Amendment R0001_12-18-2019.pdf

W68MD991420214

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

RFP W912DW20R0001

Amendment R0001

(Please see Continuation Page for more details)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 33

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 18-Dec-2019

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W912DW20R0001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

13-Dec-2019

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

18-Dec-2019

CODE

USA ENGINEER DISTRICT, SEATTLE

ATTN: CENWS-CT

4735 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH, BLDG. 1202

SEATTLE WA 98134-2388

W912DW 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912DW20R0001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The following have been added by full text: CONTINUATION PAGE R0001

1. This amendment one (0001) provides for the following:

Section 00 21 00, “Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors. (Revised) Section 00 22 00, “Basis of Award and Evaluation Factors for Award. (Revised) 52.204-8, “Annual Representations and Certifications” has been revised.

52.225-11, “Buy American-Construction Materials Under Trade Agreements” has been revised.

52.236-27, “Site Visit (Construction) (Feb 1995) – Alternate I (Feb 1995)” has been revised.

2. The proposal submittal time and date of 1:00:00 PM LOCAL TIME, 17 January 2020 remains the same.

3. The attached revised sections are to be replaced in their entirety. Specifications changes are generally identified, for convenience, either by strikeout for deletions, and double underlining of text for additions or a single dark line in the margin. All portions of the revised sections shall apply whether or not changes have been indicated.

4. NOTICE TO OFFERORS: Offerors must acknowledge receipt of all amendments including this amendment by number and date on bid.

Encl:

Section 00 21 00 (Revised) Section 00 22 00 (Revised)

W912DW20R0001 00 21 00 - 1 R0001

SECTION 00 21 00

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1.2 MAGNITUDE OF CONSTRUCTION

1.3 SUBJECT TO AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS

1.4 GOVERNMENT SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

1.5 COPIES OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) DOCUMENTS AND AMENDMENTS

1.6 OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

1.7 SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD/NAICS CODE

1.8 PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS

1.9 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE / SITE VISIT

1.10 ACCURACY IN PROPOSALS

1.11 PROPOSAL SUBMITTALS

1.12 PROPOSAL FORMAT

1.13 JOINT VENTURE PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

1.14 RFP PROVISIONS

W912DW20R0001 00 21 00 - 2 R0001

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK:

The scope of project includes all work required for the construction of FY20 SOF 22 STS Operations Facility - Squadron Operations Facility, Parachute Drying Tower and Covered Storage at Joint Base Lewis McChord, Washington.

The work shall be in accordance with Request for Proposal (RFP) documents.

General description of work:

The USACE Seattle District has a requirement for the construction of a combined 85,000 Square Footage (SF), squadron operations building and eight-story parachute drying tower, 12,000 SF covered storage area, and 60,300 SF of demolition for five buildings/structures at JBLM near Lakewood, WA. The squadron operations facility is located within the McChord Field Area Development Plan. The project will consist of construction of a new multi-building, Special Tactics Squadron (STS) operations compound. Facilities shall have foundations and floor slabs, structural framing, insulated walls and roofs, environmental control (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning), fire detection and suppression, etc. Squadron operations functional areas include: operations with secure planning, logistics, medical, team rooms, simulator room, classroom, associated staff offices, vehicle maintenance shop, storage and staging areas, pre-engineered metal building, antenna farm, radio maintenance, armory, elevator, bathrooms, Aircrew Flight Equipment (AFE) shop, etc. Parachute drying tower is integrated with operations AFE shop and climbing wall. All buildings’ supporting facilities include utilities and connections, parking (approximately 150 spaces), information systems, communications with information transfer node (ITN) site development, cyber security measures lighting, paving, walks, curbs, and gutters, landscaping and signage are all inclusive to the project.

Special site conditions include potential for asbestos removal during demolition. Special site conditions also includes requirement for multiple retaining walls and storm water runoff control to accommodate significant grade changes on the site IAW JBLM’s MS4 permit requirements and project site is adjacent to a flight line. Coordination with public and private utility contractors required. This project will provide Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection (AT/FP) features and comply with Department of Defense (DoD) Minimum Anti-Terrorism Standards for Buildings.

1.2 MAGNITUDE OF CONSTRUCTION:

In accordance with DFARS 236.204, Disclosure of Magnitude of Construction Projects, the Magnitude of Construction is estimated between $25,000,000.00 and $100,000,000.00.

1.3 SUBJECT TO AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS:

FAR Clause 52.232-18 “Availability of Funds,” (APR 1984) Funds are not presently available for this contract. The Government’s obligation under this contract is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds from which payment for contract purposes can be made. No legal liability on the part of the Government for any payment may arise until funds are made available to the Contracting Officer for this contract and until the Contractor receives notice of such availability, to be confirmed in writing by the Contracting Officer.

1.4 GOVERNMENT SECURITY REQUIREMENTS:

The Offeror(s) must ensure that ALL mail sent to the Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, either pre-contract or post-contract award, has a return mailing address on the outside of the envelope, package, box, etc. ANY MAIL addressed to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, including but not limited to; bids, modifications to bids, proposals, revised proposals, bonds, correspondence, etc., may be REJECTED by the US Army Corps of Engineers mail room facility located in Building 1202, at 4735 East Marginal Way South, Seattle, WA 98134 if it does not contain a return mailing address.

1.5 COPIES OF RFP DOCUMENTS AND AMENDMENTS:

W912DW20R0001 00 21 00 - 3 R0001

Copies of the RFP and amendments are available by INTERNET ACCESS ONLY. All RFP documents will be posted to the U.S. Government’s Contract Opportunities website at Beta.SAM.gov under RFP number W912DW20R0001. A list of interested vendors (potential Offerors and subcontractors) is available on this site.

NOTE: Beta.SAM.gov is the new official U.S. Government website for Contract Opportunities.

It shall be the contractor’s responsibility to check the website for any amendments. The Offeror shall submit in the proposal all requested information specified in this RFP. There will be no public opening of the proposals received as a result of this RFP.

Additional information regarding this RFP and potential Offerors and/or subcontractors is available at http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/BusinessWithUs/Contracting.aspx.

1.6 OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS:

Questions and/or comments relative to these documents only, should be submitted via e-mail or mailed to:

Contract Specialist:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District ATTN: John Scola Mailing Address:

P.O. Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124-3755 Email: John.P.Scola@usace.army.mil

[ATTENTION: I prefer to be contacted by email because I’m hearing impaired]

Contracting Officer:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District ATTN: Susan F. Newby Phone: (206) 764-6754 Email: Susan.F.Newby@usace.army.mil

1.6.1. BIDDER INQUIRY (ProjNet):

Note: ProjNet is down for service from 20 Dec 2019 to 31 Dec 2019. Please hold your questions until 1 Jan 2020 and post in ProjNet when opened, for the Government's response.

Please post your inquiries in ProjNet before 6:00 PM (CST) on Friday (12/20/2019) before ProjNet is closed down for the planned maintenance outage (12/20/2019 – 12/31/2019). ProjNet is scheduled to re-open at 11:00 PM (CST) on 12/31/2019.

During the planned maintenance outage, you may send your inquiries to both Lorraine Q. Laurente at lorraine.q.laurente@usace.army.mil and John Scola at john.p.scola@usace.army.mil. The Government’s response may be slow due to the holiday season. Government responses may be posted as an amendment during this time.

Please submit your inquiries to ProjNet when it opens again at 11:00 (CST) on 12/31/2019.

1.6.1.1. Technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures or bonds are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at http://www.projnet.org/projnet.

1.6.1.1.1. To submit and review bid inquiry items, bidders will need to be a current registered user or self-register into system. To self-register go to web page, click BID tab select Bidder Inquiry, select agency USACE, enter Key for this RFP listed below, and your e-mail address, click login. Fill in all required information and click create user. Verify that information on next screen is correct and then click continue.

W912DW20R0001 00 21 00 - 4 R0001

1.6.1.1.2. From this page you may view all bidder inquiries or add inquiry.

1.6.1.1.3. Bidders will receive an acknowledgement of their question via email, followed by an answer to their question after it has been processed by our technical team.

1.6.1.1.4. The RFP Number is: W912DW20R0001

1.6.1.1.5. The Bidder Inquiry Key is: KZ84RB-8KC3GX

1.6.1.2. The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquires 3 business days prior to proposal submission in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response and amend the RFP, if necessary.

1.6.1.3. Offerors are requested to review the specification in its entirety, review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry.

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

1.6.1.5. Offers will NOT be publicly opened. Information concerning the status of the evaluation and/or award will NOT be available after receipt of proposals.

1.7. SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD/NAICS CODE:

See Section 00 45 00, FAR 52.204-8 for the small business size standard/NAICS Code.

1.8. PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS:

This Request for Proposal (RFP) does not commit the Government to pay, as a direct charge, any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of a proposal.

1.9 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE:

An organized site visit has been scheduled. See FAR provision 52.236-27 Alt 1, Site Visit (Construction).

1.10 ACCURACY IN PROPOSALS:

Proposals must set forth full, accurate, and complete information as required by this RFP, (including attachments).

The penalty for making false statements is prescribed in 18 U.S.C. 1001.

1.11 PROPOSAL SUBMITTALS:

Due to heightened security at Government installations, those Offerors who have their proposals hand-delivered shall contact the Procurement Technician, Sonia Frees at 206-764-3516 prior to delivering to the address shown below.

Proposals delivered after the time specified in Block 13 of the SF 1442 will not be accepted. See FAR 52.215-1 for rules concerning late proposals.

See Box 13 of the Standard Form 1442 for the time and date your proposal is due.

EMAIL: Emailed Proposal will NOT be accepted.

FAX: Faxed Proposal will NOT be accepted.

W912DW20R0001 00 21 00 - 5 R0001

FED-EX/UPS: John Scola, Contract Specialist, Building 1202 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District

CECT-NWS CTA

4735 East Marginal Way S., Bldg. #1202 Seattle, WA 98134-2385 Note: Commercial Carriers will not deliver to PO Boxes

MAIL: John Scola, Contract Specialist, Building 1202 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District

CECT-NWS CTA

PO Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124-3755

HAND DELIVERY: John Scola, Contract Specialist, Building 1202 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District

CECT-NWS CTA

4735 East Marginal Way S., Bldg. #1202 Seattle, WA 98134-2385

Please allow sufficient time to allow for heightened security at Government installations and to get to our new location in Oxbow Building #1202. Allow time to park, pass through a metal detector, sign in, and receive a building pass at the Federal Center South Building (#1201). From there, you will be directed to the new USACE Oxbow Building (#1202) which sits behind the Federal Center South Building (#1201). Allow additional time to submit your proposal timely.

Report to the Security Desk in the lobby of the USACE Oxbow Building and call Sonia Frees, Procurement Technician, at 206-674-3516. A Contracting representative will come down and accept your Offer, Bid or Proposal.

A proposal is not received by the Government until it is in the physical possession of a representative of the Contracting office. Security guards and other non-contracting personnel are NOT authorized to accept proposals on behalf of the Government. Note that official receipt of a proposal shall be in accordance with FAR 52.215-1.

Note: If delivery is by any means other than Hand Delivery, please check prior to the due date and time to ensure that your Offer, Bid, or Proposal has arrived on time.

The Packaging that contains the Proposals shall be marked:

“Proposal for RFP Number: W912DW20R0001, DO NOT OPEN”

1.12 PROPOSAL FORMAT:

a) Please refer to Section 00 22 00 for Submission Format requirements.

b) Technical Proposal (Volume I): Submit one (1) “Original” printed volume, one (1) “Copy” of printed volume and one (1) “Electronic Copy” in PDF on a CD (assembled as one (1) document). Electronic Copy must be identical to Original printed volume. Ensure CD is labeled.

c) Price proposal and Pro Forma information (Volume II): Submit one (1) “Original” printed volume, one (1) “Copy” of printed volume and one (1) “Electronic Copy” in PDF on a CD (assembled as one

(1) document). Electronic Copy must be identical to Original printed volume. Ensure CD is labeled.

1.13 JOINT VENTURE PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS:

When proposing as a joint venture, all members of the joint venture shall sign the SF 1442 and the bid bond, unless a written agreement by the joint venture is furnished with the proposal designating one firm with the authority to bind the other member(s) of the joint venture. In addition, a copy of the fully signed Joint Venture agreement

W912DW20R0001 00 21 00 - 6 R0001

shall be submitted with the price proposal. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements may eliminate the proposal from further consideration. If this is an 8(a), SDVOSB or HubZone joint venture, the Offeror shall ensure that it complies with the applicable requirements of 13 CFR Part 124, 13 CFR Part 125 and 13 CFR Part 126, respectively.

Any of the Joint Venture partners identified in the JV agreement can submit project(s) to meet the requirement in Section 00 22 00 for evaluation.

1.14 RFP PROVISIONS:

Please see next page.

END OF SECTION 00 21 00

52.236-27 SITE VISIT (CONSTRUCTION) (FEB 1995) – ALTERNATE I (FEB 1995)

(a) The clauses at 52.236-2, Differing Site Conditions, and 52.236-3, Site Investigations and Conditions Affecting the Work, will be included in any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation. Accordingly, offerors or quoters are urged and expected to inspect the site where the work will be performed.

(b) An organized site visit has been scheduled for—

Date: 20 DEC 2019 (Friday) Time: 0900 - 1100 (Local Time) NOTE: Site Visit will start promptly at 0900 (Local Time)

(c) Participants will meet at:

JBLM ACCESS:

1. Offerors planning to attend the site visit must send their participant information two (2) days before the date of the site visit. Send the full name of all participants to both of us:

John Scola (Contract Specialist) at john.p.scola@usace.army.mil Joanne McWilson (Project Manager and Government Sponsor) at joanne.f.mcwilson@usace.army.mil

2. Participants must provide their own transportation. Please allow enough time to be processed at the McChord

Field Visitor Center (Not the Lewis Main Visitor Center).

3. Identify yourself as email sponsored and provide Joanne McWilson's name.

4. Bring for McChord Field Visitor Center:

Valid vehicle registration Proof of current vehicle insurance Valid driver’s license

5. Again, email the full names of all participants before two days of the site visit. Otherwise, you will not be allowed to enter the gate.

SITE LOCATION:

304 Pitsenbarger Blvd, McChord Field-JBLM, WA 98438

Building 308 Auditorium, 308 Pitsenbarger Blvd, McChord Field-JBLM, WA 98438

DIRECTIONS:

Head southeast on Bridgeport Way toward the McChord Field Visitor Center Road changes name to Bridgeport Road, then Main St Turn Right onto Barnes Blvd Turn Left onto Outer Drive Bare left onto 14th St SE Turn left onto 6th St / Pitsenbarger Blvd.

(See map at end of Section 00 21 00)

(End of provision)

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 1 R0001

SECTION 00 22 00

BASIS OF AWARD AND EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1.0 BASIS OF AWARD

Award of this Contract will be made to the technically acceptable responsible Offeror submitting the lowest priced offer – Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable Offer (LPTA). This acquisition will result in the award of a firm-fixed price, construction contract.

The technical evaluation of each proposal will be solely on the basis of Technical Evaluation Factors found in this section. The Government will evaluate each proposal on a technically acceptable/unacceptable basis only with respect to the technical evaluation factors (criteria) described herein. Award will be to the Offeror who presents the technically acceptable proposal with the overall total lowest price. It is the intent of the Government to award off initial offers without discussions.

2.0 PROPOSAL EVALUATION

2.1 Technical Evaluation:

Technical acceptability of your proposal will be based on all Factors receiving an acceptable rating by the Government (Please see the evaluation method of each Factor below of how “acceptability” will be determined) and other requirements of the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated according to the criteria for each Non-Price Evaluation Factor of this section.

Proposals will receive either an acceptable or an unacceptable rating for each of the evaluation factors. Find the description of the Overall LPTA Technical Ratings in Table 1 which is taken from Appendix C of the DoD Source Selection Procedures.

Table 1: Overall LPTA Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings:

Rating: Description:

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

3.0 EVALUATION PROCESS:

The evaluation process consists of three parts:

1. Proposal Compliance Review. This is an initial review to ensure all required forms and certifications are complete, and a complete proposal is received. The initial review of each of the proposals will be conducted to check for apparent errors, omissions and areas which require clarification. The purpose of this preliminary review session is to eliminate minor irregularities or apparent clerical mistakes. This preliminary evaluation will ensure each proposal contains the Volume I (Technical) and Volume II (Price) separately and the correct number of copies.

2. Relevant Experience and Past Performance. Relevant Experience and Past Performance will be evaluated according to the CRITERIA for Non-Price Evaluation Factors found within this section.

3. Price Evaluation. The Government will evaluate price for fairness and reasonableness through the use of price analysis. Price will also be verified for unbalancing of line items.

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 2 R0001

3.1 Definitions:

Clarification are limited exchanges between the Government and Offerors that may occur when award without discussion is contemplated.

Communications are exchanges, between the Government and Offerors, after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range.

Discussions are exchanges (i.e., negotiations) in a competitive environment that are undertaken with the intent of allowing the Offeror to revise its proposal. Discussions take place after establishment of the competitive range. See FAR 15.306(d).

Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) is a process used in competitive negotiated contracting where the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price. See FAR 15.101-2.

Recent - Submitted project(s) completed within the past six years from the RFP issue date.

Source Selection is the process used in competitive, negotiated contracting to select the proposal that offers the best value to the Government.

3.2 Bid Guarantee:

Please see provision 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee (SEP 1996), in Section 00 21 00.

3.3 Submission Format: (Please refer to Section 00 21 00 for number of required copies)

All proposal materials shall be submitted in binders with a table of contents and tabbed section dividers. The sections should parallel the submission requirements identified below. In Volume I, Technical Proposal, there shall be a tabbed section for each Non-Price Evaluation factor. Volume II, Price Proposal, shall be submitted in a clearly marked envelope.

1. Volume I - Offeror’s Technical Proposal shall include the following sections, in the general format specified below:

Table of Contents for Volume I - (Listing of all sections of the technical proposal) Tab A which contains submittal for Factor A – Relevant Experience of Offeror, Attachment 1.

Tab B which contains submittal for Factor B – Relevant Experience of Team, Attachment 1 & 2.

Tab C which contains submittal for Factor C – Past Performance of the Offeror, Attachment 3.

2. Volume II – Offeror’s Price Proposal shall include the following, in the general format specified below:

Standard Form (SF) 1442 and Price Schedule, Section 00 11 00. (Filled out in its entirety).

Bid Guarantee.

Section 00 45 00, Representations and Certifications.

Pre-Award Information found at back of Section 00 45 00 (filled out in its entirety).

NOTE: Offeror’s Price Proposal is due AT THE SAME TIME as Technical Proposal.

4.0 EVALUATION CRITERIA

4.1 CRITERIA for Non-Price Evaluation Factors:

Proposals shall concisely, accurately, and completely provide the information required for each of the following non-price evaluation factors. NOTE: Absence of complete information will be deemed as if no support information was provided for that factor. Proposals which do not meet the minimum requirements of any non-price evaluation factors shall be determined to be UNACCEPTABLE and is not eligible for award consideration.

NO assumptions may be made by the Government. Your proposal must CLEARLY demonstrate the requisite technical experience and qualifications to receive an ACCEPTABLE rating for each of the following criteria:

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 3 R0001

Table 2: Evaluation Factors: Location: Description:

Factor A Volume 1, Tab A Relevant experience of the Offeror Factor B Volume 1, Tab B Relevant Experience of Team Factor C Volume 1, Tab C Past Performance of the Offeror

5.0 FACTOR A (Volume 1, Tab A) – Relevant Experience of the Offeror:

The Offeror shall demonstrate relevant experience by the submission of example construction projects which illustrate the experience of the Offeror on projects with the following characteristics: complexity, function, magnitude, and scope as defined in paragraph 5.1.

5.1 Definitions for Factor A:

For the purpose of Factor A, the following definitions will apply:

Complexity Construction of a facility which required sequencing of multiple work features. Examples of multiple work features include multi-year demolition, construction phase planning, civil, mechanical, and electrical.

Function means construction of combined-use building, which include at least two of the following features:

vehicle maintenance, gym or physical training space, storage space, auditorium, multi-person office space and/or meeting space.

Magnitude/Cost means projects equal to or greater than Contract amount of $35,000,000.

Scope means containing at least three of the following elements of work on projects with a physical size of construction at least 75,000 square feet: HVAC, Mechanical, Electrical, site work and/or Storm water.

5.2 Submission Requirements for Factor A:

The Offeror shall demonstrate relevant experience by the submission of at least one but not more than four (1-4) project(s), which together, meets all of the following characteristics: complexity, function, magnitude/cost, scope.

Each project submitted must meet the magnitude/cost criteria and must demonstrate at least one other characteristic.

When combined, Offeror’s examples must demonstrate experience for each characteristic.

At least one (1) of the four (4) projects must have been performed by the Offeror acting as the Prime Contractor (or a partner of a JV Prime). The remaining submitted project example(s) may demonstrate performance by the Offeror acting as a Subcontractor or performed as a Key Subcontractor, or member of a JV.

All submitted projects shall have a completion date on or before the issue date of the solicitation for this RFP. All submitted projects shall have been completed within six (6) years of the issue date of this RFP.

Use Attachment 1, Offeror or Key Subcontractor Experience Form. Use one form for each project. Only those projects for which the Offeror was the Prime Contractor, part of a Joint Venture (JV), or projects for which the Offeror performed as a Key Subcontractor should be submitted. Offeror should describe each project with enough detail to ensure that the Government can meaningfully assess whether the project(s) submitted were recent and relevant to this project. If more than four (4) projects are submitted, only the first four will be evaluated, in the order they are presented in the proposal.

Note: If the Offeror is submitting any projects as a partner of a Joint Venture (JV), the DUNS and CAGE Code for each firm representing the JV must be included in the proposal. (See Attachment 1)

5.3 Evaluation Method for Factor A:

This factor will be evaluated to determine whether it meets the requirements of paragraph 5.2 above. If any of the required information is not provided in the Offeror’s proposal, the Offeror will be evaluated as “Unacceptable.” The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 4 R0001

the Past Performance Information Retrieval system (PPIRS) which includes the CCASS/ACASS ratings, other DoD or Government appraisal systems. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

The Government’s evaluation rating for Factor A of your proposal will be in accordance with Table 3 below (Offeror does not need to submit Table 3 with their proposal). Ensure all submitted projects meet the required completion date listed above.

Table 3: Factor A - Relevant Experience of Prime Matrix

Acceptable:

The proposal clearly demonstrates how the project examples submitted meet the requirements of paragraph 5.2.

Unacceptable:

The proposal does not clearly demonstrate how the project examples submitted meet the requirements of paragraph 5.2.

Project Title Magnitude/Cost (Each project must meet this to be evaluated further)

Offeror as Prime Complexity Function Scope

Project 1 Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Project 2 Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Project 3 Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Project 4 Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No

6.0 FACTOR B (Volume 1, Tab B) – Relevant Experience of Team:

6.1 Definitions for Factor B:

For the purpose of Factor B, the following definition will apply:

Team means the Prime Contractor and/or its key Subcontracting firms for which a letter of commitment exists.

6.2 Submission Requirements for Factor B:

The Offeror shall submit a minimum of one but no more than four (1-4) relevant project examples. Use Attachment 1, Offeror or Key Subcontractor Experience Form. Use one form for each project. The Team should describe each project with enough detail to ensure that the Government can meaningfully assess whether the projects submitted are recent and relevant to this project. If more than four (4) projects are submitted, only the first four will be evaluated, in the order they are presented in the proposal.

All submitted projects shall be completed within six (6) years of the issue date of this RFP. If submitting a project performed by a Key Subcontractor, Attachment 2, Letter of Commitment for Key Subcontractor, must also be provided.

Additionally, if submitting a project example performed by a Key Subcontractor (as indicated by the signed Letter of Commitment), any substitution of that Subcontractor(s) after contract award, will be subject to the approval of the Contracting Officer and must have qualifications and experience equal to or greater than those of the proposed Subcontractor(s).

A project is considered relevant if it meets at least one of the following four (4) especially relevant construction experience areas:

a) Evidence of demonstrated experience with construction of facilities implementing Intelligence Community

Directive (ICD) 705 security standards and requirements.

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 5 R0001

b) Evidence of demonstrated experience with construction of Telecommunications Outside Plant (OSP) construction projects with core communications nodes for campus-wide telephone switching and data networking systems.

c) Evidence of demonstrated experience with construction of Non-Classified Internet Protocol Router Network (NIPRNet) and Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet) telecommunication systems.

d) Evidence of demonstrated experience with construction projects on Federal Facilities.

All 4 elements must be demonstrated. However, all four (4) elements do not need to be present in a single project.

Project examples, when evaluated together, must demonstrate experience for all four elements.

6.3 Evaluation Method for Factor B:

This factor will be evaluated to determine whether it meets the requirements of paragraph 6.2 above. The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing the Past Performance Information Retrieval system (PPIRS) which includes the CCASS/ACASS ratings, other DoD or Government appraisal systems. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

The Government’s evaluation rating for Factor B of your proposal will be in accordance with Table 4 below (Offeror does not need to submit Table 4 with their proposal). Ensure all submitted projects meet the required completion date listed above.

Table 4: Factor B - Relevant Experience of Team Matrix

Acceptable:

Offeror has demonstrated experience in each of the above elements for relevancy as required by paragraph 6.2.

Unacceptable:

Offeror has not demonstrated experience in each of the above elements for relevancy as required by paragraph 6.2.

Project Title

ICD 705

Security

Standards:

Telecommunications Outside Plant (OSP):

NIPRNet and SIPRNet:

Federal Installation:

Project 1 Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Project 2 Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Project 3 Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Project 4 Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No

7.0 FACTOR C (Volume 1, Tab C) – Past Performance:

7.1 Submission Requirements for Factor C:

The past performance evaluation is an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum RFP requirements. This assessment is based on the Offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertains to the scope of work as outlined in the RFP requirements

Each Offeror’s past performance will be initially evaluated using the projects submitted for Factor A. The past performance will be evaluated to determine how well the Offeror performed on the prior contracts.

At a minimum, the Government will review past performance information from the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), when available.

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 6 R0001

NOTE:

If a CPARS rating is not available for ALL projects submitted under Factor A, Relevant experience of the Offerors, the Offeror must submit a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for those project(s). (See Attachment 3 at the back of this section).

Additionally, if the proposal is from a Joint Venture or Partnership, and the Joint Venture or Partnership has no CPARS ratings, all partners (other than the member represented by the project example(s) submitted in Factor A) to the Joint Venture or Partnership must submit a project example which has a CPARS rating, or submit a PPQ for that project. The selected project example must meet the submission requirements of the Magnitude/Cost, completed within six years of the issue date of the RFP and must demonstrate one other characteristics as defined in paragraph 5.1.

An Offeror shall not submit a PPQ when a completed CPARS evaluation is available. If both are submitted, only the CPARS will be evaluated. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal ONLY if a CPARS evaluation is not available. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment 3), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s).

If the client requests, PPQs may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contacts, John Scola, via email at John.P.Scola@usace.army.mil and Susan F. Newby at Susan.F.Newby@usace.army.mil prior to the proposal closing date. The Offeror shall instruct the clients to refer to the RFP number in the subject line. The PPQs are Source Selection materials. All successfully submitted PPQs will receive an e-mail confirmation upon receipt. If the Offeror does not receive the confirmation, it is their responsibility to follow up to ensure the government has received the information before the due date of your proposal.

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. Offeror may provide explanation on problems encountered on past projects and the corrective actions taken by the Offeror.

7.2 Evaluation Method for Factor C:

The Government’s evaluation rating for Factor C of your proposal will be in accordance with Table 5 below:

Note: In the case of an Offeror without a record of past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Offeror’s past performance may not be evaluated as favorable or unfavorable. Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

a

8.0 PRICE:

Price Evaluation:

The prices for the base and optional items will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness through the use of a price analysis. The prices for the base and optional items will also be checked for unbalancing of line items.

Table 5: Factor C – Past Performance of Offeror’s Evaluation Rating

Acceptable Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the Offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See Note below)

Unacceptable Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 7 R0001

9.0 REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS:

The representations and certifications apply to this RFP. The Offeror submitting a proposal in response to this RFP shall fill in the appropriate information and/or check the appropriate boxes for each provision listed in the System for Awards Management (SAM) and complete the Pre-Award Information which can be found in Section 00 45 00.

This information shall be submitted with the Offeror’s Price Proposal.

Contractors are required to be registered in SAM for awards resulting from RFPs.

LACK OF REGISTRATION IN THE SAM DATABASE WILL MAKE AN OFFER INELIGIBLE FOR AWARD.

The web site may be accessed at www.sam.gov.

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 8 R0001

SECTION 00 22 00 - ATTACHMENT 1

OFFEROR or KEY SUBCONTRACTOR EXPERIENCE FORM

PLEASE USE THIS FORM PER SUBMITTED PROJECT

Factor A – Relevant Experience of Offeror Factor B – Relevant Experience of Team

Note: A separate Word version of this document will be accessible on beta.sam.gov

Provide the following information to show examples of projects your company constructed within the last six (6) years indicating experience with recent and relevant projects.

1. Name of Offeror:

2. Project Title:

3. Contract/Project Number:

4. Project Owner and Location:

5. Total Contract Value: $ _____________________________

(Final value)

6. If submitting project performed by a JV, provide the DUNS number and Cage Code for each member:

7. Offeror acting as Subcontractor or performed as Key Subcontractor (Yes or No)

8. If Offeror performed as Subcontractor, the $-value of Subcontract: $

9. Construction Phase Start Date (Month/Day/Year):

10. Original Construction Phase Completion Date (Month/Day/Year):

11. Actual Construction Phase Completion Date (Month/Day/Year):

12. Name of Owner/Client POC:

13. Telephone Number of Owner/Client POC:

14. Email Address of Owner/Client POC:

15. General Scope of Construction Project:

ATTACHMENT 1 CONTINUED:

16. Describe/demonstrate how the project is relevant to the RFP in the following areas, as stated in the definitions for paragraph 5.1 (Factor A):

(a) Complexity:

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 9 R0001

(b) Function:

(c) Magnitude/Cost:

(d) Scope:

17. If applicable, explain how the project is relevant to the RFP in the following areas, as defined in Factor B:

(a) Evidence of demonstrated experience with construction of facilities implementing Intelligence Community Directive (ICD) 705 security standards requirements:

(b) Evidence of demonstrated experience with construction of Telecommunications Outside Plant (OSP):

(c) Evidence of demonstrated experience with construction of Non-Classified Internet Protocol Router Network (NIPRNet) and Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet) telecommunication systems.

(d) Evidence of demonstrated experience with construction projects on Federal Installation.

18. Describe your role and responsibility during construction of the project (indicate whether your firm performed as a prime or subcontractor and what percentage of work you self-performed and/or type of work you subcontracted out, if applicable) or, if this work was performed by a Key Subcontractor (Submit Attachment 2):

19. Summarize the performance evaluation by Customer/Client, if known:

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 10 R0001

20. Were you issued a Cure Notice, Show Cause Letter, Terminated for Default and/or Assessed Liquidated Damages? (If “Yes” provide an explanation):

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 11 R0001

SECTION 00 22 00 – ATTACHMENT 2

LETTER OF COMMITMENT FOR KEY SUBCONTRACTOR

(USE COMPANY LETTERHEAD)

TO: Contracting Officer

SUBJECT: Letter of Commitment for Proposed Contract for

Dear Sir or Madam:

I hereby make the unequivocal commitment that, in the event of an award of a contract to (Fill in name of Prime), that (insert name of subcontractor) will fulfill the duties of (state role on a project).

Sincerely, (Authorized Official of Prime)

Date:

(Authorized Official of Subprime)

Date:

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 12 R0001

SECTION 00 22 00 – ATTACHMENT 3

THE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

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, or other)

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: CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE

OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO USACE. THE

GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS

FORM.

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 13 R0001

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.

Contractor Information (Firm Name): ________________________________________________

Client Information (Name): ________________________________________________________

W912DW20R0001 00 22 00 – 14 R0001

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT:

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

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

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

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

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

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the Contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

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

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

responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the Contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

E VG S M U N

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

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

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

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

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

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes

E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)

E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

E VG S M U N

Contractor Information (Firm Name): ________________________________________________ Client Information (Name): ________________________________________________________

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…