I.B.08.03_Solicitation_Amendment_for_W912DR19R0028_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

This amendment hereby incorporates the follow ing changes into the solicitation:

1. Provide a summary of responses to Requests for Information (RFIs) and corresponding changes to the solicitation based on RFI responses.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 14

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 03-Apr-2019

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 W912DR19R0028

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

19-Mar-2019

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

03-Apr-2019

CODE

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, BALTIMORE

2 HOPKINS PLAZA

03-G-04

BALTIMORE MD 21201

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912DR19R0028

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 19-Apr-2019 12:00 AM to 19-Apr-2019 12:00 PM.

The Issued By organization below has been added:

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, BALTIMORE

2 HOPKINS PLAZA

03-G-04

BALTIMORE MD 21201

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS

IMPORTANT NOTES REGARDING THIS ACQUISITION

1. PROPOSAL CONDITIONS

a. Split awards or multiple award contracts will not result from this solicitation.

2. COMPETITION: Woman Owned Small Business Set-Aside

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, 03-G-04, 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 during Phase II submissions. 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. SECURITY REQUIREMENTS:

All persons, deliveries, and equipment requiring access within the boundaries of any US Secret Service Facility must comply with specific security requirements.

All Personnel are subject to vetting in advance by the U.S. Government. To accomplish this vetting process, the Contractor and all subcontractors must provide information to the Government regarding all personnel who will require access to any U.S. Secret Service facility the site and project information. The vetting of Contractor and all subcontractor personnel will be accomplished as follows: All personnel must be U.S. citizens. The Government will require proof of citizenship during the vetting process.

Acceptable forms of citizenship are a valid embossed birth certificate, U.S. passport, or original U.S. certificate of naturalization. The Contractor must submit a completed SSF 3237 - Contractor Personnel Access Application for each person requiring re-occurring access to any site or facility will require a minimum of 10 working days before access is required. Each applicant must request Category 1 type of access.

Additional security requirements in accordance with the DD Form 254 – Department of Defense Contract Security Classification Specification is located in Section 01 00 00 unter the title “DD Form 254 Security Requirements”.

5. 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 Later Than (NLT) 12:00 PM (EST), 02 April 2019. To submit inquiry items, prospective Offerors will need to use the Bidder Inquiry Key presented below and follow the instructions listed below the key for access. A prospective vendor who submits a comment /question will receive an acknowledgement via email. Another email will notify the prospective vendor once the reply is available for viewing.

The Bidder Inquiry Key is: N6CGBX-2KTHY5

Specific Instructions for ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

https://www.projnet.org/

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.

Responses to RFIs via ProjNet are for informational purposes only. Official responses will be provided by amendment.

NOTES TO OFFERORS

This is a two-phase Design-Build / Design-Bid-Build procurement. This Request for Proposals (RFP) is for Phase I only. Phase I submissions will be reviewed, and a maximum of five (5) of the most highly qualified Offerors will be invited to submit Phase II proposals. Bid bonds are not required until Phase II submissions. A bid schedule and expanded specifications and details regarding the concept design will be provided in the Phase II via an amendment.

SECTION 00 21 13 - INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

PHASE I PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS – PHASE I

1. OVERVIEW.

1.1 This Request for Proposal (RFP) solicits for a Single Award Task Order Construction Contract (SATOC) for Design Build (DB) and Design Bid Build (DBB) Construction projects in support of the United States Secret Service (USSS). This solicitation is issued as a Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) set aside. The total estimated contract capacity is $25,000,000. The minimum task order limitation is $3,000 and the maximum task order limitation is $5,000,000. The duration of the SATOC contract will be five (5) years.

1.2 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 $1,500,000 - $4,000,000.

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.

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 SATOC however all individuals working on any of the designated project sites MUST be citizens of the United States of America and will be subject to background investigations this includes all sub-contractors and delivery personnel.

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 and will be located at the following locations: James J. Rowley Training Center (JJRTC) in Laurel, MD; a training facility located in Onley, MD and at the “Post Office Range” in Washington, DC. Projects may include demolition, infrastructure, interior fit-up, communications, life safety alarms and devices, audio visual upgrades and security equipment.

1.7 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.

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

1.9 The Government will evaluate the performance capability proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein and will select up to five (5) Offerors in each category who represent the most highly qualified Offerors to participate in Phase II.

1.10 In Phase II, the Government will evaluate technical solutions and price.

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

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

2. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 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.

2.2 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.

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

2.4 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), and 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: 19 APR 2019

Time of Closing: 12:00 PM EST

Solicitation RFP: W912DR19R0028

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 II 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:

Single: $2 M Aggregate: $25 M

Note: It is anticipated that task order values could potentially range from $3,000 to $5,000,000. Each task order will require payment and 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 (Attachment D)

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 I 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 original date of issuance of this RFP. Relevant and recent projects demonstrating past performance are permitted as long as Offeror can demonstrate 75% completion of the project. 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 the 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 construction 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

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Rating Description

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Proposal is un-awardable.

Design Build Construction Projects;

Design Bid Build Construction Projects;

Renovation/Repair Construction Projects;

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

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 Wingfield via email at Ashley.Wingfield@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. Offerors may use previously completed PPQs and do not need to have one completed specifically for this project but must include it as a hardcopy.

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

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

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

5.2 FACTOR 2: MANAGEMENT APPROACH: Organize the submitted material sequentially under Tab G, to facilitate evaluation. Submit this information in the form of narratives and an organization chart.

5.2.1 Management: Describe in narrative form how your company will manage multiple, concurrent task orders issued under the contract. Specifically, the proposal shall describe the overall corporate structure and how project teams are organized to support multiple and concurrent task orders, and the respective levels of authority. The narrative shall include a description of how your company will support the geographic boundaries of the SATOC.

Also, include why your team is uniquely qualified to undertake this contract, its approach to construction and working with the customer(s) during construction. The Offeror shall also describe, in detail, its approach to Design Build projects.

Identify key positions that will be assigned to the overall management of an awarded contract. Discuss the role and responsibility of key positions.

The proposal shall identify how the overall communication will be managed with the Government. In addition, describe any communication strategies that have been successfully employed by your firm and the benefits recognized by the Government and key stakeholders. Describe how the project teams, for multiple task orders, will communicate with each other to achieve results.

5.2.2 Overall Quality Management Control System: The Offeror shall describe how they intend to manage quality throughout the contract and per task order. Discuss quality management methods proposed in both DB and DBB project throughout the design and construction process.

5.2.3 Scheduling: The Offeror must discuss its scheduling capabilities and procedures to be used for this contract and per task order. This should schedule updates, incorporating modifications into the schedule, and other steps to be taken to maintain the individual task order schedules.

5.3 FACTOR 3: ARCHITECT-ENGINEER TEAM: This SATOC may issue both Design Build (DB) task orders as well as Design Bid Build construction task orders. DB task orders may include any type of projects described in paragraph 5.1. In order to assess the team’s ability to handle a variety of DB task orders, Offerors may submit up to three Architect-Engineer (AE) firms as team members and their relative experience with DB projects. Projects should demonstrate the AE’s Designer of Record (DOR) experience. Firms submitted under this factor shall include firms that the Offeror intends to use throughout the life of the contract. Offerors shall submit a teaming agreement with the selected AE firm(s). Offerors may present up to three AE firms. If information about any team member AE is properly submitted, the expectation is that this AE will perform work. Before utilizing another AE, the Government must consent.

The Offeror may submit up to three projects from each AE firm presented. Projects should demonstrate the AE firm’s experience on design only and/or DB projects. For ongoing projects, 100% of the design and at least 75% of the major construction milestones must be completed at the time of proposal submission. For design only projects, 100% of design must be complete. All projects must have been completed within six years prior to the date of this

RFP.

Relevant projects for Restricted Offerors include DB projects with a minimum completion value of $5M $3M or design only projects with a minimum value of $50K. The information regarding the projects that is required to be supplied is identified on the form entitled “ARCHITECT-ENGINEER PROJECTS” (Attachment F).

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 Wingfield via email at Ashley.Wingfield@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. Offerors may use previously completed PPQs and do not need to have one completed specifically for this project but must include it as a hardcopy.

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

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

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

6. PHASE I EVALUATION CRITERIA

6.1 FACTOR 1: PAST PERFORMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS: Past performance will be rated in terms of how likely there is a performance risk to the Government; that is, high confidence performance ratings will be taken as indicators of a low risk that the Offeror will successfully perform the work. The more relevant a proposed project is the more weight it will be given in the overall confidence assessment rating. If an Offeror has no record of relevant past performance, or if information on the Offeror’s past performance is not available, the Offeror must state that fact. That Offeror will be rated as Unknown Confidence/Neutral.

Offerors may receive higher ratings if they can show successful past performance with multiple customers, multiple types of projects and both DB and DBB projects.

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

6.3 FACTOR 3: ARCHITECT-ENGINEER TEAM: The Offeror will be rated on an adjectival basis. To achieve an “acceptable” the Offeror will submit the information listed in paragraph 5.3 that demonstrates the DOR’s experience in relevant projects and ability to successfully meet all of the requirements related to designing a constructible project for this requirement.

Offerors may receive higher ratings if they demonstrate successful experience with the prime contractor.

7. EVALUATION PROCEDURE

7.1 Source Selection Evaluation Board: The Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will conduct a review of the Technical Evaluation Board (TEB) evaluation of proposals against the solicitation requirements and the approved evaluation criteria to ensure an equitable, impartial, and comprehensive evaluation against the solicitation requirements. The SSEB does not compare proposals against each other. The fundamental responsibility of the SSEB is to provide the SSA with information to make an informed and reasoned selection. The SSEB will therefore prepare a summary report containing adjectival assessments for each factor and their supporting rationale, including the prices for each Offeror (in Phase II); brief the SSA; and prepare any necessary items for discussion.

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

7.3 Discussions: Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details in their Phase I proposals, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of Phase I proposals. Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in their proposal after submitting it in response to Phase I - the Government may evaluate Phase I proposals as submitted, without further exchanges. However, the Government reserves the right to talk with Offerors during Phase I and to request Phase I proposal revisions, if determined to be necessary and in the best interests of the Government by the Contracting Officer. Offerors are advised that it is the intent of the Government that a Phase I “Most Highly Qualified Offerors” determination will be made without discussions. However, the Government reserves the right to hold discussions if it determines that discussions are necessary. Therefore, proposals should be submitted on the most favorable terms that the Offeror can submit to the Government. The Government reserves the right to limit the technically acceptable range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals in accordance with FAR Clause 52.215- 1(f)(4).

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

7.5 Exceptions to the contractual terms and conditions of the solicitation (e.g., standard terms and conditions) may result in a determination to reject a proposal.

7.6 Failure to submit all the data in the format indicated in this section may be cause for determining a proposal incomplete and, therefore, not considered for evaluation, and for subsequent award.

7.7 The maximum number of Offerors chosen to advance to Phase II will be up to five. The Government reserves the right to limite the acceptable range.

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

7.9 Phase I selection of the “Most Highly Qualified Offerors.” Up to five, which are determined to be the most highly qualified Offerors, will advance to Phase II. The following chart describes the evaluation factors and their relationship:

PHASE I

FACTOR 1 Past Performance of Construction Projects FACTOR 2 Management Approach FACTOR 3 Architect-Engineer Team

Factors 1, 2 and 3 are in descending order of importance. Therefore, Factor 1 is more important than Factor 2, which is more important than Factor 3.

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

8. BASIS OF CONTRACT AWARD (After Phase II)

Phase II

NON-PRICE FACTORS

Factor 1 Phase I: Past Performance of Construction Contracts Factor 2 Phase I: Management Approach Factor 3 Phase I: Architect-Engineer Team Factor 4 Seed Project Narrative

PRICE FACTOR

Factor 5 Seed Project Price and Price Schedule

When combined all non-price factors are significantly more important than price.

In Phase II, Offerors ratings for Factors 1, 2, and 3 will advance from Phase1. The order of importance for Phase II, will be Factor 4, Factor 1, Factor 2, and Factor 3.. Therefore, Factor 4 is more important than Factor 1, which is more important than Factor 2, which is more important than Factor 3..

Trade-off Analysis: After evaluations of all Phase II proposals are completed, the SSA will determine which Offeror submitted the proposal that represents the “best value” to the Government.

To be eligible for award, all proposals must meet the criteria stated in the RFP, to include responsiveness, technical acceptability and responsibility.

SECTION 00 45 00 - REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS

INFORMATIONAL TEXT - 00 45 00

SECTION 00600 FORMS MUST BE COMPLETED, WHERE APPLICABLE, AND RETURNED WITH

THE OFFEROR’S PROPOSAL.

1. STANDARD FORM LLL, DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES LOCATION (Attachment C) The Standard Form LLL “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities” and Instructions for Completion of SF LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (See SF LLL attached after Section 00800) This will be submitted with your proposal. Attachment C shall be submitted as part of Binder 1, Tab A.

End of Text

2. CERTIFICATE OF CORPORATE AUTHORITY (Attachment D) The Certificate of Corporate Authority shall be submitted as part of the bid/proposal or signed contract if the bidder/offeror is a corporation (See Certificate of Corporate Authority Form attached after Section 00800) This will be submitted with your proposal.

End of Text

(End of Summary of Changes)