W912DR19R0018_SOLICITATION_072219.pdf

PROJECT DESCRIPTON: General Instruction Building (GIB) for the U.S. Army War College located at Carlisle Barracks, Carlisle, PA. The project consists of construction of a new multi-story 200,000 SF educational facility.

This is an unrestricted acquisition utilizing a Design Bid Build Best Value Tradeoff Process.

NAICS: 236220 (Size Standard $36.5M)

MAGNITUDE OF CONSTRUCTION: Between $25,000,000 and $100,000,000;

Funds are not presently available for this acquisition. No contract or award w ill be made until funds are appropriated and made available.

Upon aw ard, this contract w ill be incrementally funded in accordance with the provisions of Section 00 72-00, Clause 252.232-7007, Limitations of Government's Obligations.

Contractors are requested to review requirements and instructions for the selection process in response to this Request for Proposal. The Solicitation at this time (Part I) only contains the 60% drawings. An amendment w ill be issued with the 100% design, only to those Offerors w ho have submitted a response to Part I.

PATRICIA MORROW 410-962-3463

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

22-Jul-2019

(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 ________1095 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________FAR 52.211-10

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 __________4 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________26 Aug 2019 (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 of fers 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

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, BALTIMORE

2 HOPKINS PLAZA

BALTIMORE MD 21201

W912DR

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

11:00 AM (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:

W912DR19R0018 60

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

Section 00 21 16 - Instructions to Proposers

INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

OVERVIEW

NOTES TO OFFERORS

1. PROPOSAL CONDITIONS

a. The United States Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District, is using a Bifurcated Design-Bid-Build (DBB) solicitation process to award this firm fixed price construction contract. The Bifurcated Solicitation Process is a split/two part request for proposal (RFP) best value trade-off procurement process for requirements that are approximately 60%-90% designed, but waiting for 100% design will unreasonably delay the award.

b. At this time the 60% drawings are being issued. On or around 05 August 2019, the 90% drawings, 90% specificitations and draft price schedule will be issued via Amendment posted to FBO.

c. The Request for Information (RFI) opening date will be 08 August 2019. All RFIs must be submitted via ProjNet (additional information below). RFI period will close on 13 August 2019 at 1200PM EST.

d. A site vist will be held on 08 August 2019 at 1000AM EST. The meeting location will be Collins Hall Parking Lot located on Carlisle Barracks in Carlisle, PA. Contractors can send pre-vetting information to the Carlisle Barracks Visitor Center and/ or arrive early to receive a day pass. Please contact Patricia.Morrow@usace.army.mil with list of attendees no later than 06 August 2019 at 1000AM EST.

e. An Amendment containing the final 100% design, bid schedule, and final small business goals will be issued via email ONLY to those Offerors who provided Volume I proposals in response to the solicitation.

2. COMPETITION: Full and Open Competition.

3. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

a. All proposals must be submitted in accordance with the procedures set forth in Block 13 of Page 1 of this Solicitation document. Proposals or modifications to proposals that are received by facsimile will not be considered.

b. Hand Carried and Mailed Proposal: It is the responsibility of each offeror to ensure that its proposal is received by the Baltimore District’s – Contracting Branch, located at 2 Hopkins Plaza, Room 03-G-23, Baltimore, MD 21201 prior to the date and time set for the receipt of the proposals – See Block 13A of Page 1 of the Solicitation.

c. SF 1442 BACK (Page 2 of the Solicitation): Offerors are required to acknowledge the receipt of all amendments to the Solicitation on the Standard Form 1442 in Block 19. Offerors shall fully complete all the required areas located under the section designated as “OFFER” (refer to Items 14 through 20C).

d. BID GUARANTEE: The offerors are required to submit a Bid Guarantee for this procurement along with their price submission. Any offeror failing to submit an authentic Bid Guarantee will be considered non-responsive to the Solicitation and ineligible for award. The Bid Guarantee shall be in the amount of 20% of the bidder’s price or $3,000,000.00, whichever is less.

e. BONDS AND INSURANCE: The Contractor will be required to furnish proof of insurance, including copies of the required endorsements, and performance and payment bonds within 10 calendar days following the Contractor’s receipt of the contract award.

4. REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION

Technical inquiries and questions relating to this solicitation are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at (https://www.projnet.org) No Earlier than 08 August 2019 and No Later Than (NLT) 12:00 P.M. (EST), 13 August 2019. To submit and review inquiry items, prospective vendors will need to use the Bidder Inquiry Key presented below and follow the instructions listed below the key for access. A prospective vendor who submits a comment /question will receive an acknowledgement of their comment/question via email. Another email to the same address will notify the prospective vendor once the reply is available for viewing.

The Bidder Inquiry Key is JMU32P-NKZEJZ

Specific Instructions for ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

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

2. Identify the Agency. This should be marked as USACE.

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

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

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

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

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

Specific Instructions for Future ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

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

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

3. Identify the Agency. This should be marked as USACE.

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

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

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

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

The call center operates weekdays from 8AM to 5PM U.S. Central Time Zone (Chicago). The telephone number for the Call Center is 800-428-HELP.

*** NOTE: QUESTIONS ANSWERED IN PROJNET ARE NOT OFFICIAL. OFFICIAL ANSWERS WILL

BE ISSUED VIA AN AMENDMENT. ***

SECTION II

RFP PROVISIONS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

This request for proposal (RFP) seeks proposals from Offerors interested in being selected for construction of the United States Army War College (USAWC) General Instruction Building (GIB) at Carlisle Barracks in Carlisle, PA.

Offerors responding to this RFP are required to submit their proposals in accordance with the instructions contained in Section 00 2116.

This is a request for Volume I and III(a) proposals. The Government will request proposals for Volumes II and III(b) via Amendment to the Solicitation containing the 100% design. The Amendment containing the 100% design shall ONLY be issued directly to those Offerors who provided the Government a Volume I proposal.

This is a Full and Open (Unrestricted) competitive RFP.

Volume I: Technical Proposal (Factors 1-3) – will be submitted in response to this RFP.

Volume II: Price & Small Business Participation (Factors 4-5) – will be requested via Amendment with 100% design documents.

Volume III(a): Administrative Documents to be submitted with Volume I.

Volume III(b): Administrative Documents to be submitted with Volume II.

Additional information regarding the volumes is provided in Section D of the RFP provisions under Proposal Submission.

B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

Award will be made to the Offeror whose proposal is the best value and most advantageous to the Government based on an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

RFP Volume I:

Factor 1: Past Performance. The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, relevant performance of the prime offeror and team members and assign a performance confidence evaluation. There are two aspects to the performance confidence evaluation: relevancy and quality assessment. The Government will evaluate these aspects to establish one performance confidence rating which will be given for this factor.

Factor 2: Experience with Drilled Pier Foundations. The Government will evaluate the qualifications of the Foundation System Team Member. The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the submission and assign one combined technical and risk rating for this factor.

Factor 3: Technical Approach. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s explanation of its proposed technical approach to the project. The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the submission and assign one combined technical and risk rating for this factor.

RFP Volume II:

Factor 4: Small Business Participation Plan. The Government will evaluate the extent to which the Offeror intends to meet the small business objectives, requirements and participation goals. The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the submission and assign one combined technical and risk rating for this factor.

Factor 5: Price. The Government will evaluate price reasonableness.

RELATIVE WEIGHT OF EVALUATION FACTORS

Past Performance, Foundation Experience and Technical Approach are of equal importance. Small Business Participation Plan is the least important non-price factor. All non-price factors, when combined, are of approximately equal importance to price.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

OFFEROR TEAMS

For purposes of this RFP, an "Offeror" may include a group of two (2) or more entities that have formed a "contractor team arrangement," as that term is defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Part 9.6. 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.

An Offeror that relies upon the experience and performance history of a member, members or affiliates of a proposed contractor team arrangement must provide a teaming agreement or commitment (in the case of any affiliates) signed by all parties. The Teaming agreement/ commitment shall:

1. Identify the legal name(s) and cage code(s) of all entities.

2. Describe the nature of each entity's relationship (partnership, joint venture, prime/sub or mentor/protégé) and their role on this project as a part of their proposal. The Offeror will be expected to maintain that arrangement during performance of any contract awarded to that Offeror under this RFP.

3. Include the estimated percentage of work to be completed by each member submitted for the RFP. This can be a rough order of magnitude for the initial proposal submission; however, this agreement/letter must be resubmitted with Offeror’s response to the amendment containing the 100% design to include the actual proposed percentages by the competing Offerors.

In the case of affiliates, past performance of an Offeror's "affiliate," as that term is defined in FAR 2.101, will be evaluated (as described within this section) if the Offeror demonstrates a firm commitment that the affiliate will participate meaningfully (e.g., roles, responsibilities, etc.) in the performance of the contract. This commitment, nature of each entity's relationship and meaningful participation shall be described in a document signed by authorized representatives of both the Offeror and its affiliate. If a teaming agreement or commitment is not provided, the projects and experience of any team members outside of the Prime Offeror will not be considered.

The contractor team agreement/commitment shall be provided at the beginning of the Offeror's technical proposal, prior to Factor 1, and will not be included in the overall page count.

The following are to be used in determining the status of the Offeror's team for the evaluation of project submissions under Factor 1 and Factor 2:

1. 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 is considered the "Prime Offeror".

2. In the case of joint ventures, the "Prime Offeror" experience is limited to joint venture members with signed agreements. The signed Joint Venture agreement must be submitted along with the teaming agreement.

3. In the case of mentor/protégé relationships, the relationship must be established by the two Offerors and approved by the chosen Government Agency prior to proposal submission. The "Prime Offeror" experience is limited to entities with signed agreements. The approved mentor/protégé document from the relevant Government Agency must be submitted along with the teaming agreement.

4. In the case of additional projects submitted by subcontractors, the subcontractor must submit the final cost of their portion of the project along with total project cost and all other required information.

5. In the case of Offerors that are large, multi-function firms (consisting of subsidiaries), experience must only be submitted by the segment of the firm (e.g., division, group, and unit) that is submitting a proposal in response to this RFP.

6. In the case of affiliates, Past performance of an Offeror's "affiliate," as that term is defined in FAR 2.101, will be evaluated (as described within this section) if the Offeror demonstrates a firm commitment that the affiliate will participate meaningfully in the performance of the contract. This commitment and meaningful participation shall be described in a document signed by authorized representatives of both the Offeror and its affiliate.

If a teaming agreement or commitment is not provided, the projects of any team members outside of the Prime Offeror will not be considered.

1. VOLUME I - FACTOR 1 – PAST PERFORMANCE.

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

1.1. RELEVANCY OF PAST EXPERIENCE:

The Offeror shall submit information on a minimum of three (3) and no more than five (5) completed projects demonstrating the Offeror's recent, relevant experience.

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. These projects must be of relevant scope and complexity and have either a minimum project size 100,000 SF building or demonstrate a minimum completion value of $50,000,000.00 considering adjustment for escalation from project completion to the date of issuance of this solicitation. Any escalated values are to be labeled as escalated and the Offeror must explain in detail their escalation rationale, which must include any formulas, calculations, assumptions, etc. At least three (3) projects MUST demonstrate experience with vertical construction.

Each submitted project shall also include a detailed discussion of at least two (2) or more of the following elements.

Experience with construction on karst geology environments and drilled pier foundations Adult Academic Facilities with associated audio/visual, staff offices, classrooms, technology, and study areas.

Experience with large underground storm water structures.

Experience working on a military installation around government housing and/or adjacent to occupied structures.

Experience working on a congested construction site with nearby pedestrian travel.

Auditoriums of similar size to the solicited project.

Experience connecting to an electrical distribution system for a military base or campus equivalent.

Projects including all of the following: parking lot, landscaping and lighting.

Projects including all of the following: Electrical, mechanical, communications and HVAC.

Construction in accordance with progressive collapse design and codes.

If the Offeror’s submission exceeds the maximum project limitation of five completed projects, then the additional project(s) will not be evaluated.

Offerors may use the form provided below entitled “EXPERIENCE IN RELEVANT PROJECTS” (Attachment A).

Offerors are not required to use the form itself as part of their proposal, but the information requested on the form must be in the Offeror’s proposal and should be in the same format as the form. As requested on the form, the Offeror must provide an explanation of how the Offeror managed and controlled the submitted projects. Offerors may expand the form as necessary to accommodate the required project information.

Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOCs) or any other type of task-order contracts that provide for the issuance of task orders for the performance of tasks will not be considered projects for the purposes of this evaluation. Only individual task orders issued under such contracts will be evaluated as projects.

1.2. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

For each of the projects submitted, provide a copy of the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) report, or Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) to a representative of the owner that can provide the owner's opinion of the Offeror's past performance for the project. The Past Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ) included in the RFP is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the owner for each project (Attachment B). Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the owner point of contact.

Organize all Past Performance Information in the same order in which the Projects are submitted.

Submit completed PPQs with your proposal. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from an owner 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). At the owner's discretion, PPQs may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Patricia Morrow, via email at Patricia.Morrow@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. If you have questions regarding the PPQs, or require assistance, please contact Patricia Morrow.

Previously completed PPQs may be submitted provided that the documents do not reference any other solicitations.

Submitted PPQs must only reference this solicitation. Contractor Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) ratings will be accepted in lieu of PPQs.

Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Contractor Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or other databases using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/ subsidiary/ affiliate) identified in the Offeror’s proposal;

interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency. The information obtained from these sources will be evaluated supplementary to the past performance questionnaires. In reference to the contracts pulled from these sources, the relevancy of the projects, completion dates, ratings and comments in the individual categories and overall ratings will be considered in making the overall confidence assessment.

1.3. RATING METHODS

Each submitted project will be assigned one of the levels of relevancy shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method

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

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

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

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

In reviewing each past performance effort by the Offeror, the SST will then evaluate the overall quality of the Offeror's past performance (see FAR 15.304(c)(2)) to determine the performance confidence assessment rating. The past performance evaluation conducted in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the Offeror's past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the Offeror performed those past contracts.

The SST will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the Offeror's performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate these into the performance confidence assessment (see Table 2 below).

The past performance confidence assessment rating is based on the Offeror's overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance. At the conclusion of the assessment, the Offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings in Table 2.

In the case for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance information is not available, the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past contract performance. In this case, the Offeror's past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of "neutral".

Table 2. Performance Confidence Assessment

Adjectival 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.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror's performance report is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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.

2. VOLUME I - FACTOR 2 – EXPERIENCE WITH DRILLED PIER FOUNDATION PROJECTS.

Qualifications of the Foundation System Contractor/ Subcontractor shall demonstrate that they have been engaged in the successful installation of Drilled Pier Foundations within the last six (6) years. The Foundation System Contractor/ Subcontractor shall submit completed Drilled Pier Foundation projects with at least one (1) of these projects demonstrating experience completing drilled pier foundations in Karst Pinnacled Limestone.

In addition to submitting projects, the Offeror shall provide a narrative that includes the following items. The narrative shall include a detailed discussion of best practices to manage cost and schedule impacts that could result due to Karst geology. The Offeror is encouraged to highlight prior teaming arrangements on any projects submitted.

The Offeror shall also submit a narrative technical approach for foundation/ site work to include how work will be carried out with karst geology and in close proximity to a Class A trout stream and demonstrating an understanding of the drilled pier foundations in Karst Pinnacled Limestone.

The Contractor shall obtain the approval of the Government for any change in the Foundation System Sub- Contractor following submission of proposal through contract completion.

2.1. RATING METHODS

The Offeror shall be assigned one of the following ratings for Factor 2.

Table 3. Combined Technical/ Risk Ratings

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

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

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

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

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

Proposal is unawardable.

3. VOLUME I - FACTOR 3 – TECHNICAL APPROACH

Narrative: The Offeror shall submit a narrative to demonstrate technical capability. The Offeror shall provide a start-to-finish narrative of how the offeror will perform the entire project, identifying critical elements and describing how the critical elements shall be completed in accordance with the solicitation specifications. The narrative should address the following minimum requirements:

Project Management: Describe the Offeror’s project management approach, to include lines of communication and key personnel. Discuss anticipated personnel, if known, or general qualifications of internal staff. Identify the Offeror’s approach to carrying out the work in close proximity to military housing and occupied facilities in a campus environment.

Site Safety: Explain how the Offeror will address site safety in a campus environment with a designated construction gate, phased site work, parking management, pedestrian and vehicle traffic management, and fire department access to construction site and existing surrounding buildings. The constrained approaches to the construction area and the limited available area will be a challenge. Offerors should demonstrate that they understand these logistical challenges and what approaches they will take to mitigate them.

Site Work: Describe the Offeror’s approach to site work, to include phasing, roadways, parking lots, pedestrian walk-ways, storm water management, landscaping and connection to the Installation’s site utilities, eg., electrical distribution loop, gas, water, sewer, communications, etc..

Schedule: In addition to the above narrative, the Offeror shall provide a preliminary schedule of how the project would be anticipated to proceed based on a winter (around February) 2020 award. The schedule shall show the critical path and demonstrate an understanding of job components such as the foundation work and commissioning and demonstrate a reasonable and realistic sequence of activities which represent all work through the entire contract performance period. In addition to the preliminary schedule, the Offeror shall submit a schedule narrative. The Offeror shall clearly articulate any assumptions made in its plan to sequence and mange key activities and any constraints that may be levied on the proposed schedule. Provide additional narrative discussing areas/ activities the Offeror sees as potential time saving features. The Offeror shall include a risk management plan that identifies major risk to the proposed schedule and proposed mitigations. The schedule shall include important early activities (such as pre-work submittals, submittal processing/ review/ approval, site organization, temporary facilities, utilities, and material delivery), sequencing/phasing and managing important construction activities – including but not limited to parking lots, roadways, erosion and sediment control, storm water management, vehicle traffic control, pedestrian and fire department access to Building 650 and along the Letort stream, and total building commissioning.

RATING METHODS

The Offeror shall be assigned one of the following ratings for Factor 3.

Table 4. Combined Technical/ Risk Rating Method.

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

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

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

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

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

Proposal is unawardable.

4. VOLUME II - FACTOR 4 - SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN (SBPP)

SBPP MINIMUM SUBMISSION CRITERIA: All Offerors (both large and small businesses) regardless of size status shall address their planned small business usage for this requirement and will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of U.S. small businesses in the performance of this acquisition (as small business prime Offerors or small business subcontractors) relative to the objectives, requirements and goals established herein. A small business prime Offeror's own participation as a prime counts towards the percentages set in this evaluation factor, and small businesses are not required to subcontract to other small businesses in order to achieve the small business participation goals.

Large business contractors may achieve the small business participation goals through subcontracting to small businesses. Small business contractors may achieve small business participation goals through their own performance/participation as a prime and also through a joint venture, teaming arrangement, and subcontracting to other small businesses.

The Offeror shall articulate within their SBPP how they intend to meet the small business objectives, requirements and participation goals. Nothing precludes an Offeror from further demonstrating their extent of commitment to use small businesses beyond what has been required by the subject RFP. Offerors are encouraged to submit: proof of awards, accolades, etc., received for their current and/or past support of small businesses (e.g. pictures of award(s), successful Small Business Administration Surveillance Review findings), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) that address small business utilization, etc.; discuss and submit proof of any specific outreach efforts performed in support of this requirement (e.g. holding internal or external meetings with potential small business subcontractors, ads, any conference attendance or host) that demonstrates the Offerors' effort to identify small business subcontractors specifically in support of this requirement (e.g. roster, attendance sheet, etc.), proof of any other pertinent information that demonstrates the Offerors' current and/or past efforts to support small businesses.

Material submitted in support of the SBPP shall be organized sequentially and all pages must be numbered to facilitate evaluation. The Small Business Evaluation Team will not look to obtain information in support of an Offerors SBPP from other binders/volumes.

Do not submit a hybrid plan that includes a combination of elements from a SBPP (IAW DFARS PGI 215.304) and elements of a Subcontracting Plan (IAW FAR 52.219- 9/AFARS Appendix DD) as the two are distinctly different.

Doing so will result in a weakness. Offerors submitting SBPPs for this project should limit submissions to data essential for the evaluation of plans.

The Government will evaluate:

a. The extent to which small business firms of each category, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in proposals;

b. The extent of commitment to use such firms (enforceable commitments will be considered more favorably than non-enforceable ones).

Note: Describe what types of commitments if any are in place for this specific acquisition either - small business prime, written contract, verbal, enforceable, non- enforceable, joint ventures, mentor-protégé, teaming agreements, partnership letters of commitment(s), etc.). Provide documentation regarding commitments to small business for this effort. Copies of such agreements should be provided as part of the small business participation plan.

In order to receive credit for letters of commitments, the SBEB must be able to verify that the commitment must (1) be with a small business, (2) include the socioeconomic type of the small business and the services/supplies to be provided e.g. ABC Company, a WOSB, will provide commissioning, (3) be specific to the subject requirement by indicating the solicitation number, and (4) include legible signature blocks and signatures from BOTH parties acknowledging the business relationship. SB firms identified within an enforceable commitment must also be listed within section (d) of the SBPP format.

c. Identification of the complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform;

Note: Offerors must identify supplies/services to be performed by small businesses that are considered meaningful elements of the requirement.

d. The extent of participation of small business prime Offerors and small business subcontractors in terms of the percentage of the value of the total acquisition (not the percentage of subcontracted dollars).

Note: Offerors shall provide both the percentage and total dollars to be performed by small businesses and each subcategory (based on the total contract value). The Government will verify the total proposed price (not individual cost elements), and any subcontracting information with the Cost/Price team to ensure the dollar amounts are consistent with what is being proposed in the SBPP. If an Offeror doesn't use the value of their total acquisition to base their participation goals on it will result in a significant weakness.

The extent to which the Offeror meets or exceeds the goals. The goals for this procurement are:

Small Business (SB): {40%} of the total contract value Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB): {10%} of the total contract value Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB): {10%} of the total contract value Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) {4%} of the total contract value Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB): {4%} of the total contract value Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB): {4%} of the total contract value Historically Black Colleges and Universities & Minority Institutions (HBCU/MI)*: {0%} of the total contract value

* The HBCU/MI goal is an aspirational goal

If an Offeror is unable to meet the full RFP participation goals for any of the socioeconomic categories (e.g.

HUBZone, WOSB, etc.), the Offeror must provide an explanation as to why the participation goal(s) cannot be met and/or what actions will be taken to increase the participation for any of the socioeconomic participation goal categories the Offeror is unable to meet. Not doing so will result in a weakness.

e. Past performance of the Offerors in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business, and 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Not addressing compliance of either FAR 52.219-8 and/or FAR 52.219-9 (if applicable) will result in a weakness.

Note: Compliance of FAR 52.219-8 applies to ALL Offerors to include small businesses.

All Offerors shall submit information substantiating their past performance in complying with FAR Clause 52.219- 8, "Utilization of Small Business," maximizing opportunities for U.S. small business subcontractors. The extent to which the Offeror complied with FAR 52.219-8, Small Business Utilization may be evaluated based on one and/or a combination of the following:

• Reporting of small business performance in CPARS

• History of prompt payments to small businesses subcontractors

• Small business participation/utilization reporting

• Documentation from customers local, state or federal agencies that demonstrates use/support of small businesses and/or provide information that substantiates the use of small businesses

• Documentation demonstrating total small business contract completion by the small business prime Offeror and/or subcontracting to other small businesses

• Offerors with no prior contracts containing FAR Clause 52.219-8 must state so

Note: Compliance with FAR 52.219-9 will only be evaluated against large businesses (doesn't apply to small business prime Offerors)

The extent to which the Offeror complied with FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan may be evaluated based on one and/or a combination of the following:

• Reporting of small business performance in CPARS

• Letters of commendation from local, state or federal customers about the Offerors' use and/or support of small businesses

• Correspondence from small business subcontractors that acknowledge support

• SBA Compliance Reviews, Defense Contract Management Agency Small Business Subcontracting Program

Reviews, etc.,

• Submission of Individual Subcontracting Reports (ISR) - the Government will evaluate how well the Offeror has performed on achieving its small business goals within the last 6 years. Offerors may submit a minimum of 2, but not more than 4 ISRs. Each ISR submitted must (1) contain the contract number for referencing purposes

(2) be accompanied with a brief description of the requirement that discusses the services/supplies provided, (3) include an explanation for not meeting subcontracting goals and/or what actions will be taken to increase participation in any of the subcontracting goals the Offeror was unable to meet. The SBEB must be able to determine which ISR, customer letter of commendation, etc., goes with each project description. Therefore, project descriptions and other supporting documentation described above should be directly followed by and/or before the ISR(s) for reference/evaluation purposes.

• Offerors with no prior contracts containing FAR Clause 52.219-9 must state so

• Offerors who never held a Federal contract as a large business must state so

• In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources that may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System, electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS), etc.

Subcontracting Plan Requirements for Other than U.S. Small Businesses (Large Businesses) ONLY: Small Business Subcontracting Plan is required (IAW FAR Clause 52.219-9). Large business prime Offerors shall include their subcontracting plan under a separately labeled tab within Volume III.

Separate from a SBPP, other than U.S. Small Business Offerors must also submit a subcontracting plan meeting the requirements of FAR 52.219-9, AFARS Appendix DD and DFARS 252.219-7003. (or DFARS 252.219-7004 if the Offeror has a comprehensive subcontracting plan). Subcontracting Plans shall reflect and be consistent with the commitments offered in the SBPP. The dollars should correlate directly to the percentage of subcontracted dollars in the Small Business Subcontracting Plan. If an Offeror specifically identifies small business subcontractors to support the subject requirement within its SBPP, those small businesses shall be listed in any subcontracting plan submitted pursuant to FAR 52.219-9 to facilitate compliance with 252.219-7003(e).

Example: The value of the total acquisition is $100,000,000 and the SB participation goal is 20%. If a large business proposed the 20% SB participation goal, the SB participation dollar amount will be $20,000,000 and the SB dollars under the subcontracting plan "have to be" $20,000,000. If a firm plans on subcontracting out the entire project to small businesses, the SB participation goal and Subcontracting Plan percentage would be 100%. For subcontracting plan purposes (that is based on total dollars planned to be subcontracted), if the firm was going to subcontract out $60,000,000 (to both large and small businesses) and had a SB participation goal of 20% ($20,000,000), the planned subcontracting percentage goal for small business would be 33.33%. The associated subcontract percentage could be anything and is based on the planned subcontracting dollars to both small and large businesses. The subcontracting goal percentages may be equal or higher and will ultimately differ from Small Business Participation Plan goals.

The Small Business Subcontracting Plan is not a requirement for evaluation in source selection, but rather a requirement for award to an Other than Small Business Only. The apparently successful Offeror's Small Business Subcontracting Plan sha ll be assessed IAW AFARS Appendix DD and FAR 52.219-9 requirements and must be determined as "acceptable" by the Contracting Officer in the event of an award. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan is a materiel requirement of the solicitation and any resultant contract. A Subcontracting Plan deemed as "unacceptable" may preclude an Offeror from being eligible for contract award. Although submission of a subcontracting plan is required, subcontracting plans will only be evaluated for the Offeror(s) deemed to be apparently successful Offeror(s) prior to award. Failure of large businesses to submit a subcontracting plan will result in a deficiency.

Offerors must comply with all elements spelled out with Minimum Submission Criteria listed above in support of SBPPs.

4.1. RATING METHODS

The Offeror shall be assigned one of the following ratings for Factor 4.

Table 5. Small Business Participation Plan Rating Method.

Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the small business objectives.

5. VOLUME II – FACTOR 5 – PRICE

Offerors shall complete the price schedule that will be issued with the Amendment containing the 100% design.

The contract will be a Firm Fixed Price Contract. A price analysis will be performed using FAR Part 15.404-1(b).

The Government will evaluate price reasonableness, and will consider whether proposed prices are unbalanced in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g). Price will also be evaluated for completeness and whether the Offeror proposed in accordance with the Army provided contract line item numbers (CLINs) on a firm-fixed basis.

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. Offerors shall submit Proposal Volumes I and III(a) in response to the initial Solicitation. Once the 100% design is completed by the Government, Offerors who submitted Volumes I and III(a) will be issued an Amendment containing the 100% design, price schedule, and a request for further proposal submissions. Only Offerors who submitted under the original solicitation will be able to submit in response to the 100% design Amendment. At the time the Amendment with the 100% design is issued, the Government will request Proposal Volumes II and III(b) (Administrative Documents).

2. Each Offeror is required to submit a proposal in a hard copy binders with accompanying digital copies consisting of the following volumes:

Volume Title Printed Copies Digital Copies* I Technical Proposal –

Factors 1-3 Original and 5 Copies

II Factors 4-5 Original and 2 Copies

III(a) and III(b)

Administrative Documents Original, no copies 1

*NOTE: Digital copies shall be on separate compact disc(s) (CDs) (or DVDs), one per volume, and each CD should contain one text-searchable PDF file that is an exact color copy of the hard, original volume. The digital copy will be used solely for administrative purposes.