Amendment_0001.pdf

W16ROE40913097

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1. Replace sections 00 22 10 and 00 22 20 in their entirety.

2. Proposal due date is hereby extended to 18 June 2014 at 2:00pm EST.

NOTE: Bidders must acknow ledge receipt of this amendment by the date specified in the solicitation (or as amended) by one of the follow ing methods. In the space provided on the SF 1442, by separate letter, or by signing the block 15 below . FAILURE TO ACKNOWLEDGE AMNEDMENTS BY THE DATE AND TIME SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR BID IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LATE BID, LATE

MODIFICATION OF BIDS OR LATE WITHDRAWAL OF BIDS (FAR 14.304)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 36

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 11-Jun-2014

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 W912DS-14-R-0006

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

15-May-2014

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

11-Jun-2014

CODE

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, NEW YORK

26 FEDERAL PLAZA, RM 1843

NEW YORK NY 10278-0090

W912DS 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912DS-14-R-0006

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 21 16 - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICE TO OFFEROR

The following have been modified:

PHASE ONE INSTRUCTIONS 00 22 1

SECTION IV

SOLICITATION SECTION 00 22 10

PHASE ONE OF TWO PHASE DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.0 OVERVIEW

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

3.0 PHASE 1 PROPOSAL AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

4.0 TAB A – FACTOR 1 – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

4.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

4.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.0 TAB B – FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

5.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

6.0 TAB C – STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

7.0 PHASE 1 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

7.1 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

7.2 EVALUATION

7.3 DEFINITIONS

7.4 EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

7.5 PAST PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT RATING SYSTEM

PHASE ONE – SECTION 00 22 10 ATTACHMENTS

FORM A1 – PROPOSAL DATA SHEETS

FORM A2 – PAST EXPERIENCE CONSTRUCTION OF PRIME CONTRACTOR

FORM A3 – PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

1.0 OVERVIEW

This is the first phase of a two phase solicitation, in accordance with FAR 36.3, for all work described in this solicitation. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein, and award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible Offeror, whose proposal conforms with all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and whose proposal is determined to represent the top rated proposal from phase one evaluations and the best value to the Government from the phase two proposal evaluations.

In Phase one of the two phase design-build selection procedure, interested firms or joint venture entities (referred to as ”offerors”) submit specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully execute the design-build construction contract resulting from this solicitation.

The Government will evaluate the performance capability proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein and will short-list no more than five (5) of the Phase one offerors to compete for the design-build contract in Phase two.

In Phase two, the short-listed offerors will submit proposals in accordance with Section 00 22 20.

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 Who May Submit - This is an Unrestricted procurement. Any legally organized Offeror may submit a proposal.

2.2 Prospective Offerors should submit inquiries related to this solicitation only by e-mail to:

E-MAIL ADDRESS: Matthew.Guilday@usace.army.mil Include the solicitation number, and project title with any questions/clarifications. Written questions must be received by this office not later than 7 calendar days prior to the date set for receipt of offers. TELEPHONE INQUIRIES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

Oral explanations or instructions are not binding. Any information given to an Offeror which impacts the solicitation and/or offer will be given in the form of a written amendment to the solicitation.

As this is a competitive negotiation acquisition, there is no public proposal opening and no information will be given out as to the number of Offerors or the results of the competition until all awards are made.

2.3 Page Limit and Size of Printed Materials

In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information sufficiently detailed to clearly address submission requirements as outlined below.

The written portion of the phase one proposal shall not exceed 20 pages. A page printed on two sides will be counted as two pages. Any sheet with printed material (text or graphics) shall be considered a page, excluding dividers, cover sheets, letters of commitment, past performance information and/or Joint Venture agreements. All sheets shall be submitted on 8-1/2 x 11 inch paper. Each page shall be minimally single spaced with a minimum 12-point font and one inch margins all around. Each page of Volume I shall be numbered sequentially.

2.4 Joint Ventures

a. When an Offeror is submitting a proposal as a joint venture, all members of the joint venture must sign the SF 1442 and any financial surety instrument that is required, unless a written agreement by all members of the joint venture is furnished with the proposal designating one firm with the legal authority to bind the other member(s) of the joint venture. Signatures on the written agreement designating one member of the joint venture as having legal authority to bind all other members of the joint venture must be executed by the duly authorized representatives of the respective joint venture members. All joint venture members will remain jointly and severally liable for all actions, representations, and other activities by the joint venture and by other joint venture members in connection with this solicitation and subsequent contract. A copy of the joint venture agreement and agreement providing evidence of the authority to legally bind all other members of the joint venture must be submitted with the Offeror’s proposal. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements may eliminate the proposal from further consideration.

b. If submitting a proposal as a joint venture, the experience, past performance, and other information about each of the joint venture partners can be submitted for the joint venture. The experience of each joint venture partner will be considered the experience of the joint venture entity. Joint ventures must also submit the following additional documentation:

1) A copy of the Joint Venture Agreement.

2) A detailed statement outlining the following in terms of percentages, where appropriate:

i. The relationship of the joint venture parties in terms of business ownership, capital contribution, and profit distribution or loss sharing.

ii. The structure of the joint venture and decision making responsibilities of the joint venture parties in terms of who will control the manner and method of performance of the work under the contract.

iii. Identification of key personnel having the authority to bind the joint venture to any and all agreements, including any subcontracts, executed by the joint venture.

iv. Identification of party or parties maintaining the joint venture bank accounts for the payment of all expenses and the deposit of all receipts, keeping the books and records of the joint venture, and paying applicable taxes for the joint venture.

v. Identification of party or parties having overall control of the joint venture.

c. Other sections of the proposal shall identify, where appropriate, whether key personnel are employees of the individual joint venture entities and identify the entity, or whether they are hired directly as employees of the joint venture.

d. A complete and legally binding document with all information required under this section titles

“Joint Ventures” shall be included in Volume I of the proposal.

2.6 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS

2.6.1 Proposal Requirements and Submission

Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms. Do not assume that Offerors will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss or revise their proposals.

Do not submit any material not required by this solicitation (such as company or system brochures).

Offerors must meet all technical portions (construction criteria) of the RFP. The fact that the technical specifications and the drawings are not evaluated factors during solicitation does not relieve the Offerors from meeting all technical, or other, requirements of the RFP.

The Government will not make assumptions concerning the intent, capabilities, or experiences of the Offerors. Clear identification of proposal details shall rest as sole responsibility of the Offeror.

Therefore the proposal shall meet the following basic requirements:

a. Proposals shall be typed and easy to read. Margins (1-inch) shall be clean and clear.

b. Proposals shall be organized, concise, and submitted in the volumes and in the order indicated herein. Volumes shall be clearly identified and tabbed. Each factor shall be described in a separate tabbed section.

c. Proposals shall contain a Table of Contents and include at the bottom left side of each page the volume and page number.

d. Offerors shall verify that the information for the Point-of-Contacts located in Form A1, is current, correct and complete including email address and telephone number, and fax number if available.

f. Offerors shall submit a signed Offer (Standard Form 1442) for this solicitation including verification of all amendments received.

g. Offerors are reminded that elaborate corporate marketing information, formatting, special reproduction techniques, and the like are not necessary. However, proposals shall completely and adequately address the requirements of this solicitation.

h. Failing to submit attachments or failing to properly complete the proposal, may result in rejection of the Offer without further evaluation. Therefore, Offerors are urged to follow instructions and contact the Contract Specialist if instructions are not understood.

2.6.2 Where to Submit

Offerors shall submit their proposal packages to the Corps of Engineers (USACE) at the address shown in Block 7 of Standard Form 1442.

FAXED OR EMAILED PROPOSALS, MODIFICATIONS THERETO, OR CANCELLATIONS

WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. However, proposals may be withdrawn in writing by letter or e-mail.

Any written notice to withdraw an offer sent to this office must be received in the office designated in the Request for Proposal (RFP) for receipt of offers not later than the exact date and time set for receipt of proposals.

2.6.3 Submission Deadline

The USACE must receive proposals not later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

Due to increased security on packages, your proposals may take longer than anticipated in arriving to New York District's Contracting Office in Room 1843. It is the sole responsibility of the Offeror to ensure that its proposal arrives by the designated date and time.

2.6.4 Incurring Costs

The Government is not liable for any costs incurred by the Offerors submitting an offer in response to this solicitation.

2.6.5 Format Requirements

Submit one (1) original plus five (5) copies and (1) CD containing a digital copy of the proposal. In the event that there is a discrepancy between the original or copies, the original will control. All proposals shall contain the volume number and the name, address and telephone number of the Prime and Major Subcontractors, Joint Venture, or other entity identified on the cover. Note that a letter of commitment from the Subcontractor is required in order for the Subcontractor to be considered in the evaluation. The original proposal must be clearly marked as “ORIGINAL” and the original signatures must be in blue ink. Copies of the proposals must also be clearly marked as “COPY x of y (i.e. COPY 1 of 5)”. Proposal clarity and material organization in each volume are mandatory. No material shall be incorporated by reference. Each volume will be submitted separately bound. The proposal shall address and contain the information listed below.

The information will be used by the Source Selection Board to evaluate each proposal. Offerors are advised that conciseness and relevance of the proposal is important and unrelated information will not be evaluated. Proposals that provide only superficial coverage of the information required below may not receive additional consideration and may be excluded from the competitive range.

Additionally, should the proposal include any terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation, the proposal may be determined to be "unacceptable" and thus ineligible for award.

3.0 PHASE 1: PROPOSAL AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

Location Factor Number Description Relative Importance TAB A Factor 1 Specialized Experience Equally as Important as Factor 2 TAB B Factor 2 Past Performance Equally as Important as Factor 1 TAB C Pro Forma

Information N/A

4.0 TAB A – Factor 1: SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

To demonstrate recent, relevant experience, the Offeror must use the Specialized Experience forms – (Attachment 2 for construction experience). Submit projects that are currently well underway (designed and at least 75% construction progress completed) or completed and turned over no longer than ten (10) years preceding the date of this Solicitation. If any firm has multiple divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division submitting the offer. The Offeror shall submit no more than five (5) projects. Letters of commitment (signed by both the subcontractor and Offeror) are required in order for the Government to consider subcontractor experience in the proposal evaluation.

EVALUATION CRITERIA:

The Offeror will be evaluated on the relevancy of the experience demonstrated in the submitted EXPERIENCE INFORMATION FACT SHEET, Form A2. Factor 1 shall be rated in accordance with Paragraph 8.4. The projects submitted should include the following criteria. Projects do not have to include all of the criteria; however, projects that meet many or all of the criteria would be given a higher degree of relevancy.

Projects shall be considered similar in scope if they are construction of a new commercial, institutional or industrial facility located in a VE flood zone. If the project is not located in the VE flood zone, it is still considered similar if it demonstrates reinforced concrete wall construction and pile foundations.

Projects shall be considered similar in complexity if they contain the management and coordination of a multi-disciplined construction team to complete projects that included the majority of the following, foundation piles, steel superstructure, reinforced concrete construction, new building HVAC system, building electrical, and site/civil construction similar to this project.

Projects shall be considered similar in magnitude if they are over $18,000,000. The magnitude shall be that of the project, not the subcontract amount if it is an experience as a subcontractor.

However the subcontractors role must be clearly defined in the project experience submission.

The Government will consider the combination of experience demonstrated by the five (5) projects.

Proposals will be highly rated when the Offeror demonstrates extensive experience in all or nearly all of the aspects defining relevance and listed below. Where this combination of experience includes the following, the proposal may be given strengths (the following list does not encompass all possible strengths):

- Projects demonstrating multi-disciplined construction teams consisting of the majority of the disciplines listed under the complexity definition.

- The Offeror acted as a prime contractor in the majority of the example experiences;

- The majority of the example experiences are projects performed for the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers;

- The majority of the example experiences are projects performed within the last three years;

- The example experiences demonstrate previous teaming experience between current proposal team members.

- Projects with magnitudes over $25M.

- Projects demonstrating experience where the construction site had an active customer on it where a high level of coordination was necessary for both the construction to be successful and the customer to remain operational.

Where this combination of experience includes the following, the proposal may be given weaknesses (the following list does not encompass all possible weaknesses):

- Few or no projects are provided where the Offeror acted as Prime contractor.

- Example experience where the project amount was below $18M.

- Example experiences where the Offeror or their proposed subcontractor were subcontractors and their role was minor in comparison to the whole project.

- Example experiences are from proposed subcontractors in lieu of the Offeror.

- The example experiences do not demonstrate previous teaming experience between current proposal team members.

- Experience examples are not verifiable.

The Government reserves the right to verify the experience by reviewing the Construction Contractor (or Architect-Engineer) Appraisal Support System (CCASS/ACASS), other DOD or Government appraisal systems or to interview commercial owners or references. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information. The relevant experience of key personnel proposed for this project will not be evaluated or considered under this factor.

5.0 TAB B – FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

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. 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 the proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (FORM A2), 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, Contract Specialist via email at Matthew.Guilday@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

Also include performance recognition documents received within the last five (5) years such as 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.

In addition, the Offeror is required to provide information on past projects (within the past five (5) years) in which they have been issued a CURE NOTICE, have been terminated for default or have been issued a negative past performance rating (either interim or final) and provide accompanying information as to the details for such action(s) with an explanation of why they were issued a cure notice or negative rating and what actions their organization have taken or would take to ensure that their performance on this project will not warrant a similar cure notice or negative rating.

EVALUATION CRITERIA:

The Government will evaluate the relevancy of the Offeror’s record of past performance information in accordance with the table in paragraph 8.5.

Based on the Offeror’s recent relevant performance record, the Government will make a determination as to the expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort. A performance confidence assessment rating will be assigned in accordance with the table in paragraph 8.5.

Where 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 will receive an Unknown Confidence (neutral) rating. This rating is neither favorable nor unfavorable.

6.0 TAB C - STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PRO FORMA DATA

6.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Must contain a Proposal Cover Sheet, to include the Offeror’s e-mail address, cell phone number, Name, Address, DUNS, and CAGE code. The proposal cover sheet is required by Provision “FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors—Competitive Acquisition.”

Must contain the signed, dated Standard Form 1442, Solicitation, Offer, and Award. Any and all amendments must be acknowledged by the Offeror in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30, Amendment of Solicitation.

7.0 PHASE 1 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

7.1 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

The SSEB will be established to conduct the evaluation of proposals received in response to this solicitation. The evaluation will be based on the content of the proposal, proposal corrections and any information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information. The SSEB will not consider any proposal incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

7.2 EVALUATION

The SSEB will evaluate the proposals and assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor. Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts for the Phase 1 submission, and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to determine their performance capability. 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 1. The Government will determine the (up to) top five (5) best qualified firms and ask that they submit a phase two proposal. Phase one successful offerors and unsuccessful offerors will be notified upon completion of phase one evaluations.

7.3 DEFINITIONS

7.3.1 Deficiency: A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. A proposal containing a “deficiency” is unawardable.

7.3.2 Weakness: A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

7.3.3 Significant Weakness: A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

7.3.4 Strength: Any aspect of a proposal that, when judged against a stated evaluation criterion, enhances the merit of the proposal or increases the probability of successful performance of the contract.

7.3.5 Significant Strength A significant strength appreciably enhances the merit of a proposal or appreciably enhances the probability of successful contract performance.

7.4 EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

7.4.1 General: The Government will review the proposals and rate the quality of each evaluation factor and subfactor(s). The SSEB will rate each proposal against the specified evaluation criteria in the Solicitation requirements. They will not compare proposals at this time. After all proposals are rated, the Government will compare the ratings and relative advantages and disadvantages of proposals against each other in order to determine which Offerors are the most highly qualified under Phase 1 to short-list for participation in Phase 2.

7.4.2 Review Write-up: The Government will support each rating with a narrative, separately listing all strengths or advantages, weaknesses or disadvantages, deficiencies, and required clarifications.

7.4.3 Rating System: After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies, the SSEB will assign an adjective rating of “Outstanding”, “Good”, “Acceptable”, “Marginal”, or “Unacceptable” to each factor (except for the Past Performance Factor), which reflect the Government's confidence in each offeror's technical ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the RFP.

The adjectival ratings shall be assigned, using the following criteria, which incorporate a proposal risk assessment:

7.4.4 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.

7.4.5 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..

7.4.6 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.

7.4.7 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.

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

Proposal is unawardable.

7.5 PAST PERFORMANCE (CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT RATING SYSTEM)

7.5.1 Past Performance Risk Ratings assess the risks associated with an offeror's likelihood of success in performing the requirements stated in the RFP based on the offeror's demonstrated performance on recent, relevant contracts. Performance Confidence Assessment (Overall) Rating System:

(a) Unknown 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.

(b) 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.

(c) 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.

(d) 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.

7.5.2 Past performance relevancy ratings.

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

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

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

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

FORM A1

PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

1. Name of Solicitation:

2. Name of Firm:

Address:

Phone:

Fax:

E-mail:

DUNS # (used for accessing the Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS) or A-E

Contractor Administration Support System (ACASS) Database)

Also provide any other assigned number that identifies the member firm(s) in the ACASS or CCASS databases. If a separate DUNS has been created for a joint venture (J-V) it must also be submitted.

Provide a DUNS number for each company identified in any proposed Contractor-subcontractor association of firms. If the firm is a joint venture or contractor-subcontractor association of firms, list the individual firms and briefly describe the nature of the association. Provide DUNS for each. If the Offeror has never done work with the Government, provide the Tax ID number (TIN).

Firm 1:

Firm 2:

Firm 3:

Nature of Association:

3. AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATORS. FAR 52.215-11

The Offeror represents that the following persons are authorized to negotiate on its behalf with the

Government in connection with this Request for Proposals (RFP).

[List names, titles, and telephone number of the authorized negotiator.]

Name of Person Authorized to Negotiate:

Negotiator's Address:

Negotiator's Telephone:

Negotiator’s E-mail:

FORM A2

1. Project name and location (city, country)

2a. Name of Firm that performed this work (this should be the offeror or one of the offeror’s subcontractors)

2b. Offeror’s involvement in this project (write in “Prime”, “Subcontractor”, or “Joint-Venture Partner”) (if submitting subcontractor’s experience tell us what the subcontractor’s involvement was on the project)

3a. Project Owner’s name (Government Agency, commercial firm or other organization)

3b. Project Owner's complete address

4. Contract number of project

5. Date contract was signed

6. Date work was begun 7. Date work was completed or is scheduled for completion

8. Initial contract price (if this is experience where the Offeror is acting as a subcontractor, put amount of money the Offeror was responsible for and total contract amount).

USD $

9. Current Contract amount (if this is experience where the Offeror is acting as a subcontractor, put amount of money the Offeror was responsible for and total contract amount).

USD $

10a. Technical point of contact of the Project Owner (name, title, e-mail address, phone number and fax number)

10b. Contracting point of contact of the Project Owner (name, title, e-mail address, phone and fax numbers)

11. Description of Design and Construction work (describe scope of project and DETAILED nature and scope of work actually performed by the Offeror (or proposed Subcontractor). For additional explanation, please attach a continuation sheet.

12. Current status of the project (fill in % complete)

The work is ________ % complete.

(If not 100%, indicate current status, on-schedule, behind, terminated for convenience, etc.)

13. English Speaking point of contact for Past Performance information (if different from Project Owner) (name, title, e-mail address, phone and fax numbers)

14. Explain any Problem(s) Encountered and Solution(s) to Resolve them. If the initial completion date or initial contract amount changed during performance of the work, or there were any safety issues, the offeror must provide an explanation here. If no problems were encountered and the contract was completed within the original schedule and budget, state so here.

For additional explanation, please attach a continuation sheet.

FORM A3

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 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 E VG S M U N and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes

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):

PHASE TWO INSTRUCTIONS 00 22 2

SECTION V

SOLICITATION SECTION 00 22 20

PHASE TWO OF TWO PHASE DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.0 NOTICE TO OFFERORS

2.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS

3.0 PHASE TWO FACTORS FOR EVALUATION

4.0 VOLUME II PRICE PROPOSAL

5.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

6.0 BASIS OF AWARD

PHASE ONE – SECTION 00 22 10 ATTACHMENTS

1 – FORM A4 – KEY PERSONNEL RESUME

1.0 NOTICE TO OFFERORS

This is the second phase of a two phase solicitation, in accordance with FAR 36.3, for all work described in this solicitation. Only Offerors who were determined to be among the (up to) five top qualified firms from phase one proposal evaluations are invited to submit phase two proposals. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein, and award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible Offeror, whose proposal the Source Selection Authority has determined conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, considering all non-price factors described herein, and price. All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are considered significantly more important than the price.

1.2 Who May Submit – Phase two is limited to those determined to be the (up to) five (5) best qualified firms from the phase one proposal evaluations.

1.3 Prospective Offerors should submit inquiries related to this solicitation only by e-mail to:

E-MAIL ADDRESS: Matthew.Guilday@usace.army.mil Include the solicitation number, and project title with any questions/clarifications. Written questions must be received by this office not later than 7 calendar days prior to the date set for receipt of offers. TELEPHONE INQUIRIES WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

Oral explanations or instructions are not binding. Any information given to an Offeror which impacts the solicitation and/or offer will be given in the form of a written amendment to the solicitation.

As this is a competitive negotiation acquisition, there is no public proposal opening and no information will be given out as to the number of Offerors or the results of the competition until all awards are made.

1.4 Page Limit and Size of Printed Materials

In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information sufficiently detailed to clearly address submission requirements as outlined below.

The written portion of the phase two proposal (Volume I - Technical Proposal) shall not exceed 25 pages. A page printed on two sides will be counted as two pages. Any sheet with printed material (text or graphics), excluding dividers, cover sheets and letters of commitment, shall be considered a page. All sheets shall be submitted on 8-1/2 x 11 inch or A4 paper. Each page shall be minimally single spaced with a minimum 12-point font and one inch margins all around.

Each page of Volume I shall be numbered sequentially.

1.5 Joint Ventures

a. When an Offeror is submitting a proposal as a joint venture, all members of the joint venture must sign the SF 1442 and any financial surety instrument that is required, unless a written agreement by all members of the joint venture is furnished with the proposal designating one firm with the legal authority to bind the other member(s) of the joint venture. Signatures on the written agreement designating one member of the joint venture as having legal authority to bind all other members of the joint venture must be executed by the duly authorized representatives of the respective joint venture members. All joint venture members will remain jointly and severally liable for all actions, representations, and other activities by the joint venture and by other joint venture members in connection with this solicitation and subsequent contract. A copy of the joint venture agreement and agreement providing evidence of the authority to legally bind all other members of the joint venture must be submitted with the Offeror’s proposal. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements may eliminate the proposal from further consideration.

2.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 Proposal Requirements and Submission

Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms from a price and technical standpoint. Two (2) separate volumes shall be submitted as Volume I - Technical Proposal and Volume II - Price Proposal. Do not assume that Offerors will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss or revise their proposals.

Do not submit any material not required by this solicitation (such as company or system brochures).

Offerors must meet all technical portions (construction criteria) of the RFP. The fact that the technical specifications and the drawings are not evaluated factors during solicitation does not relieve the Offerors from meeting all technical, or other, requirements of the RFP.

The Government will not make assumptions concerning the intent, capabilities, or experiences of the Offerors. Clear identification of proposal details shall rest as sole responsibility of the Offeror.

Therefore the proposal shall meet the following basic requirements:

a. Proposals shall be typed and easy to read. Margins (1-inch) shall be clean and clear.

b. Proposals shall be organized, concise, and submitted in the volumes and in the order indicated herein. Volumes shall be clearly identified and tabbed. Each factor shall be described in a separate tabbed section.

c. Proposals must be sent in two separate volumes. Each volume shall be contained within a separate 2 or 3 ring binder (no heat or spiral bound volumes). Each volume shall be identified by the solicitation number, volume number, and name, address, and telephone number of the prime Offeror on the cover. Each volume shall contain a Table of Contents and include at the bottom left side of each page the volume and page number.

d. Offerors shall submit the Price Schedule in Volume II, which shall be completed in full including all options. Offerors may be required to provide complete cost and pricing data and certification or information other than cost or pricing data at a later date if needed to adequately evaluate price proposals.

e. Offerors shall submit a signed Offer (Standard Form 1442) in Volume II for this solicitation including verification of all amendments received.

f. Offerors are reminded that elaborate corporate…