect the Offeror's information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and (2) refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it is furnished.

The following is a sample format for the consent form:

Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreement

Whereas we have reviewed FAR 9.505 regarding organizational conflicts of interest. To our knowledge, no organizational conflict of interest exists for this procurement between our company and the Offeror.

Whereas Offerors were advised that employees of our firm may serve as technical advisors to the Source Selection Evaluation Board in the source selection process or have served in the conceptual development of this project, the development of the RFP and/or have been involved in the value engineering process of this project.

Whereas in accomplishing our duties, our firm, may require access to proprietary information contained in your proposal. Pursuant to FAR 9.505-4, we must execute an agreement with each Offeror that states that we will (1) protect the Offeror's information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary and (2) refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it is furnished.

Therefore, we, (name of company), agree that we will:

(1) protect ___________________________________’s information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary

And

(2) refrain from using the information for any purpose other than that for which it is furnished.

Signature of Company Official Date

TAB C: 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 and obtain performance and payment bonds should they win the contract. FAILURE TO PROVIDE

THIS INFORMATION WILL RESULT IN INELIGIBILITY FOR AWARD.

TAB D: 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 E: Ownership Disclosure: Offerors shall be required to submit a completed Security Questionnaire pertaining to foreign interest, for the prime contractor (to include all parties in a joint venture), the Architect-Engineer and all major subcontractors proposed in Phase 1 (Note: if additional subcontractors/team members are added in Phase 2, the Security Questionnaires shall be submitted in accordance with instructions provided to Phase 2 Offerors). All Offerors and subcontractors shall be required to comply with DFARS 252.209-7001, Disclosure of Ownership or Control by the Government of a Terrorist Country, DFARS 252.209-7002, Disclosure of Ownership or Control by a Foreign Government and DFARS 252.209-7004, Subcontracting with Firms that are Owned or Controlled by the Government of a Terrorist Country.

A contract will not be awarded to a firm or subsidiary of a firm if it is determined that the Government of a terrorist country has significant interest in the firm or subsidiary or if the firm is determined to be under foreign ownership of a country that sponsors or assists terrorism or is an intelligence threat. Subcontracts identified in the proposal are subject to the same eligibility determination.

If the Government determines thee is or may be an issue, the Government may seek clarification to make a final determination if the Offeror is eligible for award. If an Offeror is not determined to be free of these issues, the Offeror, may be permitted to submit a mitigation strategy.

TAB F: Teaming Agreement(s), if applicable. See paragraph 2.2. Note to 8(a)—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 G: FACTOR 1 Past Performance of Construction Contractor, Phase 1

TAB H: FACTOR 2 Technical/Management Approach, Phase 1

TAB I: FACTOR 3 Past Performance of Architect-Engineer (DOR), Phase 1

4. EVALUATION RATINGS

4.1 Proposal Ratings: Factors. Factors 2, 4, 5, and 6 will be adjectivally rated. Phase 1 offerors submitting proposals for this project should limit submissions to data essential for the evaluation of proposals.

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 Factors 2, 4, 5, and 6.

TABLE 3 – 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 not awardable.

4.3 Past Performance Assessment Definitions. Factors 1 and 3 will be evaluated using the following Performance Confidence Assessments:

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings:

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

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

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

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

Performance Confidence Assessments:

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

5. PHASE 1 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, will 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 submitted for Factor 3 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 their role on this project. In the case of joint ventures, at least one project will be submitted from each member to demonstrate past experience. This documentation shall be provided in Binder 3 of the Offeror's proposal.

5.1 BOND SURETY LETTER: A Bond Surety Letter shall be submitted in accordance with TAB C under section

3.7. The bonding requirements should be based on the current (at time of release of solicitation) incremental funding information, which is as follows:

Incremental Funding Stream:

Upon award: 30 Aug 2016: $ 24M FY17 Increment: 31 Dec 2016: $172M FY18 Increment: 31 Dec 2017: $280M FY19 Increment: 31 Dec 2018: $212M

5.2 OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE: Offerors shall be required to submit a completed Security Questionnaire I accordance with TAB E in section 3.7.

5.3 FACTOR 1: PAST PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR:

Projects submitted must demonstrate past performance of similar projects either in progress or completed within seven years of the original date of issuance of this RFP. For ongoing projects, either Design-Build or Design-Bid- Build, 100% of the design and approximately 75% of the major construction milestones must be completed at the time of proposal submission for Phase 1. The Offeror shall submit past performance information on a minimum of three completed similar projects but not more than five. In the case of contractor team arrangements involving a prime contractor and subcontractor(s), at least three of the submitted projects must document the prime contractor’s past performance. The remaining projects may come from other members of the contractor team arrangement, as defined above. In the case of a joint venture teaming arrangement, each member of the joint venture entity must each submit at least one project under this factor. The information regarding the projects that is required to be submitted is identified on the form entitled “PAST PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR” (Attachment B) and “PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE” (Attachment D).

Relevant projects are defined as follows:

Design-Build projects valued at approximately $400,000,000 (present day construction value) or more;

Design-Bid-Build projects valued at approximately $350,000,000 (present day construction value) or more;

Projects in excess of 500,000 SF of space that included constructing buildings containing extensive infrastructure to include mechanical, electrical, fire suppression and cooling systems in support of administrative buildings containing large computer rooms and sophisticated information systems;

Operations Floor, Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) construction; UPS backup capacity, Chiller Plant, Electrical generator, Parking structure, Perimeter site security measures, Anti- Terrorism Force Protection (AT/FP) and the American with Disabilities Act of 1990.

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.

Provide the Offeror’s assigned performance evaluations for the submitted projects that demonstrate the Offeror’s performance on recent and relevant Design-Build projects. The Offeror should provide formal performance evaluation. Formal performance evaluations are those that are similar to the Department of Defense Performance Evaluation (Construction) Form DD2626.

In addition to formal evaluations or if a formal evaluation is unavailable, the Offeror shall obtain the information using the Past Performance Questionnaire included. See Attachment D.

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 Construction Contractor. 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 (Attachment A), 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, Ashley Williams via email at ashley.williams@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date.

Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs.

However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. 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.

Also include performance recognition documents received within seven years of the original date of issuance of this RFP 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.

5.4 FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Organize the submitted material sequentially under tabs, to facilitate evaluation. Submit this information in the form of narratives and an organization chart.

5.4.1 Project Team Organization: Describe in narrative form, how the project team shall be structured. Describe the principle firms involved and their responsibilities. Identify the design-build team contractual members and personnel. The personnel must include at a minimum the Overall Single Corporate Program Manager, Overall On-site Project Manager, Project Architect, Mechanical Engineer, Electrical Engineer, Fire Protection Engineer, Designer of Record Design Manager, Construction Project Manager, Lead Scheduler, full-time on-site Safety Manager and full time on-site Quality Control Manager. All disciplines shall be led by an experienced professional registered in the discipline (if professional registration is available). The Offeror shall submit documentation as to the availability of Key Personnel that indicates each individual’s current assignment and the Offeror’s plan to ensure that the named personnel will be used on this project; however, if the named person isn’t available upon award, a person with the same or better qualifications shall be substituted and approved by the Government. The Offeror shall discuss their approach to manage multiple, large-scale projects simultaneously. The qualifications of the design and construction personnel shall be provided. Identify the construction portion the Offeror intends to self perform and the items to be subcontracted. Similarly, the Offeror shall identify the areas they intend to design through consultants.

The Offeror will submit an organization chart identifying the proposed team that will execute this project. 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. This chart should clearly indicate who the ultimate decision maker is for the proposed team.

This organization chart should include the Offeror’s key personnel, and key subcontractors, testing firms, quality control and commissioning agents. The organizational chart shall show the relationship of each entity (at a minimum, show the following relationships: key subcontractors, testing firms, quality control and commissioning agent personnel) to the Offeror.

In addition to the organization chart, present a matrix of responsibilities which outlines the roles and responsibilities for the Offeror and each potential key subcontractor in executing the work breakdown structure activities of the project, including all construction activities for each major feature (i.e., site work, utilities, structural, architectural, mechanical, electrical, security, building features, and commissioning). Generally describe the items the Offeror will self-perform and supply Key Personnel Resumes.

The Offeror must submit the names and qualifications of key project personnel to include the project manager, on-site superintendent, lead scheduler, quality control, safety manager, Cx manager and D/B Integrator. The resumes of these key project personnel identified above shall highlight specific experience and qualifications on projects of a similar type, size, and technical issues. Each of the named personnel must demonstrate experience as noted in the specifications for their specialty and be regularly engaged in the positions for which they are being proposed. The named managers will be the managers for this project. If the successful Offeror should substitute another manager, it will be subject to the approval of the Government.

The Key Personnel Resumes shall also include the following:

1. Personnel’s Title on this project

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

3. Number of years in this position or role

4. Specialization

5. Professional Registration (Type and State Registration)

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

Provide the Management approach to integrating the Design and Construction Teams throughout the Design and Construction Phases of the project to include design refinement after acceptance of Issued For Construction (IFC) sets.

5.4.2 Design Organization: This project is principally an administrative facility with an integral mechanical plant and supporting utilities, perimeter site security, and a parking structure. The Offeror shall discuss its organizational structure for the design process. The discussion shall illustrate how this team will work with the Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) 4-010-01 DOD Minimum Antiterrorism Standards for Buildings. The narrative shall state why your design firm is uniquely qualified to undertake this project, its approach to sustainable design and process of working with the customer during the design phase. The Offeror shall also discuss their approach to designing buildings with extensive and sophisticated HVAC, power and mechanical requirements that are integrated with the design.

The Offeror shall also discuss how they have successfully designed to be within firm project budgets. The Offeror shall discuss how the Design Team will integrate within the Construction Team throughout the project life to include design refinement after award.

5.4.3 Construction Organization: This project is principally an administrative facility with an integral mechanical plant and supporting utilities, perimeter site security, and a parking structure. The Offeror shall discuss its construction organizational structure to build the facilities. The narrative shall state why your construction firm is uniquely qualified to undertake this project.

5.4.4 On-site Design-Build Management Team: Describe the on-site design-build management team’s responsibilities and staff organization. The description of the personnel shall describe the duties of each staff member. The successful Offeror shall establish a management office within 10 miles of Fort Meade, MD.

5.4.5 Quality Management Control System: The Offeror shall describe how they intend to manage quality through the design development and construction of the project. Discuss quality management methods proposed throughout the design and construction process.

5.4.6 Schedule: The Offeror must describe how it aggressively schedules this project. Discussion should also include how it has scheduled other projects of a similar nature. Information should include how to start the project;

discussions on important early activities, such as design, pre-work submittals, site organization, etc. The Offeror must describe and discuss its plan to sequence and manage key activities such as design, site work, building construction, and/or other key features. The Offeror shall describe how they will successfully schedule the project with incremental funding.

The Offeror must discuss its scheduling capabilities and procedures to be used for this project, which must include schedule updates, incorporating modifications into the schedule, and other steps to be taken to maintain the completion date.

The discussion on scheduling should include the following schedule and funding assumptions. This information may change in Phase 2 as more information is received, but the Government is interested in knowing how Offerors would deal with the proposed funding situation in regards to schedule.

Final completion date: 1514 calendar days from NTP.

Incremental Funding Stream:

Upon award: 30 Aug 2016: $ 24M FY17 Increment: 31 Dec 2016: $172M FY18 Increment: 31 Dec 2017: $280M FY19 Increment: 31 Dec 2018: $212M

5.5 FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE OF ARCHITECT-ENGINEER (Designer of Record): Projects that demonstrate the Offeror’s Architecture-Engineer (Designer of Record) (DOR) experience. Projects submitted for this Factor must demonstrate the experience of the DOR that the Offeror proposes to use for the project. The Offeror shall submit at least four but no more than six projects that demonstrate the DOR’s experience on design only and design-build projects. For ongoing projects, 100% of the design and approximately 75% of the major construction milestones must be completed at the time of proposal submission. For design only projects, 100% of design must be complete. All projects must be submitted by the DOR. All projects must have been completed within seven years of the original date of issuance of this RFP.

The AE (DOR) submitted in Phase 1 is binding and will become part of the contract; a substitution for the AE (DOR) cannot be presented in Phase 2.

In order to be considered relevant, projects must demonstrate all of the following project types (either individually or in combination thereof):

Projects that were design-build of approximately $350,000,000 (present day construction value); projects that included constructing buildings containing heavy mechanical, electrical, and cooling systems in support of large;

Administrative buildings with, operations floors, computer rooms and sophisticated information systems;

Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) construction; with utility infrastructure;

Electrical service (primary power and temporary construction power).

Projects should also demonstrate one or more of the following elements:

Projects in excess of 500,000 SF of space Parking structure Perimeter site security measures Chiller plant Fire suppression systems

Electrical generator UPS back up capacity Anti-Terrorism Force Protection (AT/FP) Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990

The information regarding the projects that is required to be supplied is identified on the forms entitled “AE (DOR)’s PAST PERFORMANCE ” (Attachment C) and “PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE” (Attachment D).

6. PHASE 1 EVALUATION CRITERIA

6.1 FACTOR 1: PAST PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR: 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 project 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 will be rated as Unknown Confidence/Neutral.

Extra consideration may be given for the following:

a. Multiple project relationships with the proposed designer.

b. In the case of a Joint Venture or Prime/sub relationship, long term relationships and previous experience working together.

c. Multiple project relationships with the Intelligence Community.

d. Projects that successfully demonstrated meeting aggressive schedules and/or fast tracked projects.

e. Projects that successfully demonstrated the awareness and utilization of incremental funding.

6.2 FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT APPROACH: The Offeror will be rated on an adjectival basis.

To achieve an “acceptable” the Offeror will submit the information listed in paragraph 5.4 that demonstrates a sound approach capable of meeting all requirements and objectives.

6.3 FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE OF ARCHITECT-ENGINEER (DESIGNER OF RECORD): 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. Offerors shall submit the information listed in paragraph 5.5 that demonstrates the DOR’s experience in similar projects and ability to successfully meet all of the requirements related to designing a constructible project for this requirement.

Extra consideration may be given for proposals containing the following:

a. Projects that show prior experience with the Prime Offeror.

b. Projects with fast track design, construction project delivery, and turnkey project delivery.

c. Projects with the federal government, or specifically U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

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 Board (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 Advisory Council 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.

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 advised that it is the intent of the Government that a Phase 1 most highly qualified Offerors determination will be made without discussions. However, the Government reserves the right to hold either oral or written discussions if it determines that discussions are necessary. Therefore, proposals should be submitted on the most favorable terms that the Offeror can submit to the Government.

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 maximum number of Offerors chosen to advance to Phase 2 shall not exceed three (3).

7.6 The Phase 2 solicitation will be issued via Amendment to the Offeror’s selected to advance to Phase 2.

7.7 In Phase 1, Factor 1, Factor 2 and Factor 3 are of equal importance. Phase 1 selection of the three “Most Highly Qualified Offerors.” The three most highly qualified Offerors will advance to Phase 2.

After all of the evaluations have been completed, the SSA will consider all factors to determine which Offerors are deemed to be the most highly qualified.

PHASE 1

FACTOR 1

PAST PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION

CONTRACTOR (RATING)

FACTOR 2

TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT APPROACH

(RATING)

FACTOR 3

PAST PERFORMANCE OF ARCHITECT-ENGINEER

(DESIGNER OF RECORD) (RATING)

PHASE 2

NON-PRICE FACTORS

FACTOR 1

PAST PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION

CONTRACTOR PHASE 1 RATING

FACTOR 2

TECHNICAL MANAGEMENT APPROACH PHASE 1

RATING

FACTOR 3

PAST PERFORMANCE ARCHITECT-ENGINEER

(DESIGNER OF RECORD - DOR) PHASE 1 RATING

FACTOR 4

PHASE 2 PROJECT NARRATIVE/SCHEDULE

(TECHNICAL APPROACH)

FACTOR 5 DRAWINGS, ELEVATIONS AND SITE PLAN

FACTOR 6 SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

FACTOR 7 PRICE

An unacceptable rating in any factor will render the entire proposal unacceptable and the proposal will be removed from further consideration.

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.

8. BASIS OF CONTRACT AWARD (After Phase 2)

Award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposals that are determined to be the most beneficial to the Government with appropriate consideration given to the evaluation factors. Best value will be determined by utilizing the tradeoff process and performing a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the RFP.

Factors 4, 5, and 6 are more important than factors 1, 2, and 3. When combined, all non-price factors are more important than price.

9. FORMS

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

Attachment A: Statement of Affiliation (Questionnaire Pertaining to Foreign Interest) Attachment B: Past Performance of Construction Contractor Attachment C: AE (DOR)’s Past Performance Attachment D: Past Performance Questionnaire

Attachment A

Questionnaire Pertaining to Foreign Interest

STATEMENT OF AFFILIATION

Name of Offeror: ______________________________________________________________________

Cage Code: __________________________________________________________________________

Address: _____________________________________________________________________________

Phone Number: ________________________________________________________________________

Website: _____________________________________________________________________________

1. Does the offer hold an active DoD Facility Security Clearance (FSC)? Yes ____ No ____

(Answer “No” if the clearance was issued under a Special Security Agreement or a Security Control Agreement (see DoD5220.00-M sec. 2-306).

2. At any time within the calendar year preceding the due date for this proposal, has the contractor submitted to the U. S. Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM) a completed Statement of Affiliation set forth below?

Yes ____No ____

If the Offeror answered “No”, the contractor must complete the Statement of Affiliation form and submit it to INSCOM through the USACE.

If the Offeror answered “Yes”, does the contractor state that all the information on the previously submitted form is correct?

Yes ____ No ____

If the Offeror answered “Yes”, submit…