W912DS24R0004.pdf

a. Project: Pituf fik J Plant and HEMP Shield at Pituf fik Air Base, Greenland.

b. This Request for Proposal (RFP) is open to US f irms.

c. NAICS Code: 236220, Size Standard: $45,000,000.00

d. Project Magnitude Range: $100,000,000 and $250,000,000

e. Submit proposals no later than the date and time stated in BLOCK 13.

f. Contract Specialist: Adrian Stafford-Brow ne, email: adrian.j.stafford-brow ne@usace.army.mil

ADRIAN STAFFORD-BROWNE 917-790-8087

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

20-Oct-2023

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______5 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________1460 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________52.211-10

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________1 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________20 Nov 2023 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time of fers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______180 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, NEW YORK

26 FEDERAL PLAZA, RM 16-300

NEW YORK NY 10278-0090

W912DS

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

02:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

212-264-3013FAX:TEL: 917-790-8026 TEL: FAX:

W912DS24R0004 133

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 1 Job J Plant Renovation

FFP

All work (includes all plant, labor, and material) for the Renovation of J-Plant as described in the plans and specifications except for work included in items below.

FOB: Destination

PSC CD: Z2EZ

NET AMT

0002 1 Job Construction of HEMP enclosure

FFP

All work (includes all plant, labor, and material) for construction of HEMP enclosure and associated HEMP features (special penetrations, filters) include HEMP conduit to Bldg 4012 as described in plans and specifications.

0003 1 Job Power Generators

FFP

All work (includes all plant, labor, and material) for construction of temporary power generators during construction as described in plans and specifications.

0004 1 Job Electrical Switchgear

FFP

All work (includes all plant, labor, and material) for purchase and installation of Electrical Switchgear and relays within M-Plant, to include all connecting cables as described in plans and specifications.

0005 1 Job Construction of remaining site work

FFP

All work (includes all plant, labor, and material) for construction of remaining site work (5 ft outside of J-Plant) as well as water storage tank as described in the plans and specifications.

0006 1 Job Drawing Submission

FFP

All work for the Final Record Drawing Submission. This line item is pre-priced (USD 250,000.00) and cannot be changed.

$250,000.00

0007 1 Job

OPTION FF&E

FFP

All work associated with procurement delivery and installation of Furniture, Fixtures, & Equipment (FF&E) as listed on the drawings. Optional CLIN 0007 may be exercised, if at all, at any time within 1095 calendar days after NTP.

Execution of any optional items will not extend construction duration.

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

0001 1460 dys. ANP 1 PPMD-MILITARY

BRIAN PACKOWSKI

26 FEDERAL PLAZA ROOM 21-100

NEW YORK NY 10278

917-790-6236

W912DS

0002 1460 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0003 1460 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0004 1460 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0005 1460 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0006 1460 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0007 1460 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

TOTALS/NOTES

TOTAL BASE BID PRICE FOR LINE ITEMS 0001- 0006 _____________ _

TOTAL BASE BID PRICE FOR OPTION LINE ITEM 0007 _____________ _

TOTAL BASE BID + OPTION PRICE FOR LINE ITEMS 0001- 0007 _____________ _

NOTES:

1. All goods must be wrapped accordingly. It should be protected to withstand handling as well as storage and transportation by sea. Due to packing in containers, in warehouse and on ship every package must be able to withstand a pressure from above of at least its own weight. If you have any questions on shipping from Denmark, please contact US Embassy in Copenhagen, Patrick King by e-mail:

patrick.king.23@spaceforce.mil.

2. Proposals must be in US dollars.

3. Offerors are required to submit a price on all the Base and all the Optional Items or their proposals will be rejected.

4. Offerors are reminded that they must submit a price on the issued plans and specifications as amended. Any deviations, conditions or attachments made by the offeror himself, thereto, may render the proposal non-responsive and be cause for its rejection.

5. Line item 0006 is pre-priced at USD $250,000.00 and this price shown may not be changed. This price is set by the Government as assurance to receive final drawings, it may not reflect the actual effort of developing final set. Offerors are to include the balance of actual effort in CLIN 0001, whether credit or additional cost.

6. The Basis of Evaluation will be the proposal that represents the overall value based on price and non-price factors combined.

7. The Offer Acceptance Period is as stated on the Standard Form 1442.

8. The Government shall provide transportation from Norfolk, VA to Pituffik, AB via sealift at no cost to the contractor. All other transportation shall be at the contractor’s expense.

9. Offerors are advised to review the attached DBA waiver along with the DBA clauses to ensure the requirements of the solicitation are met.

Section 00 20 00 - Instructions for Procurement

OFFEROR INQUIRIES

Submission of inquiries will open on 20 October 2023. Please submit technical inquiries and questions relating to this solicitation via email to adrian.j.stafford-browne@usace.army.mil and francis.cashman@usace.army.mil. Submission of inquires will close 13 November 2023 11:59 AM EDT. The Government reserves the right to decline addressing questions received after this date. If an Offeror believes that the requirements in this solicitation contains an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound;

immediately notify the Contract Specialist in writing with supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to award this contract based on the initial bid, as received, without discussions. A prospective vendor who submits a comment or question will receive an acknowledgement via e-mail, followed by an answer after it has been processed by our technical team. All timely questions and approved answers will be made available through an amendment which will be posted on sam.gov as soon as the comment/question entering period is over and answers are all finalized.

ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION

(a) Definition.

Electronic proposal, as used in this provision, means a proposal, revision or modification of a proposal, or withdrawal of a proposal that is transmitted to and received by the Government via electronic commerce (see FAR Subpart 4.5 -- Electronic Commerce in Contracting).

(b) Offerors may submit electronic proposals as responses to this solicitation. Electronic proposals are subject to the same rules as paper proposals.

(c) The format for electronic proposals in this solicitation is PDF documents sent via email ONLY to the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer, as listed below:

Adrian.J.Stafford-Browne@usace.army.mil Francis.Cashman@usace.army.mil

File size is limited to 25MB per email. It is advised to submit e-mail 2 hours in advance to ensure the proposal is submitted timely.

Submit proposals no later than 2:00PM EST on 20 November 2023.

If a proposal received at the Government facility by electronic data interchange is unreadable to the degree that conformance to the essential requirements of the solicitation cannot be ascertained, the Contracting Officer immediately shall notify the Offeror that the proposal will be rejected unless the Offeror provides clear and convincing evidence –

(1) Of the content of the bid as originally submitted; and

(2) That the unreadable condition of the bid was caused by Government software or hardware error, malfunction, or other Government mishandling.

The resubmission shall be considered as if it were received at the date and time of the original unreadable submission for the purpose of determining timeliness, provided the offeror complies with the time and format requirements for resubmission prescribed by the Contracting Officer.

The Government reserves the right to make award solely on the electronic bid. However, if requested to do so by the Contracting Officer, the apparently successful offeror promptly shall submit the complete original signed proposal.

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS

Potential Offerors are reminded that only the minimum documents are required for bid submission:

1. Signed 1442.

2. Acknowledged amendments.

3. Filled out schedule and totals.

4. Technical proposals

5. Bid Bonds

6. Offerors must check off box (d) in 52.204-8 Annual Representations and Certifications (DEC 2019) for being on SAM.gov.

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

NOTICE REGARDING BID BONDS, PEFORMANCE BONDS, AND PAYMENT BONDS

The Standard Forms (SF24, SF25, and SF25A) for these bonds have been revised and can be found using the search at https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms#

When including your bid/offer, contractors/sureties shall use the revised versions. No other version will be valid and thus may render your bid/offer non-compliant.

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

GENERAL INFORMATION

FAR Subpart 51.102 Authorization to use Government supply sources

1) Upon award of the contract, the Contractor will reach out to DLA at descfpa@dla.mil to request the Government Contractor Fuel Purchase Authorization (FPA) Document.

2) The Contractor will fill out the relevant information in Sections 1 and 2 and submit to the Contracting Officer for review.

3) Upon completion of Section 3 by the Contracting Officer, the document will be routed to the Contractor for signature.

4) The Contractor will route the signed document to the Contracting Officer which will then be sent to DLA along with the required supporting documents.

5) If the Contract/Contractor is a sub-Contractor, a copy of the letter from the Prime to the subcontractor must be included.

6) Once DLA has determined that the contract meets the requirements under FAR 51.101, an approved FPA will authorize the Contractor to purchase fuel on Military installations after a new DoDAAC is issued for billing purposes.

7) If identaplates (Fuel Cards) are requested, it would only be processed only if the account is approved and issued a new DoDAAC.

Non-Disclosure Agreement

1) All Offerors will sign the attached NDA and submit with their proposal. Drawings will not be issued prior to receipt of signed NDAs.

2) Any employee who is privy to the information provided in this solicitation will sign the NDA and it will be submitted with the solicitation.

3) Upon award, any employee involved with the HEMP project in any capacity will sign and submit the NDA either prior to NTP or after NTP when he/she is hired/assigned to this requirement.

CPARS

The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requires that Past Performance Information (PPI) be collected on DoD contracts. The Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) is a web-enabled application that supports the completion, distribution, and retrieval of all contract performance evaluations. Contractor Representatives are responsible for reviewing and commenting on evaluations submitted on the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) website at https://www.cpars.gov/index.html

EVALUATION FACTORS

SECTION III

CRITERIA AND FACTORS FOR EVALUATION, BASIS OF AWARD,

EVALUATION CRITERIA, RATING SYSTEM AND DEFINITIONS

SECTION 00 22 10 -SELECTION PROCEDURES

AND BASIS OF AWARD

(Best Value Trade Off)

1.0 OVERVIEW

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

4.0 PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION

FACTORS, SUBFACTORS AND ELEMENTS

5.0 VOLUME 1 - PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY

5.1 TAB A – FACTOR 1 –PAST PERFORMANCE

5.2 TAB B – FACTOR 2 – PROPOSED CONTRACT DURATION

AND SUMMARY SCHEDULE

5.3 TAB C – FACTOR 3 – ORGANIZATIONAL / TECHNICAL APPROACH

6.0 VOLUME 2 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

6.1 TAB A – PRICE (STANDARD FORM 1442, PROPOSAL

DATA SHEET AND CONTRACT LINE ITEM

SCHEDULE)

6.2 TAB B – BID BOND

6.3 TAB C – SELF-PERFORMED WORK

7.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

7.1 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

7.2 EVALUATION

7.3 DEFINITIONS

ATTACHMENTS

1 – PROPOSAL DATA SHEETS

2 – PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

3 – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE PRIME

CONTRACTOR OR KEY

SUBCONTRACTOR

4 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

1. OVERVIEW

This is a "Best Value Trade Off" solicitation in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.101-1 for the Construction of the J-Plant located at Pituffik AB, Pituffik, Greenland. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein, and award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible firm, whose proposal conforms to all the terms and conditions of the solicitation is fair and reasonable and offers the best overall value to the Government.

2. BASIS OF AWARD

2.1. This is a Best Value Trade Off procurement where the Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible Offeror whose proposal the Source Selection Authority and Contracting Officer have 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 technical factors when combined are approximately equal in importance to price. The intent of this solicitation is to obtain the best proposal within an acceptable range. After the Government individually evaluates and rates each proposal, the Source Selection Authority and Contracting Officer will compare proposals to determine which proposal represents the best value. Analysis of the price to determine which Offeror’s proposal represents the best value to the Government will be performed in two steps. The price used in the initial trade-off analysis shall be the aggregate amount for the base items and option CLINS 0001-0007. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers. In order to be eligible for award, a proposal must have no less than an acceptable rating in the technical factors and no less than a neutral or satisfactory confidence rating in past performance. If there is a lower priced, conforming offer(s), the Source Selection Official must determine that the added value of a more expensive proposal (within an acceptable range) would justify award to that Offeror.

2.2. As part of the evaluation, the Government will evaluate strengths in proposals relative to the minimum standards in the RFP to determine if they offer additional value to the Government.

3. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS & MINIMUM SUBMISSION CRITERIA

3.1. Submit proposals initially on the most favorable terms from a price and technical standpoint. Do not assume that firms will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss or revise their proposals.

3.2. Page Limit and Size of Electronic Materials:

Note: Proposals shall be submitted electronically. Refer to Section 00 21 13 – Instructions to Offerors, for complete instructions on submitting proposal electronically.

In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer/PCO must receive information sufficiently detailed to clearly address submission requirements as outlined below. Pages containing text shall be submitted electronically on standard 8-1/2 x 11 inch size. Schedules, Drawings and/or sketches may be submitted electronically on paper not exceeding 11 x 17 inch paper, (each 11 x 17 counts as two pages). Use of 'TAB' pages are encouraged to identify each section of the proposal and shall not count against proposal's total page count. Each page of text shall be minimally single spaced with a minimum 12-point font and one inch margins all around.

Instructions for Submitting Electronic Proposals (see additional instructions in Section 00 21 13 – Instructions to Offerors): All proposals shall be submitted electronically via email to the Contract Specialist (adrian.j.stafford-browne@usace.army.mil and Contracting Officer (francis.cashman@usace.army.mil). Submission shall be in Adobe PDF format. You are limited to five

(5) maximum files per upload (total size cannot exceed 2GB). Offerors may use compression utility software such as WinZip or PKZip to reduce file size and facilitate transmission.

The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

3.3. VOLUME

3.4. MINIMUM SUBMISSION CRITERIA (TECHNICAL PROPOSAL): For purposes of this RFP, an “Offeror” may include a group of two (2) or more entities that have formed a “contractor team arrangement,” as that term is defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Part 9.6. In the case of entities that have formed a contractor team arrangement, the experience and performance history of any member of the team, whether or not gained while working with the other member(s) of the currently- proposed contractor team arrangement, will be considered as a part of the evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal.

In the case of affiliates, past performance of an Offeror’s “affiliate,” as that term is defined in FAR 2.101, will be evaluated (as described within this section) if the Offeror demonstrates a firm commitment that the affiliate will participate meaningfully (e.g., roles, responsibilities, etc.) in the performance of the contract.

This commitment, nature of each entity’s relationship and meaningful participation shall be described in a document signed by authorized representatives of both the Offeror and its affiliate. If a teaming agreement or commitment is not provided, the projects and experience of any team members outside of the Prime Offeror will not be considered.

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

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

1. In the case of contractor team arrangements involving a Prime Contractor and Subcontractor(s), where the Prime Contractor submits the proposal in response to this RFP, the Prime Contractor is considered the “Prime Offeror”.

2. In the case of joint ventures, the “Prime Offeror” experience is limited to entities with signed agreements.

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

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

5. In the case of Offerors that are large, multi-function firms (consisting of subsidiaries), experience may be submitted by any segment of the firm (e.g., division, group, and unit) that is submitting a

Volume Tab Title Maximum Pages

A Factor 1: Past Performance No page limit

B Factor 2: Proposed Contract Duration and Summary Schedule 20

C Factor 3: Organizational / Technical Approach 20

2 A Price (Standard Form 1442 & Contract Line Item Schedule) No page limit

2 B Bid Guarantee No page limit

2 C Self-Performed Work No page limit proposal in response to this RFP provided the Offeror has access to these resources.

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

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

4. PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS, RATINGS,

AND ELEMENTS

4.1 VOLUME 1 – PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY

Location Factor Number Description Relative Importance Vol 1 TAB A Factor 1 Past Performance Factors 1-3 are in descending order of importance.

Vol 1 TAB B Factor 2 Proposed Contract Duration & Summary Schedule

Vol 1 TAB C Factor 3 Organizational/Technical Approach

4.2 VOLUME 2 – PRICE

Vol 2 Factor 4 Price, Bid Guarantee & Self-

Performed Work All technical factors when combined are approximately equal in importance to price.

EVALUATION RATINGS:

General: The Government will review the proposals and rate the quality of each evaluation factor. 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 SSAC will compare the ratings and relative advantages and disadvantages of proposals against each other in order to present their findings to the SSA.

Evaluators will apply the adjectival rating for the definition that most closely matches the evaluation.

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.

Table 1

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Description

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

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

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

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

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:

Table 2

Performance Confidence Assessments

Rating Description

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

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

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance 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 factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Technical Factor 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 and subfactor, 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:

Table 3

Color Rating

Adjectival Rating DESCRIPTION

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, 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 or significant 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 performance is unacceptably high.

Proposal is unawardable.

Award will not be made to any firm receiving below an acceptable rating for this factor.

5. VOLUME 1 – PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY

GENERAL: This Volume also includes a Phasing and Summary Schedule for the contract duration with narrative showing all the elements described below, and Organizational/Technical Approach.

5.1 VOLUME 1 – FACTOR 1 –PAST PERFORMANCE SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

The Offeror will provide past performance information on relevant projects (see section below on Relevant Past Performance) submitted using the past performance questionnaires included in the solicitation. Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) shall be submitted for projects, when available. In addition to the past performance questionnaires provided, the Government intends to use the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). However, 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 CPARS, using all CAGE/EUI 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) or other personnel with knowledge of performance, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources.

The source selection evaluation team will review this past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to a performance competence assessment as described in the guidelines, below.

The issuance of cure notices, terminations for default, or the requirement for excessive oversight in order to achieve satisfactory completion may be considered in the evaluation of past performance. A single example of less than satisfactory performance, if significant enough, may lead to a less than satisfactory rating for this factor. Likewise, multiple examples of less significant less than satisfactory performance may lead to a less than satisfactory rating for this factor.

In conducting the performance competence assessment, the Government will consider the relevancy of the past performance information available. Highly relevant projects are those that are similar in scope, magnitude, and complexity to the current solicitation, although the past performance may still be considered if the projects do not fully meet the criteria for Factor 1.

In addition, the Offeror is required to provide any information on past projects (within the past five

(5) years) that were terminated (for any reason) or in which they have been issued a CURE NOTICE and provide accompanying information as to the details for such action(s) with an explanation of why they were terminated or issued a cure notice.

5.1.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

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:

Rating Guidelines for Factor 1: Refer to Table 1 and Table 2, above (Section III).

NOTE: In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral confidence”) past performance.

RELEVANT PAST PERFORMANCE:

5.1.2 Contractor should submit at least three (3) but no more than five (5) projects total. The projects should be similar to the project as described in this solicitation in scope, magnitude and complexity. All projects must have been completed no later than ten (10) years preceding the date of this solicitation.

SIMILAR PROJECTS ARE DEFINED AS:

Facility:

Relevant Scope: The construction of an industrial facility such as a power generation plant, high-end manufacturing facilities, or other similar facilities, with at least 50,000 SF. Construction of High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse Protection (HEMP) Envelopes in compliance with MIL-STD-188-125-

1A & Ground Based Radar Missile Warning/Defense System (GBRMW/DS) Security Classification Guide (SCG) Dated OCT22.

Relevant Magnitude projects of at least eighty (80) million dollars in construction value.

Relevant Complexity: A project involving disciplines including High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse Protection (HEMP), architecture, structural, civil, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, telecommunications

Projects must meet Relevant Scope and Relevant Complexity Requirements to be evaluated. However, a Project will be considered more relevant the more criteria that are met.

5.1.2.1 The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, related experience of the contractor.

Federal Government project experience will not be rated inherently more important than non-Federal Government project experience.

1. The government may give additional consideration for the following:

a. Projects demonstrating experience working at Pituffik AB and with USACE

b. Projects demonstrating experience in cold weather construction

c. Projects demonstrating limited/dictated supply deliveries for construction materials and equipment

d. Prime contractor experience working as a prime contractor

e. Projects demonstrating self-performance by the prime contractor

5.2 VOLUME 1 – FACTOR 2 – PROPOSED CONTRACT DURATION AND

SUMMARY SCHEDULE

5.2.1 Submission Requirements:

5.2.1.1 Planning and Scheduling. Describe the time control capabilities and systems to be used to plan the project and how the schedule will be used to manage construction from notice to proceed to completion. Discuss internal procedures for handling delays to minimize time growth.

5.2.1.1.1 Submit a summary level schedule for new construction. Schedules or diagrams may be provided separately in a size that is easily read, and clearly labeled. This summary schedule will, after contract award, be replaced with a project schedule as required by Section 01 32 01.00 10:

Project Schedule. The schedules shall be task oriented, indicating the number of calendar days, after notice to proceed, by which milestones are to be achieved. Schedules shall be graphically represented. The proposed project schedule shall reflect the proposed contract duration.

Features of the summary level schedule:

1. The schedule shall at a minimum include the following activities: submission of quality control and safety plans, procurement for long lead material and equipment items, supply deliveries, construction of site and foundation, vertical superstructure, Installation of power generation equipment, mechanical systems, system testing and whole building commissioning.

2. Submission must include the following for each activity: activity duration, early start, early finish, late start and late finish, float, predecessors and successors. This information can be provided in table format or graphically.

3. Schedule shall show turnover of new facility activities. The time to complete the facility and turnover to the Government must take into account the requirement for the Contractor's Quality Control (CQC) completion inspection and the subsequent joint Contractor- Government turnover inspection.

4. Submit narrative discussing the projects critical path. Ensure critical path is shown graphically. Discuss critical path activities that have the greatest risk to project delivery. Discuss how your schedule mitigates those risks and what measures you will take to ensure the project is delivered on time.

5. Submit narrative discussing submittal procedures and linkage of submittal register to scheduled activities. Discuss how the schedule accounts for management of the submittal process and lead time is reflected in the submittal register to meet activity early start date. Discuss internal procedures for preventing late submittal submission to minimize time growth.

6. Constraints: Clearly identify any constraints on the schedules presented (e.g., labor or material availability, supply chain issues, weather/construction season and other constraints).

5.2.2 Evaluation Criteria

5.2.2.1 The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the plan focused on logic, task duration and critical path. The Government will evaluate the firm's understanding and the capability to execute the project as presented in the narrative required in the submission. Some additional specific evaluation considerations are listed below. This list is not all-inclusive.

5.2.2.2 Summary Schedule: The Government will evaluate the summary schedule for construction. The length of the schedule can match the proposed contract duration but not exceed it.

If it is shorter than the proposed contract duration, it is binding. The Government will evaluate the schedule to assess how well it meets the project scope, restrictions which must be considered in the schedule e.g., long lead items, shipping, climate restraints etc. The Government will evaluate the strength of understanding of all elements required in the submission and the Offeror's capability to schedule the complete project within the proposed contract duration and the realism of the schedule.

5.3 VOLUME 1 – FACTOR 3 – ORGANIZATIONAL/TECHNICAL

APPROACH

Provide information that describes the Offeror's organization and intended technical approach to executing the contract per the detailed requirements of the solicitation.

Organizational Approach: Describe subcontractors, teaming partners, etc, their resources and how their resources will be utilized, their roles and responsibilities and any contractual arrangements that will be established. Present a matrix of responsibilities for each firm in executing the key work breakdown structure activities of the project, including construction activities for each major feature. The Offeror should identify any specific firms chosen as key subcontractors and list specific features of work; or indicate self-performance. In order for a firm other than the Offeror to contribute to the Offeror’s organizational approach, document unequivocal teaming arrangements with firms(s) and key subcontractors. Describe the proposed management structure for the team, how the construction process will be managed and the authorities and the delegations of authority within the team. Include a chart illustrating the organization including the proposed quality control group(s). Include a key personnel organization chart that clearly depicts the key positions and the names of the personnel, their firm affiliations and their job locations, and their job/position title within the organization. Key personnel include Project Manager, Site Superintendent, Site Safety Officer and Quality Control Manager.

The qualifications of firms submitted as part of the Offeror’s teaming arrangement(s) as part of their proposal will become part of the contract awarded. Should there be extenuating circumstances where a submitted firm is unable to perform, an alternate firm of equal or greater qualification may be proposed, subject to the Contracting Officer’s written approval. The substitute must be of equal or greater technical qualifications. The Government reserves the right to deny the substitution of firms.

Technical Approach for Construction: Describe the approach for the full scope of work in the contract, including list specific scope features IAW list specific constraints. The Government is looking for the proposed construction/installation approach employed by the Offeror in schedule management, material/equipment delivery and management, labor management, and cost management. Describe interactions within the team and with the Corps of Engineers during the construction. Describe the role and interaction of the construction team during construction, addressing elements such as schedule management, material/equipment delivery and management, labor management, cost management, site security and personnel assurance system management, progress meetings, documentation, and quality control. Describe interaction and process for on-boarding Danish Sub- Contractor who will be preforming all work other than HEMP and HEMP Verification Work.

Describe quality control procedures during construction. Include description of quality control inspection and submittal register control. Particular attention should be paid to effectively incorporating the requirements of the list external requirements into both the Quality Control Plan and Submittal Register.

Evaluation Criteria for Factor 3:

The Government will evaluate the firm’s capability to execute the project in accordance with the contract documents. Some additional specific evaluation considerations are listed below.

Organization: The Government will evaluate the clarity and strength of the overall organization and how well it is organized, structured, and staffed to execute the entire scope of work. Joint venture participant’s contribution to the organization should be commensurate with their skills and background. Submission of Danish or Greenlandic Subcontracting Plan for all non-HEMP work is required. The successful offeror will be required to subcontract all CLIN 1 work as well as any other non-HEMP work to Danish or Greenlandic firms as described above. Offerors are to submit their proposed plan as to how they will utilize Danish or Greenlandic firms for this work. The proposed plan shall include the type of work to be subcontracted, the name of the proposed firm, a signed teaming agreement or other binding agreement between the proposed subcontractor and the offeror to perform the work and the percentage of work that will be given to each Danish or Greenlandic subcontractor. For each of the proposed subcontracts, offeror shall submit the information detailed below to establish that the subcontractor meets the criteria:

Subcontractors the firm must be registered as a business in Denmark as described below. Subsidiaries of a foreign company are not eligible subcontractors.

a. It is, and shall remain, registered as a Danish or Greenlandic firm in the Danish Central Business Register. Verification must be submitted that the subcontractors are registered in the Kingdom of Denmark. (Det Central Virksomhedsregister (CVR);

b. More than 50 percent of a Danish or Greenlandic firm’s equity, defined as the entire capital of the company, is, and shall continue to be, owned by Danish and/or Greenlandic individuals or legal entities.

c. A non-Danish or non-Greenlandic individual or legal entity does not, and shall not, have a "decisive influence" (in Danish: "bestemmende indflydelse") over a Danish or Greenlandic firm; and

d. As part of its offer, an offeror must present a signed letter from a Danish or Greenlandic bank certifying banking service for each Danish or Greenlandic subcontractor verifying that the company conducts business with that institution. The successful offeror must pay the Danish or

Greenlandic subcontracts by electronic funds transfer to a bank in Denmark.

For each of the major Danish or Greenlandic subcontractor the Offeror shall submit three

(3) projects that they have completed as part of Factor 2, Past Performance. The Danish or Greenlandic subcontractor plan shall also include the dollar value or projects they have completed in the past, work, if any, performed at Pituffik, experience working together, and the organization chart of how the offeror will interact with the subcontractor’s key personnel.

In evaluating this factor, it may be considered a strength if:

Prime and subcontractor have worked on previous projects together.

If the subcontractor has performed work at Pituffik in the past, either as a prime or a subcontractor

If the subcontractor has worked on projects involving switchgears, generators, repair of the building foundations and structures, replacement of fire detection and fire suppression systems, and renovation of the facility interiors.

If the subcontractor has performed projects exceeding $50,000,000.00.

The following may be considered weaknesses:

Prime and subcontractor have not worked on previous projects together.

The subcontractor has not worked at Pituffik in the past.

The subcontractor has not performed projects in excess of $50,000,000.00.

Technical Approach for Construction: The Government places a higher value on an Offeror that provides proposed methods to streamline construction, manage labor and other resource constraints in effort to reduce costs and support an aggressive schedule. The Government will also consider whether the approach reduces on-site fabrication and susceptibility to inclement weather delays. The Government will also evaluate the Offeror’s capabilities and understanding of the contractually required quality control processes for construction.

6. VOLUME 2 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

GENERAL: Submit the Pro Forma information in a separate electronic file labeled: "Volume 3 – Pro Forma Requirements."

6.1 VOLUME 2 TAB A – PRICE (STANDARD FORM 1442 AND CONTRACT LINE ITEM

SCHEDULE)

Submission Requirements: Submit the properly filled out and executed SF 1442, along with the CLIN Schedule, containing proposed line item and total pricing, as well as the proposed contract duration.

6.1.1 Evaluation Criteria: Price will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness through the use of a price analysis by the Price Evaluation Board (PEB). The PEB will also check for appearance of unbalanced line item prices. Firms are cautioned to distribute direct costs, such as material, labor, equipment, subcontracts, etc.

and to evenly distribute indirect costs, such as job overhead, home office overhead, bond, etc., to the appropriate contract line items. Both parties shall presume that field overhead costs through the proposed contract duration are inclusive in the offered price for the contract.

6.1.2 If deemed necessary, the supplemental price breakdown information will be used to assist the Government in performing the price evaluations described above.

6.1.3 Analysis of the price to determine which Offeror’s proposal represents the best value to the Government will be performed in one step. The price used in the initial trade-off analysis shall be the aggregate amount for the base items and option CLINS 0001-0007. The trade-off analysis will be conducted and an initial best value proposal will be determined. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers.

6.2 VOLUME 2 TAB B – BID GUARANTEE

6.2.1 Submission Requirements: Submit the bid bond in accordance with the RFP. If the Offeror cannot provide a Bid Guarantee IAW FAR 52.228-1, the Offeror’s proposal may be rejected as ineligible for award.

6.2.2 Evaluation Requirements: This item is not rated. The Government will review the Bid Bond for legal sufficiency. The Bond must be legally sufficient.

6.3 VOLUME 2 TAB C – SELF-PERFORMED WORK

6.3.1 Submission Requirements: The Firm shall confirm that it understands and that it shall perform the amount of work required to be self-performed, in accordance with the appropriate clause in Section 00 70 00 that applies to the contract performance.

6.3.2 Evaluation Requirements: This item is not rated. In order to assure adequate interest in and supervision of all work, the Contractor shall be required to perform a significant part of the contract with its own forces. This public policy is expressed in various Statutes, as well as in the Federal Acquisition Regulations and in the Small Business Administration Code of Federal Regulations.

The Firm must confirm that it understands the amount of work performed, based on the status of the firm, and that it will self-perform the required amount of work with its own forces.

7.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

7.1 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

7.1.1 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 and any subsequent discussions required, as well as information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information. The SSEB will not consider any information incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

7.2 EVALUATION

7.2.1 The SSEB will evaluate the proposals and assign a consensus rating for the evaluation factor.

7.2.2 Firms are cautioned to put forth their best efforts, and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to evaluate proposals. Firms should not assume that they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in their proposal after submitting it. However, the Government reserves the right to hold discussions if it determines that discussions are necessary.

Therefore, proposals should be submitted on the most favorable terms that the Offeror can submit to the Government.