Amendment 0002 Solicitation W912DR22R0028 (3).pdf

W912DR22R0028

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this Amendment 0002 is to:

1.Extend the RFI due date to Tuesday 28 June 2022 2:00EST, 2.Extend the proposal due date to 08 July 2022 3.Add UAI Design Build Clause 4.Add change to the Solicitation w ith Clearance and Security Information and (Blue) 5.Add Security Language for Unclassified contracts. (Yellow ) 6.Provide Attachment B 7.Post the already answ ered RFI through 14 June 2022

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 13

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 14-Jun-2022

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 W912DR22R0028

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

06-May-2022

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 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

14-Jun-2022

CODE

USACE, BALTIMORE, RSFO

300 SENTINEL DRIVE, STE 400

ANNAPOLIS JUNCTION MD 20701-0548

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE (SF 30)

The following have been added by full text:

UAI 5152.236-9011

UAI 5152.236-9011 Design-Build Construction Contracts As prescribed in 5136.570-100(a), insert the following clause:

DESIGN-BUILD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS (MAR 2019)

(a) Design-Build Contract Order of Precedence. The contract includes the standard contract clauses and schedules current at the time of contract award. It entails (1) the Solicitation in its entirety, including all drawings, cuts, and illustrations, and any amendments, and (2) the successful offeror’s accepted proposal. The contract constitutes and defines the entire agreement between the Contractor and the Government. No documentation shall be omitted which in any way bears upon the terms of that agreement.

(1) In the event of conflict or inconsistency between any portion of this contract, precedence shall be given in the following order:

i. Betterments: Any portions of the accepted proposal which both conform to and exceed the requirements of the Solicitation.

ii. The requirements of the Solicitation. (See also FAR 52.236-21, Specifications and Drawings for Construction)

USACE Acquisition Instruction (UAI) Version 5 dated 3 JUNE 2019

iii. All other elements of the accepted proposal.

iv. Any design products including, but not limited to, plans, specifications, engineering studies and analyses, shop drawings, equipment installation drawings, etc. These are "deliverables" under the contract and are not part of the contract itself. Design products must conform to all provisions of the contract, in the order of precedence herein.

(b) Personnel, subcontractors, and outside associates or consultants. In connection with this contract, any in-house personnel, subcontractors, and outside associates or consultants will be limited to individuals or firms that were specifically identified in the Contractor's accepted proposal. The Contractor shall obtain the Contracting Officer's written consent before making any substitution for these designated in-house personnel, subcontractors, associates, or consultants. If the Contractor proposes a substitution, it shall submit the same type of information that was submitted in the accepted proposal to the Contracting Officer for evaluation and approval. The level of qualifications and experience submitted in the accepted proposal or that required by the Solicitation, whichever is greater, is the minimum standard for any substitution.

(c) Responsibility of the Contractor for Design. The Contractor shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy, and the coordination of all designs, drawings, specifications, and other non-construction services furnished by the Contractor under this contract. The Contractor shall, without additional compensation, correct or revise any errors or deficiency in its designs, drawings, specifications, and other non-construction services and perform any necessary rework or modifications, including any damage to real or personal property, resulting from the design error or omission.

(1) The standard of care for all design services performed under this agreement shall be the care and skill ordinarily used by members of the architectural or engineering professions practicing under similar conditions at the same time and locality.

Notwithstanding the above, in the event that the contract specifies that portions of the Work be performed in accordance with a performance standard, the design services shall be performed so as to achieve such standards.

(2) Neither the Government's review, approval or acceptance of, nor payment for, the services required under this contract, shall be construed to operate as a waiver of any rights under this contract or of any cause of action arising out of the performance of this contract. The Contractor shall be and remain liable to the Government in accordance with applicable law for all damages to the Government caused by the Contractor's negligent performance of any of these services furnished under this contract.

(3) The rights and remedies of the Government provided for under this contract are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law.

(4) If the Contractor is comprised of more than one legal entity, each entity shall be jointly and severally liable hereunder.

(d) Contractor's Role during the Design Process. The Contractor's construction management key personnel shall be actively involved during the design process to effectively integrate the design and construction requirements of this contract. In addition to the typical required construction activities, the Contractor's involvement includes, but is not limited to actions such as: integrating the design schedule into the Master Schedule to maximize the effectiveness of fast-tracking design and construction (within the limits allowed in the contract), ensuring constructability and economy of the design, integrating the shop drawing and installation drawing process into the design, executing the material and equipment acquisition programs to meet critical schedules, effectively interfacing the design and construction quality control (QC) management programs with the design QC program, and maintaining and providing the design team with accurate, up-to-date redline and as-built documentation for eventual submission as Record Drawings.. The Contractor shall require and manage the active involvement of key trade subcontractors in the above activities.

(e) Deviating from the Accepted Design. The Contractor must obtain the approval of the Designer of Record and the Government's concurrence, in the form of supplemental agreement to the contract, for any Contractor-proposed revision to the professionally stamped-and-sealed and Government-reviewed final design that has been released for Construction before proceeding with the revision. The Government reserves the right to disapprove such a revision.

(1) The Government reserves the right to non-concur with any revision to the final design that has been released for construction, including those which may impact furniture, furnishings, equipment selections or operations decisions that were made, based on the reviewed design.

(2) Any Contractor-proposed revision to the design which deviates from the contract requirements (i.e., the Request for Proposal (RFP) and the accepted proposal), will require a bilateral modification (e.g. supplemental agreement) to the contract before any work commences.

(3) Unless the Government initiates a change to the contract requirements, or the

Government determines that the Government furnished design criteria are incorrect and must be revised, any Contractor initiated proposed change to the contract requirements, which results in additional cost, shall strictly be at the Contractor's expense.

(4) The Contractor shall track all approved revisions to the reviewed and accepted design and shall incorporate them into the as-built design documentation, in accordance with agreed procedures. The Designer of

USACE Acquisition Instruction (UAI) Version 5 dated 3 JUNE 2019

Record shall document its professional concurrence on the as-builts for any revisions in the stamped and sealed drawings and specifications.

(f) Value Engineering after Award. In reference to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.248-3, Value Engineering - Construction, the Government may refuse to entertain a "Value Engineering Change Proposal" (VECP) for those "performance oriented" aspects of the Solicitation documents which were addressed in the Contractor's accepted contract proposal and which were evaluated in competition with other offerors for award of this contract.

(1) The Government may consider a VECP for those "prescriptive" aspects of the Solicitation documents, not addressed in the Contractor's accepted contract proposal or addressed but evaluated only for minimum conformance with the Solicitation requirements.

(2) For purposes of this clause, the term "performance oriented" refers to those aspects of the design criteria or other contract requirements, which allow the offeror or Contractor certain latitude, choice of and flexibility to propose in its accepted proposal a choice of design, technical approach, design solution, construction approach or other approach to fulfill the contract requirements. Such requirements generally tend to be expressed in terms of functions to be performed, performance required or essential physical characteristics, without dictating a specific process or specific design solution for achieving the desired result.

(3) In contrast, for purposes of this clause, the term "prescriptive" refers to those aspects of the design criteria or other Solicitation requirements wherein the Government expressed the design solution or other requirements in terms of specific material, approaches, systems, and/or processes to be used. Prescriptive aspects typically allow the offerors little or no freedom in the choice of design approach, materials, fabrication techniques, methods of installation, or any other approach to fulfill the contract requirements.

(g) Warranty of Design. The Contractor warrants that the design shall be performed in accordance with the contract requirements. Design and design related construction not conforming to the Contract requirements shall be corrected at no additional cost to the Government. The standard of care for design is defined in paragraph c of this clause, Responsibility of the Contractor for Design.

(1) The period of this warranty shall commence upon final completion and the

Government's acceptance of the work, or in the case of the Government's beneficial occupancy of all or part of the work for its convenience, prior to final completion and acceptance, at the time of such occupancy.

(2) This design warranty shall be effective from the above event through the Statute of Limitations and Statute of Repose or host nation law, as applicable to the place of construction performance.

(3) The rights and remedies of the Government provided for under this clause are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided in this contract or by law.

(h) Government Re-Use of Design. In conjunction with the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 252.227-7022, Government Rights (Unlimited), the Government will not ask for additional originals or copies of the design works after the Contractor provides all required design documentation and record drawing documentation under the instant contract. Further, if the Government uses the design for other projects without additional compensation to the Contractor for re-use, the Government releases the Contractor from liability in the design on the other projects, due to defects in the design that are not the result of fraud, gross mistake as amounts to fraud, gross negligence or intentional misrepresentation.

(End of clause)

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 06-Jun-2022 12:00 PM to 08-Jul-2022 02:00 PM.

SECTION 00 21 16 - INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

The following have been modified:

PHASE I PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

PHASE I SOLICIATION PROVISIONS

General: This Request for Proposal (RFP) seeks proposals from Offerors interested in being selected for the design and construction of the DLA HQ Elevator Modernization. This is Phase I of a two-phase FP. This RFP is requesting submission of proposal under Phase I submission criteria ONLY. After evaluating Phase I proposals, the Contracting Officer will select the most highly qualified Offerors and request that only those Offerors submit proposal for Phase II. The maximum number of Offerors will be selected to submit Phase II proposal shall not exceed five (5). Offerors shall not submit any proposals under Phase II submission criteria at this time. Phase II of the solicitation will be issued in an amendment directly to those Offerors selected for Phase II. Submitting any information under Phase II criteria may lead to disqualification of your proposal. This is an unrestricted competitive RFP. Offerors responding to this RFP are required to submit their proposals in accordance wit the instruction contained in this Section 00 21 16. A contract will be awarded to the Offeror whose proposal represents the “Best Value” to the Government. The best value determination will be based on a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation.

FACTOR 1 – PAST PERFORMANCE: The submitted material MUST be organized sequentially under tabs for each numbered section to facilitate evaluation. All narratives must contain sufficient detail to demonstrate technical capability.

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

The Offeror shall provide a teaming agreement with their proposed Designer.

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 solicitation, the prime contractor must have completed at least fifty percent (50%) of the total number of projects that meet the requirements for Factor 1 for consideration in response to the experience requirements of this solicitation.

All teaming agreements/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.

1.1 EXPERIENCE IN RELEVANT PROJECTS: The Offeror shall submit information on at least two (2) but no more than four (4) Design-Build (DB) and/or Design-Bid-Build (DBB) projects demonstrating the Offeror’s recent and relevant experience. If the Offeror’s submission exceeds the maximum project limitation of four

(4) completed projects, the first four (4) projects submitted will be evaluated only, while the remaining additional project(s) will not be evaluated. These projects must be of relevant scope and complexity and demonstrate a minimum completion value of $2,800,000 considering adjustment for escalation from project completion to 2022 (all escalation 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.) and address the discussions requested on Attachment A while meeting the teaming agreement requirements in section above.

Completed projects must have a 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. The 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.

Note: In reference to Task Order Construction Contracts (TOCCs)/Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contracts, these base contracts will not be accepted as a project submission; however, individual task orders/delivery orders on TOCCs and/or ID/IQ contracts can be submitted under Factor 1. Each task/delivery order submitted must individually meet the requirements of the factor. Submissions of multiple task/delivery orders as a project will not be accepted or evaluated.

At least one (1) project must be a Design-Build (DB) project from the Offeror. At least one (1) project must demonstrate Design-Build (DB) experience from the proposed Designer. For projects demonstrating past experience from the designer, one hundred percent (100%) of the design and at least seventy five percent (75%) of the construction of each project must be completed by the original date of issuance of this solicitation.

For projects demonstrating past experience for the construction contractor, one hundred percent (100%) of the construction must be complete.

In order for a project to be considered relevant, the project must include at least two (2) or more of the following elements with each project demonstrating at least one of the first three (3) elements (discussion/documentation of additional elements may be considered more highly). Each element must have a description of how the project meets the element (e.g. concrete paving – For this project, 500 LF of concrete sidewalks were installed, 300 LF of curbs were removed and re-installed, etc.):

• Experience designing/modernizing/installing/commissioning various types of elevators to include freight traction and/or passenger elevators.

• Experience designing/modernizing/installing/commissioning hydraulic elevators with a minimum capacity of 3,500 lbs.

• Experience designing and installing an elevator remote monitoring system throughout the facility and/or campus.

• Experience working concurrently in multiple buildings on the same work site/installation.

• Experience working in an occupied facility. Must include discussion of how the work waFs phased/coordinated to accommodate access to facility occupants.

*Lists, charts/matrices, and bullets will not be accepted when identifying relevant elements.

It is the responsibility of the Offeror to identify, detail and demonstrate the relevancy of the submitted projects to the solicitation criteria elements. The evaluation committee WILL NOT make assumptions.

The information that is required to be supplied is identified on the form provided 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. Offerors may expand the form as necessary to accommodate the required project information.

The only submissions under the tab for this section are to be the completed “Attachment A” forms or similar format as indicated above. Only the information provided in either of these formats will be considered. Company summaries/introductions, project summary charts/matrixes, etc. will not be accepted or evaluated.

1.2 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRES EXPERIENCE IN RELEVANT PROJECTS:

For each of the projects submitted, provide a copy of the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) report, or USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ-0) (Attachment B) from a representative of the owner. The Offeror must request that their client complete the USACE Past Performance Questionnaire for Relevant Experience (Form PPQ-0) and submit the questionnaire as part of the Offeror’s technical proposal. The Offeror may provide an explanation if the performance evaluation rating is less than satisfactory. Offerors are encouraged to follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires.

If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the proposal closing date, the Offeror must complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment B) for projects submitted under the tab for EXPERIENCE IN RELEVANT PROJECTS, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the owner point of contact.

Previously completed PPQ-0s may be submitted provided that the documents do not reference any other solicitations.

Submitted PPQ-0s must only reference this solicitation. Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) ratings will take precedence over PPQs.

Past Performance information may be obtained from other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Contractor Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or other databases using all CAGE/DUNS number 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. 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.

d. The past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality.

(i) RECENCY: The first aspect is to evaluate the recency of the offeror’s past performance.

Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information.

(ii) RELEVANCY: The second aspect is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection.

Relevancy is not separately rated; however, the following criteria (see Table 2) will be used to establish what is relevant which shall include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming.

Table 2 - Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition

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

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

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

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

(iii) QUALITY ASSESSMENT: The third aspect assesses the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. Documented results from Past Performance Questionnaires, interviews, CPARS, and other sources form the support and basis for this assessment.

e. Performance Confidence Assessment: Utilize the Performance Confidence Assessment (see Table 3 below) to select the most appropriate confidence level for each Offeror. Ensure the rationale for the conclusions reached are included.

TABLE 3 - Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Definition

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

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

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the facto 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. FACTOR 2 – MANAGEMENT APPROACH: The submitted material MUST be organized sequentially under tabs/pages for each numbered section to facilitate evaluation. All narratives must contain sufficient detail to demonstrate technical capability. All narratives/responses must be specific to the solicitation requirements (boilerplates and company histories/summaries will not be accepted) and contain sufficient detail to demonstrate management capability.

2.1 Describe the proposed management structure for the team to include both the construction and design firms, the resources available to each firm and how those resources will be utilized, their roles and responsibilities, and what subcontracting firms the Offeror is considering utilizing. Describe how subcontractors are managed by the contractor to include flow-down of contract requirements, duties, responsibilities, and coordination. Discuss how non-performance by subcontractors is handled by the general contractor.

Offerors are encouraged to describe prior experience working with their proposed designer.

The Offerors must also provide a statement that, in accordance with the specifications of the RFP, all individuals, including subcontractors, will be able to gain access to the Fort Belvoir installation and adhere to current access requirements.

Note: The Offerors down selected to Phase II will be required to possess a secret security clearance.

2.1a FACILITY SECURITY CLEARANCE:

To work in POD 10, the Prime Contractor and all Subcontractors (at all tiers) must possess an active Facility Security Clearance (FCL) at the Secret level prior to award. This is a requirement in order to be awarded the project.

2.1b BUILDING SECURITY:

The Prime Contractor shall be responsible for safeguarding all Government property provided for Contractor use. At the close of each work period, Government facilities, equipment and materials shall be secured.

Contractor personnel that require access to POD 10 infrastructure shall possess at a minimum a SECRET level as verified through the Joint Personnel Adjudication System (JPAS). Prior to commencement of work, the Prime Contractor shall provide Visit Authorization Requests in accordance with the National Industrial Security Program Manual (DOD 5220.22-M) and any instructions contained in the DD Form 254 (Contract Security Classification Specification), on all personnel that will be required to have access to DTRA infrastructure.

Entrance into the facility is Access Controlled and all persons and vehicles are subject to search. All Contractor or sub-Contractor personnel shall be required to sign-in upon entry into the building unless a badge has been issued to the Contractor personnel. All Contractor personnel who work in the HQC shall be required to fill out the necessary information to obtain a badge. All Contractor employees must receive a favorable background investigation. If the background investigations are unfavorable, HQC (Command Security) Command security will make the determination to allow access to the HQC. The cost of the background investigation shall be the responsibility of the Contractor. Once the Contractor's personnel have passed the background investigation, the Security Divisions will issue appropriate badges.

2.2 Describe the role and interaction of the design team with the construction team during construction to include design quality control; tracking design evolution and changes during design to meet the schedule; management of the design during construction, including control and approval of revisions to the accepted design; requests for information; shop drawing and submittal reviews and approvals; progress meetings; site visits, if any; and as-built drawings.

In accordance with the Army Source Selection Supplement (AS3), Section 3.1, the Army methodology for evaluating Management Approach and Related Risk is the Combined Technical/Risk Rating, (see Table 1 below). This methodology considers risk, in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

3. EVALUATION CRITERIA

3.1 VOLUME I – EVALUATION CRITERIA (TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, PHASE I – FACTORS 1 AND 2)

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the technical requirements with a statement of intent to perform will not demonstrate an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal.

3.2 FACTOR 1 – PAST PERFORMANCE & EXPERIENCE: All submissions by Offerors must demonstrate the minimum requirements for experience in relevant projects, as stated in paragraph 2.2 above. Validation of Offeror performance may occur through contacting the client point of contact (POC) provided by the Offeror on the first page of the PPQ and various government and commercial sources.

Past Performance evaluations will be rated in terms of performance confidence for the Government; that is, projects that are considered to be less relevant in terms of size, scope or complexity, dollar value, and/or demonstrating low past performance evaluation ratings will be interpreted as indicators of less confidence that the Offeror can successfully perform the work. More relevant projects and high past performance evaluations will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. Higher confidence assessments will be given for higher past performance evaluation ratings.

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description

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

Purple 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.

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

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

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

Proposal is unawardable.

Demonstrating previous experience working directly with the proposed designer on multiple projects could be considered a stronger predictor of future success and increase the past performance confidence assessment. Higher confidence assessments will be given for higher past performance evaluation ratings and for successful experience with the proposed designer.

Projects that include three (3) or more elements may be considered more relevant and may be considered a stronger predictor of future success and increase the past performance confidence assessment. Additional consideration may be given to teams that submit three (3) or more projects that demonstrate experience installing elevators to include freight traction and passenger elevators.

Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Contractor Performance 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.

In the case of Offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance information is not available, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past contract performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv).) In this case, the Offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of “neutral.”

3.3 FACTOR 2 – MANAGEMENT APPROACH: The Offeror’s narrative will meet the requirements of this RFP if the narrative is a specific discussion that addresses the elements identified in paragraphs 2.1 in sufficient detail to demonstrate management capability. The narrative must clearly demonstrate a reasonable approach to the contract, an understanding of the requirements of this contract and a plan that has clearly applied the information provided in paragraphs 2.2 which will lead to successful completion of all work within the contract duration.

SECTION 00 73 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS

The following have been added by full text:

SECURITY LANGUAGE

SECURITY LANGUAGE FOR UNCLASSIFIED CONTRACTS

All Contractor employees (U.S. citizens and Non- U.S. citizens) working under this contract (to include grants, cooperative agreements and task orders) who require access to Automated Information Systems (AIS), (standalone computers, network computers/systems, e-mail) shall, at a minimum, be designated into an ADP-III position (nonsensitive) in accordance with DoD 5220-22-R, Industrial Security Regulation. The investigative requirements for an ADP-III position are a favorable National Agency Check (NAC), SF-85P, Public Trust W912DR20R0003 Page 57 of 73 Position. The contractor shall have each applicable employee complete a SF-85P and submit to the Security Officer, Baltimore District, Corps of Engineers, 2 Hopkins Plaza, Baltimore Maryland 21201 within three (3) working days after award of any contract or task order, and shall be submitted prior to the individual being permitted access to an AIS. Contractors that have a commercial or government entity (CAGE) Code and Facility Security

Clearance through the Defense Security Service shall process the NACs and forward visit requests/results of NAC to Security Officer, Baltimore District, Corps of Engineers, 2 Hopkins Plaza, Baltimore Maryland 21201. For those contractors that do not have a CAGE Code or Facility Security Clearance, the Security Office, Baltimore District, Corps of Engineers, will process the investigation in coordination with the Contractor and contract employees.

In accordance with Engineering Regulation, ER 380-1-18, Section 4, foreign nationals who work on Corps of Engineers’ contracts or task orders shall be approved by the HQUSACE Foreign Disclosure Officer or higher before beginning work on the contract/task order. This regulation includes subcontractor employees. (NOTE: exceptions to the above requirement include foreign nationals who perform janitorial and/or ground maintenance services.)

The contractor shall submit to the Division/District Contract Office, the names of all foreign nationals proposed for performance under this contract/task order, along with documentation to verify that he/she was legally admitted into the United States and has authority to work and/or go to school in the US. Such documentation may include a US passport, Certificate of US citizenship (INS Form N-560 or N-561), Certificate of Naturalization (INS Form N-550 or N-570), foreign passport with I-551 stamp or attached INS Form I-94 indicating employment authorization, Alien Registration Receipt Card with photograph (INS Form I-151 or I-551), Temporary Resident Card (INS Form I-688), Employment Authorization Card (INS Form I-688A), Reentry Permit (INS Form I-327), Refugee Travel Document (INS Form I-571), Employment Authorization Document issued by the INS which contains a photograph (INS Form I- 688B)

(End of Summary of Changes)

NAVFAC / USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) Form PPQ -0 (9/30/11)

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

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

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

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

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

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

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

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

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

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

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

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

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

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE requests that the client completes this questionnaire and submits directly back to the offeror.

The offeror will submit the completed questionnaire to USACE with their proposal, and may duplicate this questionnaire for future submission on USACE solicitations. Clients are highly encouraged to submit questionnaires directly to the offeror. However, questionnaires may be submitted directly to USACE. Please contact the offeror for USACE POC information. The Government reserves the right to verify any and all information on this form.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

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

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

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

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

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

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

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

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

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

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

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

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

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

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

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

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

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes;

responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer? E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force? E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

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

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

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes E VG S M U N

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

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client

E VG S M U N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E VG S M U N

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section. Yes No

e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below. Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues?

(Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements. E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

E VG S M U N

b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues) E VG S M U N

c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below) Yes No

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor. E VG S M U N

Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks. Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary):