Amendment_0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate the follow ing changes into the solicitation:

1. Provide RFI responses

2. Revise Section 00100

3. Establish an additional POC for submission of RFI responses. RFI's shall be submitted to Sharla Andrew s at Sharla.R.Andrew s@usace.army.mil (copy: Ashley Williams at Ashley.Williams@usace.army.mil).

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 27

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 06-Nov-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-16-R-0001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

23-Oct-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 is extended, X is not extended.

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

06-Nov-2015

CODE

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS BALTIMORE DIS

10 SOUTH HOWARD STREET

ROOM 7000

BALTIMORE MD 21201-2536

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912DR-16-R-0001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION

Question 001: Would the Government consider reducing the in excess of $25M for unrestricted category to in excess of $20M for unrestricted category, in order to increase competition?

Response: Yes. Unrestricted has been changed to $20M and restricted to $5M (see amendment 0001).

Question 002: Are there incumbents on this proposed contract? If so, who are they and what are their contract numbers?

Response: This will be a new contract. Therefore, there are no incumbents.

Question 003: Section 00100, Subsection 2.3, 2nd Paragraph, Page 6 of 66. What type of evidence is required to satisfy this requirement for an 8(a) Joint Venture? Our notification to the SBA on the pursuit of an opportunity by the JV is due the same day as the proposal submittal, not before.

Response: Response: If an Offeror is submitting as a JV, the JV agreement must be approved at time of submission.

Question 004: Section 00100, Subsection 2.4, Page 7 of 66. What type of evidence is required to ensure that the proposed subcontractor is committed to perform the work? Teaming Agreement or Letter of Commitment?

Response: Either will suffice.

Question 005: Section 00100, Subsection 3.8, TAB B, Page 8 of 66. The minimum bonding requirements are, for small business, $10M single and $50M aggregate. These minimums seem unfairly excessive. Suggest these be dropped to $5M single and $10M aggregate.

Response: Minimum bonding requirements have been reduced to $5M Single and $10M aggregate for restricted category.

Question 006: Section 00100, Subsection 5.1, first bullet, Page 11 of 66. On page 8 of 66, it is stated that anticipated projects range from $50k to $100M and yet the first bullet here in this Subsection requests projects in excess of $5M (100 times the anticipated project minimum). The $5M preference seems unfairly excessive.

Suggest this be dropped to $2.5M or something similar.

Response: This requirement shall stay as written.

Question 007: Section 00100, Subsection 5.3, Page 12 of 66. Our firm has both AE design and build capabilities.

As such, some of the projects that we will highlight under Past Performance of Construction Projects also have a considerable self-performed design component. When providing past performance as an AE, can we repeat the use of some of these construction projects?

Response: Yes

Question 008: The 1st sentence states geographic boundaries of Continental US (CONUS) and Hawaii. Please clarify if work will occur in the following locations:

1. Alaska?

2. US Territories in Pacific Rim?

3. US Territories, such as Puerto Rico?

Response:

1. Alaska – Yes (Added via amendment 0001)

2. US Territories in Pacific Rim – No

3. Us Territories such as Puerto Rico - No

Question 009: Section 00100-Phase 1 – Paragraph 1.7/ Page 5 of 66. The 3rd sentence states: “Task orders set-aside for the restricted contractors will only be within the NAD mission boundaries.” Will this prohibit a USACE District outside of NAD boundaries from using the restricted contractor pool?

Response: Yes

Question 010: Section 00100-Phase 1 – Paragraph 1.7/ Page 5 of 66. The last sentence states that any USACE District may use this contract. The 1st sentence states geographic boundaries of Continental US (CONUS) and Hawaii. Please clarify that not all USACE Districts (i.e., Europe, Japan) will have access to this contract because of the geographic boundaries limitation.

Response: The contract will not be used for USACE Districts Overseas.

Question 011: Section 00100-Phase 1 – Paragraph 1.7/ Page 5 of 66. The last sentence states that any USACE District may use this contract. Will any DoD Agency be allowed to use this contract?

Response: No

Question 012: Section 00100-Phase 1 – Paragraph 3.3/ Page 7 of 66. Does a folded 11” X 17” page count as 1 or 2 pages?

Response: For organization charts or schedules, a folded 11” x 17” format may be used and shall be counted as one page.

Question 013: Section 00100-Phase 1 – Paragraph 3.3/ Page 7 of 66. The RFP states that the page limit for the submittal is 50 pages and that PPQs do not count against the page limit. Please provide the following clarifications with respect to the page limit:

1. Does the 50 page limit govern Binders 1 and 2 combined?

Response: The 50 page limit applies to Binder 2, Technical Proposal, only.

2. Do title pages, tables of contents, tabs, or appendices count against the page limit?

Response: No

3. With respect to pagination, if the page limit governs the combined length of the two binders, is it the Government’s preference that the binders be continually paginated?

Response: The 50 page limit applies to Binder 2, Technical Proposal, only

Question 014: Section 00100-Phase 1 – Paragraph 5.1/ Page 10 of 66. The RFP states, “FACTOR 1: PAST PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS: Projects submitted must demonstrate past performance by the physical and substantial completion of similar projects within six years of the original date of issuance of this RFP.” Can the Government define what it considers to be “physical and substantial completion” under Factor 1?

Response: All projects must have a construction completion date no earlier than six (6) years preceding the original date of issuance of this solicitation. Projects that have a Beneficial Occupancy Date (BOD) within the same date range will also be considered. Beneficial Occupancy Date (BOD) is the point at which the customer determines the facility or area can be occupied from both a regulatory and work function standpoint.

Question 015: Section 00100-Phase 1 – Paragraph 5.2.1/ Page 12 of 66. 2nd paragraph states that the offeror is to identify key personnel. Are there specific personnel and subsequent education / certification / experience requirements?

Response: The paragraph is revised to read: “Identify key POSITIONS that will be assigned to the overall management of an awarded contract. Discuss the role and responsibility this key POSITIONS.”

Question 016: There will be two distinct contract pools – Restricted and Unrestricted. Section 00100-Phase 1, paragraph 1.7 states: “Task orders set-aside for the restricted contractors will only be within the NAD mission boundaries.” Will the Contracting Officer use any other criteria in the determination of which pool will be utilized for task orders (i.e., size, complexity, etc.)?

Response: The determination of Unrestricted or Restricted for individual task orders will be based on multiple factors to include, but not limited to: value, complexity, location, and past performance. Other factors will be taken into consideration on a task order by task order basis.

Question 017: Page 8 of 66: Tab B states “Note: Anticipated projects range from $50K to $100M.” Page 11 of 66 states “Projects in excess of $5M for the restricted category” are deemed similar. If anticipated projects range from $50K, why do projects submitted under Factor 1 – Past Performance of Construction Projects need to be in excess of $5 Million for the restricted category?

Response: See response to question 006.

Question 018: Page 11 of 66: Do the projects submitted under Factor 1 – Past Performance of Construction Projects need to be greater than or equal to $5 Million to obtain a Relevancy Rating of “Relevant” as defined in Section 4.2 on page 9 of 66 for the restricted category?

Response: Yes

Question 019: Page 11 of 66: Please describe the types of “Civil and/or Road Construction Projects” that would be considered “Relevant” to this contract.

Response: Road construction projects could include intersection upgrades, access control points, repair/reconstruction of existing roadways/. Civil construction projects could include runways, drainage, site development, etc.

Question 020: How many seed projects will the restricted Offerors need to bid on if advanced to Phase 2?

Response: Restricted and Unrestricted Offerors will propose on the same seed project for Phase 2.

Question 0021: Section 2.5, page 7. Offerors should submit their proposal to the address shown in block 7 of the SF. Would the Government allow the option to hand deliver the proposal to the address in block 7 of the SF.

Response: Yes

Question 022: Section 5.1.1, page 11. 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. Would the Government exclude the recognition documents from page count since they will be included in the Performance Evaluation Section?

Response: Table of Contents, section tabs, any type of teaming arrangement documentation, performance recognition, and PPQs are not considered in the page limitation.

Question 023: How many seed projects will the unrestricted Offerors need to bid on if advanced to Phase 2?

Response: Restricted and Unrestricted Offerors will propose on the same seed project for Phase 2.

Question 024: Are the restricted and unrestricted Offerors bidding on the same seed project(s) if advanced to Phase 2?

Response: Restricted and Unrestricted Offerors will propose on the same seed project for Phase 2.

Question 025: Reference an Offerer’s experience requirement stated on page 10-11. Would the Baltimore District consider lowering the minimum contract threshold to $2.25M for the restricted category? Though a few small businesses may have completed projects in excess of $5M, many reputable ones have not.

Response: See question 006.

Question 026: Do you have Attachment “B”, the past performance Questionnaire available in word or writeable pdf?

Response: No

Question 027: Section 00100 Instructions, Section 3.3 Printed Matter Submissions. Verify that the 50-page count limitation is applicable only to the Technical Proposal.

Response: The 50 page limit applies to Binder 2, Technical Proposal, only.

Question 028: Section 00600 - Representations and Certifications Representations and Certifications are provided with the Proposal Clauses. Verify that these do not need to be provided in Binder 1.

Response: See FAR clause 52.204-8.

Question 029: SF1442, Section 13. B. The SF 1442 identifies that an offer guarantee is required per Section 13. B.

Please verify that a bid bond is not required at this time and only the Bond Surety Letter requested in Binder 1, Tab B is all that is needed for the Phase I submission.

Response: Correct, as stated in section 00100 paragraph 3.8.

Question 030: Section 00100 Instructions, Section 3.3 Printed Matter Submissions. Please verify that the 11” x 17” organizational chart counts as 1 page.

Response: The 11” x 17” organization chart counts as 1 page.

Question 031: The SF1442 states that the Bid Bond amount for those proposing in the restricted pool is $10M and references FAR 52.228-1. Please confirm that the Contracting Officer intends to return Bid Bonds to successful offerors, “…upon execution of contractual documents” as stated in the referenced FAR clause and the contractor will be required to provide bonds for individual task orders.

Response: Accurate as stated. Bid Bond will be returned and bonds will be required on a task order basis.

Question 032: The SF 1442 states the intent to award up to five (5) small business contracts and page 6, section

1.10 says it will select five (5) to eight (8) offerors. Can you please confirm the number of contracts that will be issued for the restricted/small business contractors?

Response: The Government intends to award up to five (5) contracts for the restricted category.

Question 033: On page 7, section 3.3 it states the page count shall not exceed 50 pages. Can you confirm if the 50 page limitation is relevant for Binder 1: Solicitation Information & Binder 2: Technical Proposal combined or is this only related to our Binder 2:Technical Proposal?

Response: The 50 page limit applies to Binder 2, Technical Proposal, only.

Question 034: On page 7, section 3.6 it states that the project schedule should be in an.xer format & Page 12, Section 5.2.3 Scheduling, for Phase I submissions states that we need to discuss our scheduling capabilities and procedures. Can you please confirm if that particular section is what we’re to respond to regarding scheduling and that a project schedule is not required in Phase I?

Response: There is no schedule required for the Phase 1 submission. Phase 1 requires the detailed narrative.

Question 035: Section 3, page 7. Include a table of contents, title page and tabs for each binder. Please confirm that the table of contents, title page and tabs are excluded from page count.

Response: Table of Contents, section tabs, any type of teaming arrangement documentation, performance recognition, and PPQs are not considered in the page limitation.

Question 036: Paragraph 3.3 on Page 7 states “The page count shall not exceed 50 pages. Past Performance Questionnaires are not to be included in the page count”. Please confirm if this page limitation is limited to just Binder 2 or is this for the total of both Binder 1 and Binder 2.

Response: The 50 page limit applies to Binder 2, Technical Proposal, only.

Question 037: In #10 of the Standard Form 1442 for the above subject, instructs the following: Requests for information (RFI's) shall be submitted in writing to Ashley Williams at Ashley.Williams@usace.army.mil. The deadline to submit RFI's is 2PM on Wednesday, November 11, 2015. Are offerors required to submit the response to the RFI by November 11 in addition to the proposal by December 3, 2015?

Response: Yes

Question 038: RFP reference 3.3, please clarify which pages are excluded from the 50-page limit. Do resumes count?

Response: Paragraph 5.2.1 is revised to replace the current 2nd paragraph with “Identify key POSITIONS that will be assigned to the overall management of an awarded contract. Discuss the role and responsibility this key POSITIONS.” Therefore, the Government is not requiring resumes. If the Offeror chooses to include resumes, they will be included in the page count.

Question 039: RFP reference 3.3, does an 11 x 17 matrix showing project types versus evaluation criteria count as one page?

Response: Response: 11” x 17” sheets shall be used for organization charts or schedules only.

Question 040: 5.1 Factor 1 Past Performance of Construction Projects – Please clarify the project experience required for Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIF); for example, will USACE accept experience where the contractor BUILT a SCIF? Or should we be showing experience where we have worked IN a SCIF?

Response: One or both is acceptable as there is a possibility that either situation could occur under this contract.

Question 041: 5.1 Factor 1 Past Performance of Construction Projects – Since the seed task is estimated at $20M, can the Factor 1 projects be changed to “in excess of $20M for unrestricted category”?

Response: The amount has been changed to $20M.

Question 042: Section 3.3, page 7. Page count shall not exceed 50 pages. Would the Government please confirm that the page limit applies only to Binder 2.

Response: Response: The 50 page limit applies to Binder 2, Technical Proposal, only.

Question 043: Is there any consideration to lower the $5M minimal threshold for past performance project value under the restricted small business category? With the maximum value of 8(a) sole source awards being $4M and most projects half of that, a $2.0 - $3.0 value would enable a broader population of 8(a) and 8(a) graduates to compete.

Response: See response to question 006.

Question 044: Can Program Value (IDIQ Contract Value Completed) be used for past performance value over delivery order value if all work was related and for same client?

Response: In reference to Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contracts: Task orders on ID/IQ contracts can also be submitted under Factor 1; however, each task order submitted must individually meet the requirements of the factor and this section. Submissions of multiple task orders as a project or entire base contracts will not be accepted or evaluated.

Question 045: Section 00100 Instructions, Page 9 of 66, Tab E. Tab E requirements include "Teaming Agreement(s) if applicable". Please confirm that a Teaming Agreement between two general contractors that will form a Joint Venture is acceptable in lieu of an executed JV agreement.

Response: If two general contractors are proposing under a JV, an executed JV agreement shall be provided.

Question 046: Section 00100 Instructions, Section 5.1.1 states "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." Please confirm this information will not be included in the page count.

Response: Data appearing in Factor 1 relating to awards are not counted in the overall page limitation.

Question 047: Section 00100 Instructions, Section 5.3 states "DB task orders may include any type of projects described in paragraph 1." Please confirm this is referring to project types described in Section 1. Overview on pages 5 and 6 of 66.

Response: Section 5.3 “…projects described in paragraph 1.” Should read “…projects described in paragraph 5.1”. Revised via amendment 0001.

Question 048: Section 00100 Instructions, Section 5.3 states "Offerors may submit up to three Architect-Engineer (AE) firms as team members and their relative experience with DB projects." Please confirm that A/E experience with design only and/or DB projects will be considered equally relevant as indicated later in section 5.3 on page 12 of 66.

Response: Response: Design only and Design Build projects are equally relevant.

Question 049: The government has set a maximum of 50 pages in paragraph 3.3 of the solicitation, except for PPQs. Does this page limit apply to Binder 2 only? Also, will the government consider including title page, TOC, section tabs, and teaming agreements as part of the exception to the 50 page count limit?

Response: Table of Contents, section tabs, any type of teaming arrangement documentation, awards, and PPQs are not considered in the page limitation.

Question 050: Binder 2, Tab E and Section 5.3, page 9 and 12. Offerors shall submit a teaming agreement with the selected AE firm(s). Please confirm that Teaming Agreements are excluded from page count.

Response: Response: Table of Contents, section tabs, any type of teaming arrangement documentation, performance recognition, and PPQs are not considered in the page limitation.

Question 051: Section 2.4, page 6. Information submitted about any company other than the Offeror, whether a predecessor company, affiliated company, subsidiary…will not be evaluated for any factor unless the proposal contains a detailed narrative explaining why this submitted information is relevant to this acquisition. When submitting past performance information of an affiliated company, we include an INTER-COMPANY CONTRACT PERFORMANCE COMMITMENT AGREEMENT letter showing the meaningful relationship and between the affiliated companies. Being that we may need to submit this letter for multiple affiliated companies, will the government exclude these letters from page count?

Response: The documentation is considered as past performance information support and is not counted in the page limitation.

Question 052: Section 5.1, pages 10 and 11. Similar projects should demonstrate as many of the following project types (either individually or in combination thereof) as possible. Are the criteria prioritized in order of importance?

Response: There is no prioritization.

Question 053: Section 2.3 and Section 5.3, pages 6 and 12. Section 2.3: The submission must contain a narative that clearly explains the relevance to a particular factor of information concerning a company that is part of a Contractor Team Arrangement. Since we will be teaming with AE firms for the completion of Design-Build Task Orders, will the information contained within Factor 3 (to include up to three relevant projects for each named AE firm), along with the inclusion of Teaming Agreements, satisfy this “narrative” requirement? If not, please describe what the contents of this narrative should include and where it should be located in the proposal.

Response: Response: The Offeror must clearly identify what its teaming partners are responsible for in each factor it is using the teaming partner in. The teaming agreements and projects will satisfy the requirements.

SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The required performance has changed from Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) for Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build Construction in support of projects located in the Baltimore-Washington corridor but also can be used throughout CONUS and Hawaii. The contract capacity is $499,000,000.00 and will have a guaranteed minimum of $5,000.00 per award. The period of performance is five years from date of award.This acquisition will utilize a two phase, best value methodology to establish the MATOC base contract awards on an unrestricted and restricted basis. The intent is to award up to five unrestricted contracts and up to five small business contracts to the responsible offerors whose proposals are determined to be the “best value” to the Government.NAICS: 236220. Size Standard: $36.5M. Requests for information (RFI's) shall be submitted in writing to Ashley Williams at Ashley.Williams@usace.army.mil. The deadline to submit RFI's is 2PM on Wednesday, November 11, 2015.The required amount for bid bonds is $10M for those proposing in the restricted (i.e. small business) pool and $25M for those proposing in the unrestricted pool.

See FAR 52.228-1. to Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) for Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build Construction in support of projects located in the Baltimore- Washington corridor but also can be used throughout CONUS and Hawaii. The contract capacity is $499,000,000.00 and will have a guaranteed minimum of $5,000.00 per award. The period of performance is five years from date of award.This acquisition will utilize a two phase, best value methodology to establish the MATOC base contract awards on an unrestricted and restricted basis. The intent is to award up to five unrestricted contracts and up to five small business contracts to the responsible offerors whose proposals are determined to be the “best value” to the Government.NAICS: 236220. Size Standard: $36.5M. Requests for information (RFI's) shall be submitted in writing to Sharla Andrews at Sharla.Andrews@usace.army.mil and Ashley Williams at Ashley.Williams@usace.army.mil. The deadline to submit RFI's is 2PM on Wednesday, November 11, 2015.The required amount for bid bonds is $10M for those proposing in the restricted (i.e. small business) pool and $25M for those proposing in the unrestricted pool. See FAR 52.228-1..

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

SECTION 00100 - PHASE 1

SECTION 00100

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS – PHASE 1

1. OVERVIEW.

1.1 This Request for Proposal (RFP) solicits for Multiple Award Task Order Construction Contracts (MATOC) for Design Build (DB) and Design Bid Build (DBB) Construction projects in support of DoD and other Federal agencies. This solicitation is issued for full and open competition for a single pool that includes an unrestricted category and a restricted category. A restricted contractor is any offeror who meets the definition of any federally designated small business category. USACE, Baltimore District, intends to award up to five contract awards on an unrestricted basis and up to five contract awards on a restricted basis. The total estimated contract pooled capacity is $499,000,000. The minimum task order limitation is $2,000 and the maximum task order limitation is $100,000,000. The duration of each MATOC base contract will be five years.

1.2 The result of this solicitation will be the establishment of a MATOC with a single pool to include up to five unrestricted awards and up to five restricted awards. There are several projects under consideration as the seed project. The salient characteristics of these projects include: Vertical construction, full complement of construction disciplines to include: foundation, infrastructure, site utilities, superstructure, building systems; features of work include: interior/exterior mechanical/electrical / fire protection /HVAC/architectural finishes/ concrete/ plumbing / carpentry/ roofing. A fully scoped seed project is planned for inclusion in Phase II of this procurement. The estimated dollar range of seed projects under consideration is $5M - $20M. Each offeror must designate which category (unrestricted or restricted) they are competing in. An offeror eligible to propose in each category may do

so. An offeror who submits a proposal, one in each category, may only be selected for award in only category.

Offerors submitting under different teaming arrangements may submit more than one proposal.

1.3 Task orders may be either Design Build or Design Bid Build. The individual projects will be a variety of construction types. The task orders will range in size and complexity from small to large and from non-complex to highly technical. Funding may be either Military Construction funding (MILCON) or Operations and Maintenance (O&M) funding. Other types of funding may utilized if authorized for constructions projects.

1.4 All task orders will be firm-fixed-priced task orders.

1.5 A Top Secret Facility Site Clearance IS NOT required for this MATOC however individual projects specifically for the Real Property Services Field Office (RSFO) may require Statements of Affiliation (SOAs) for all companies. All contractors must have personnel that meet the U.S. citizenship requirements identified in the task order Scope’s of Work as some task orders will require only U.S. citizens to perform on those task orders.

1.6 Further details regarding this project include the following: This contract is for a broad variety of major and minor repair, modification, renovations, rehabilitation, alterations, DB, DBB and new construction projects that may include working in Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIF). The work may be very technical electrical or mechanical work. Projects may include demolition, infrastructure, interior fit-up, communications, security, counter terrorism, 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.

1.7 The geographic area for this contract is anticipated to be within the North Atlantic Division (NAD) Mission Area, but may be used throughout the Continental United States (CONUS) to include Alaska and Hawaii. Work performed may be either in secure or non-secure sites. Task orders set-aside for the restricted contractors will only be within the NAD mission boundaries. It is anticipated that the preponderance of the task orders will be within the Baltimore District boundaries. Any USACE District may use this contract.

1.8 The purpose of these instructions are to establish uniform evaluation procedures by the Source Selection Evaluation Teams (SST) for 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.

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

1.10 The Government will evaluate the performance capability proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein and will select between five and eight offerors in each category who represent the most highly qualified Offerors to participate in Phase 2.

1.11 In Phase 2, the Government will evaluate technical solutions, a small business participation plan and price.

1.12 Only those Offerors who receive a written notification from the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) that their firm has been selected to participate in Phase 2 of this solicitation are invited to submit a Phase 2 proposal. Those Offeros selected for Phase 2 will be provided the technical requirements package for the project, issued via amendment to the solicitation.

1.13 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 There will be one pool in this solicitation. However, offerors will be required to identify if they would like to be considered in the unrestricted category or the restricted category. The restricted category is open only to small businesses under NAICS 236220. Any entity that does not meet this standard will be removed from consideration for the Phase 1 evaluation if submitting in the restricted category.

2.2 Firms formally organized as design-build entities, design firms and construction contractors that have associated specifically for this MATOC, 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. No “entity” may be awarded a contract in both categories.

2.3 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.

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, 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, Point of Contact (Name, Phone Number, and Email address), date of the submittal and which category the offeror is competing in, unrestricted or restricted (small business).

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 page count shall not exceed 50 pages (this applies to Binder 2 “Technical Proposal” only). Past Performance Questionnaires are not to be included in the page count. Please include page numbers.

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

3.5 Number of Copies. Offerors shall submit the following:

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

3.6 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 should 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. Drawings should be in Microstation DGN. The schedule should be in an.xer format. Any portion of the proposal not available in electronic format, i.e. cut sheets, 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, 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.

3.7 Proposals shall be marked:

Date of Closing: 3 December 2015

Time of Closing: 11 a.m.

Solicitation RFP: W912DR-16-R-0001.

3.8 The proposal shall be organized and tabbed as follows:

Binder 1: Solicitation Information The CD with the electronic submissions should be included in this binder.

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: 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 a contract. This letter should include the single bonding limit as well as the aggregate amount of bonding available to the offeror.

The minimum bonding requirements are as follows:

Unrestricted Category: Restricted Category (Small Business):

Single: $20M Single: $5M Aggregate: $100M Aggregate: $10 M

Note: Anticipated projects range from $50K to $100M. Each task order will require payment performance bonds for the full value of the task order and will required a bid bond with each task order proposal.

TAB C: 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 D: 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.

Offerors are required to complete the statement and submit it with their proposals. 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.

Binder 2: Technical Proposal

TAB E: 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 F: FACTOR 1 Past Performance of Construction Projects

TAB G: FACTOR 2 Management Approach

TAB H: FACTOR 3: Architect-Engineer Team

4. EVALUATION RATINGS

4.1 Proposal Ratings: Factors 1, 2 and 3 will be adjectivally rated. 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 Past Performance Assessment Definitions. Factor 1 will be evaluated using the two aspects of the past performance evaluation: relevancy and performance confidence.

Relevancy ratings will be used by the Government in assessing the relevancy of the submitted projects to allow assessment of the overall confidence rating.

RATING DESCRIPTION

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.

Based on the quality of the relevant efforts gathered, a single consensus performance confidence rating will be assessed.

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.

4.3 Technical Rating Definitions.

The following combined technical/risk rating definitions will be utilized in the evaluation of Factors 2 and 3.

5. PHASE 1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Binder 2: Technical Proposal

5.1 FACTOR 1: PAST PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS: Projects submitted must demonstrate past performance by the physical and substantial completion of similar projects within six years of the

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.

original date of issuance of this RFP. The Offeror shall submit past performance information on a minimum of three completed similar projects but not more than five. At least three of the submitted projects must document the prime contractor’s past performance. If offeror is a joint venture, each team member must provide at least two projects.

The remaining projects may come from other members of the contractor team arrangement, as defined above. The information regarding the projects that is required to be supplied is identified on the form entitled “CONTRACTOR PAST EXPERIENCE” (Attachment A).

Similar contracts may include construction projects in a variety of sizes, a variety of construction disciplines, varying degrees of technical complexity and both DB and DBB projects. 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. Projects can be either new contruction or renovation/repair.

Similar projects should demonstrate as many of the following project types (either individually or in combination thereof) as possible:

Projects in excess of $5M for restricted category or in excess of $25M for unrestricted category Design Build Construction Projects;

Design Bid Build Construction Projects;

Renovation/Repair Construction Projects;

Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIF);

Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing Systems Repair, Construction and/or Replacement;

Civil and/or Road Construction Projects

5.1.1 Projects that demonstrate multiple experiences noted above may receive higher relevancy ratings.

The offeror shall provide the performance evaluations for the submitted projects that demonstrate the offeror’s performance on recent and relevant projects. The offeror shall provide formal performance evaluation if available.

Formal performance evaluations are those similar to the new Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or the former 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 B). 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 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, Ashley Williams via email at Ashley.Williams@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…