RFP W912DW20R0017 Fuel Hydrant System Repair Amendment 0002.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

RFPW912DW20R0017 "Repair of Fuel Hydrant System, Spots 25-28 at Fairchild Air Force Base, Spokane, WA."

Please see continuation page for more details.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 9

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 24-Aug-2020

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 W912DW20R0017

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

09-Jul-2020

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

24-Aug-2020

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:

W912DW20R0017

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

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

W912DW20R0017 Repair of Fuel Hydrant System, Spots 25-28 – Fairchild Air Force Base, Spokane, WA

1. This amendment two (0002) provides for the following changes:

a. The proposal submittal date is extended to September 10, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. LOCALTIME. The SF1442 Solicitation, Offer and Award is revised to reflect the date extension.

b. The attached revised sections, 00 22 16, Evaluation Factors for Award, is replaced in their entirety. 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.

c. NOTICE TO OFFERORS: Offeror must acknowledge receipt of this amendment by number and date on offer.

Encl:

SF1442 (revised)

Page 3 of 8Section 00 22 16 – Evaluation Factors for Award

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 (based on the total of all line items on the Bid Schedule) – 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

Acceptability will be based on all factors receiving an acceptable rating. The proposal will be evaluated according to the Criteria for Non-Price Evaluation Factors of this section.

Proposals will receive either an ACCEPTABLE or an UNACCEPTABLE rating for each of the evaluation factors.

Find the description of these ratings in Table 1.

TABLE 1: TECHNICAL ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE RATINGS

Rating: Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

2.2 Pricing Evaluation

The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all line items, including optional items, identified on the Contract Line Item Schedule (Price-Schedule), Section 00 11 00 of this Solicitation.

3.0 EVALUATION PROCESS

The evaluation process consists of three parts:

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

• Relevant Experience and Past Performance. Relevant Experience and Past Performance will be evaluated according to the Criteria for Non-Price Evaluation Factors found in this section.

• 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.

3.1 Definitions

• Clarification is a limited exchange with an Offeror for the sole purpose of eliminating minor irregularities, informalities, or apparent clerical mistakes in the proposal or to address adverse past performance not previously addressed with the Offeror. Clarifications do not give an Offeror the opportunity to revise of modify its proposal and are used, as necessary, when not opening discussions.

• Communications are a limited exchange with an Offeror used to assist in determinations of the competitive range. Communications are limited to enhancing Government understanding of proposals and addressing adverse past performance information not previously addressed if said information is the determining factor preventing an Offeror from being included in the competitive range. Such communications shall not be used to cure proposal deficiencies or material omissions, or otherwise revise the proposal.

• Discussions offer the opportunity to resolve deficiencies or weaknesses in the proposals, based on the requirement and the evaluations factors set forth in the solicitation. If the Contracting Officer determines it is necessary to open discussions, they must discuss with all Offerors in the competitive range. Offerors have the opportunity to revise their proposals at the conclusion of discussions.

• A Project is a temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique result. Submit only projects that demonstrate Relevant Experience required under Factor A and Past Performance required under Factor B.

Submit projects performed under C-type contracts or task orders; do not submit base or umbrella IDIQ contracts as projects.

• Year is defined as 365 consecutive days.

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 that do not meet the minimum requirements of all of the non-price evaluation factors shall be determined to be UNACCEPTABLE and are 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:

TABLE 2: EVALUATION

FACTORS

LOCATION DESCRIPTION

FACTOR A VOLUME 1, TAB A RELEVANT EXPERIENCE

FACTOR B VOLUME 1, TAB B PAST PERFORMANCE

5.0 FACTOR A – RELEVANT EXPERIENCE

5.1 Definitions for Factor A (Definitions for the purposes of this factor)

• Relevant is defined as having a logical connection with the requirements in this request for technical proposals; that is, featuring work that is similar in complexity, magnitude, and scope to the current requirement. To be acceptable, there must be an explanation of how the provided project information is relevant to the proposed work

• Complexity means new construction or major repair with many varied elements of work or sequencing of the work required for construction or major repair of hydrant fueling systems and aircraft parking spots within the controlled flight line area of active U.S. Department of Defense airfields serving large airframe, fixed-wing aircraft.

• Magnitude means a total project contract value –greater than $5,000,000.

• Scope means containing many of the elements of work and of physical size of construction of DoD Type

III hydrant fueling pits, and piping and/or construction of Portland cement and asphalt concrete airfield pavements.

• Similar means not necessarily identical but showing a resemblance in qualities or characteristics of the proposed project.

• Experience - knowledge and skill obtained by performing or managing work.

5.2 Submission Requirements for Factor A

5.2.1 Submit a minimum of three and a maximum of six (3-6) project examples to clearly demonstrate the relevant experience required. Submit Attachment 1, Offeror’s Relevant Experience Matrix and use Attachment 2, Offeror Experience Form, for each project. Submit only those projects for which the Offeror was the Prime

Contractor or part of a Joint Venture, except as specified below. If more than six (6) projects are submitted, only the first six will be evaluated, in the order they are presented in the proposal.

5.2.1.1 For purposes of evaluating construction experience as a Prime Contractor, the Offeror and prime contractor are defined as the contractor identified in Block 14 of SF1442. If a Joint Venture is identified in Block 14 of the SF

1442, then a signed Joint Venture Agreement must be submitted with the proposal and the Joint Venture shall be registered as such in the System for Award Management (SAM) before this proposal response date established in this solicitation.

5.2.1.2 The Offeror may demonstrate prime contractor experience if it served on the example project as one of the partners in a Joint Venture executing that project; if an Offeror is claiming prior project experience as a partner in a

Joint Venture, then the signed Joint Venture Agreement applicable to that example project must also be submitted.

5.2.1.3 Projects performed by contractors other than the Offeror (such as teaming partners) will not be evaluated as construction experience by a prime contractor unless (1) those other contractors are part of a Joint Venture for this solicitation as demonstrated by a signed Joint Venture Agreement or (2) those other contractors are proposed as key subcontractors and commitment is demonstrated with a completed Attachment 3, Letter of Commitment of Key

Sub-Contractor. Prior experience as a subcontractor is not considered relevant when evaluating the experience of the

Offeror as a prime contractor.

5.2.1.4 The Government will also consider prime contractor experience of the Offeror’s parent/subsidiary/affiliate firm as experience attributable to the Offeror for evaluation purposes if the proposal establishes that the parent/subsidiary/affiliate firm will have a significant involvement in performance of this contract and describe the resources of the parent/subsidiary/affiliate firm that will be utilized on project that is the subject of this procurement.

If submitting a parent/subsidiary/affiliate firm’s project for experience, it is the Offeror’s responsibility to effectively demonstrate and describe how the parent/subsidiary/affiliate firms’ resources (such as workforce, management, facilities, or other resources) will significantly contribute to the execution of the project which is the subject of this procurement; failure to effectively demonstrate and describe the planned contribution of the parent/subsidiary/affiliate firm’s involvement in the subject project of this procurement will cause the past experience of the parent/subsidiary/affiliate firms to be considered not relevant for evaluation purposes in this procurement.

5.2.2 Submit projects that are 100% construction complete, accepted by the client and have been completed within ten (10) years of the issue date of this RFP. Each project cited should have a construction dollar value greater than $5 Million.

5.2.3 Describe each project with enough detail to ensure that the Government can meaningfully assess the recency and relevancy of the projects submitted. Limit the length of each Attachment 12, Offeror Experience

Form to four (4) pages.

5.2.4 Each project example shall demonstrate relevant experience to the proposed acquisition. In addition, Offerors should clearly explain how the information provided is relevant to the proposed acquisition.

5.2.5 Project examples shall demonstrate the following experience:

5.2.5.1 At least three (3) project examples shall demonstrate experience with construction (or repair), and commissioning of pressurized hydrant fueling systems designed in accordance with UFC 3-460-01 “Design:

Petroleum Fuel Facilities” and Standard Design AW 078-24-28, “DOD Pressurized Hydrant Fueling System Type

III” (DoD Type III Hydrant Fueling Systems) to support concurrent fueling and/or defueling of multiple large airframe aircraft.

5.2.5.2 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with installation of lined carbon steel fuel circulation piping for DoD Type III Hydrant Fueling Systems.

5.2.5.3 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with construction of hydrant fuels system hydrants, low point drains and high point vents for DoD Type III Hydrant Fueling Systems.

5.2.5.4 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with installation of impressed current cathodic protection systems for DoD Type III Hydrant Fueling Systems.

5.2.5.5 At least two (2) project examples shall demonstrate experience with the construction of airfield pavements to support large airframe military aircraft (e.g., KC-135 or C-17).

5.2.5.6 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with construction of Portland cement airfield pavements in sections similar to those required under this solicitation.

5.2.5.7 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with construction of asphalt concrete airfield pavements in sections similar to those required under this solicitation.

5.2.5.8 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with removal and disposal of petroleum contaminated soils.

5.2.5.9 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with installation or repair of buried line sensor intrusion detection systems.

5.3 Evaluation Method for Factor A

5.3.1 The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether it meets the requirements of this Factor A. If any of the required information is not provided in the Offeror’s proposal, the Offeror will be evaluated as “Unacceptable.”

The Government may check any or all cited references to verify that the supplied information demonstrates compliance with the relevance criteria.

5.3.2 The Government will also consider prime contractor experience of the Offeror's parent, subsidiary or affiliate firm as experience attributable to the Offeror for evaluation purposes if the proposal clearly establishes that the parent, subsidiary or affiliate firm will have a significant involvement in performance of this contract and describes the resources of the parent, subsidiary or affiliate firm that will be utilized on project that is the subject of this procurement.

5.3.3 The Government may 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 information supplied in the proposal.

5.3.4 The Government will assign one of the following ratings:

TABLE 3: FACTOR A – RELEVANT EXPERIENCE OF OFFEROR

Rating: Description:

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.

6.0 FACTOR B – PAST PERFORMANCE

6.1 Submission Requirements for Factor B

The project examples submitted for Paragraph 5.2, Submission Requirements for Factor A, and determined by the

Government to be Acceptable pursuant to Paragraph 5.3, will be used for evaluation of Past Performance of the

Offeror. DO NOT provide Past Performance references for projects other than those project examples provided for

Factor A.

The Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment 2) included in the back of this Section 00 21 16 is provided for the Offeror to submit to the client of each project the Offeror includes in its proposal for Factor A in paragraph

5.2. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client’s point of contact. Completed

Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact identified as Contract Specialist in Section “Instructions to Proposers,” paragraph “Offeror’s Questions and Comments,” via email prior to proposal closing date and time.

The Government will accept resubmissions of previously submitted PPQs on Form PPQ-0. Please ensure all information is up to date including client point-of-contact information, reflects the state of completion of each example project as of the issue date of this Solicitation, and meets the requirements of the evaluation factor. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs.

Note: You may submit CPARS ratings in lieu of the PPQ forms included in Attachment 2 if you completely fill in blocks 1 – 5 of the Contract Information portion of the NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (Form

PPQ-0) and submit with the Final CPARS report. Be sure to include the POC’s information of the Client and the

Contract Number of the project.

6.2 Evaluation Method for Factor B

The Government will evaluate the successful completion of the project examples that were submitted in the proposal for Factor A and determined by the Government to be Acceptable. The Government reserves the right to check any or all cited references to verify supplied information and to assess owner satisfaction. As a minimum, the offeror shall demonstrate overall satisfactory performance (to include a showing of adequate corrective action on adverse past performance information). Government evaluators may contact points of contact listed in the Past Performance

Questionnaire for the projects submitted, to verify past performance on these projects.

The Offeror shall encourage all customer points of contacts/references to provide evaluation of your performance as requested.

The Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information

Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all

CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

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

TABLE 4: FACTOR B – PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RATING

Rating: Description

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.

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

NOTE: In the case of an Offeror without a record of past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, or is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror’s past performance may not be evaluated as favorable or unfavorable. [Ref: FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)]. Therefore, the

Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

7.0 PRICE

Price proposals will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness through the use of a price analysis. Price will also be checked for unbalancing of line items. The Offeror shall provide its pricing on the price schedule and submit with the Request for Proposal.

It is the intent of the Government to award without discussions.

8.0 SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

8.1. Submission Requirements (NOTE: This Requirement only applies to Offeror if it is other than a Small

Business.

8.1.1. If the Offeror proposing on this solicitation is a large business concern, in accordance with the definition as identified in FAR Clause 52.219-1, “SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM REPRESENTATION”, , the firm must submit a small business subcontracting plan in accordance with FAR Clause 52.219-9 SMALL BUSINESS

SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (Jan 2002) (see Section 00 72 00 of this solicitation for the full FAR Clause). The goals established for small business, small disadvantaged business, woman-owned business, HUBZone business, Service disabled veteran-owned small business participation are described in Section 00 21 16, Instructions to

Proposers.

8.1.2. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan shall be thorough, complete, and in accordance with AFARS

Appendix DD and FAR Clause 52.219-9, as it will be incorporated into the contract upon award of the contract to the Offeror, if acceptable and upon final approval of the Contracting Officer.

8.1.3 The Plan shall include a description of the types of services the firm proposes to subcontract with small business (SB), small disadvantaged business (SDB), woman-owned small business (WOSB), HUBZone business, and service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB), along with the proposed percentages of their participation, to demonstrate a plan to meet the subcontracting goals that will apply to these contracts. If practical, the Offeror shall provide specific information on proposed subcontracted effort for this project.

8.1.4 Submit the firm’s subcontracting compliance on previous projects completed or underway within the past three years of the date of this solicitation. This requirement may be supported by using copies of the U.S. Government

Standard Form 295.

8.2. Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate the Plan in accordance with the rating scheme in Army FAR Supplement Appendix

DD and with the requirements of FAR Clause 52.219-9. This requirement is rated as GO/NO-GO. To be acceptable

(“GO” rating), subcontracting plans must:

(a) Adequately address the required statutory elements.

8.2.1. Provide sufficient information to enable the Contracting Officer to answer affirmatively questions A through H of Appendix DD, Part 2, number 8, (Army FAR Supplement 19.705).

8.2.2. A subcontracting plan that is rated 70 points or less under the AFARS evaluation system will not be considered acceptable. The Government will review those areas where the plan is deficient with the Offeror with the goal of correcting deficiencies.

8.2.3. As part of the evaluation, the Government will compare the small business subcontracting opportunities in the plan with the goals established in the solicitation.

8.2.4. As part of the subcontracting plan evaluation, the Government will also evaluate the Offeror’s past performance in establishing realistic yet challenging goals, and in achieving them.

Attachment 1 – OFFEROR’S RELEVANT EXPERIENCE SUMMARY MATRIX

Attachment 2 – OFFEROR EXPERIENCE FORM

Attachment 3 – LETTER OF COMMITMENT OF KEY SUB-CONTRACTOR

Attachment 4 – PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

(End of Summary of Changes)

ATTACHMENT 1 - OFFEROR’S RELEVANT EXPERIENCE SUMMARY MATRIX

Offeror must complete the project summary matrix as noted below

The Offeror shall complete the Relevant Experience Matrix to clearly identify the relevancy attributes represented by a project example the Offeror is proposing for

Relevant Project Experience under Factor A. See the following Relevant Experience

Matrix example.

Note: If there are disparities between the Relevant Experience Matrix (Attachment 1) and the

Offerors Relevant Experience (Attachment 2), the Offerors Relevant Experience (Attachment 2) will take precedence.

RELEVANCY ATTRIBUTES

Example Project

1 2 3 4 5 6

5.2.5.1 At least three (3) project examples shall demonstrate experience with construction (or repair), and commissioning of pressurized hydrant fueling systems designed in accordance with UFC 3-460-01 “Design:

Petroleum Fuel Facilities” and Standard Design AW 078-24-28, “DOD

Pressurized Hydrant Fueling System Type III” (DoD Type III Hydrant

Fueling Systems) to support concurrent fueling and/or defueling of multiple large airframe aircraft.

X X X

5.2.5.2 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with installation of lined carbon steel fuel circulation piping for DoD Type III Hydrant Fueling Systems.

X

5.2.5.3 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with construction of hydrant fuels system hydrants, low point drains and high point vents for DoD Type III Hydrant Fueling Systems

X

5.2.5.4 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with installation of impressed current cathodic protection systems for DoD Type III Hydrant Fueling Systems

X

5.2.5.5 At least two (2) project examples shall demonstrate experience with the construction of airfield pavements to support large airframe military aircraft (e.g., KC-135 or C-17).

X X

5.2.5.6 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with construction of Portland cement airfield pavements in sections similar to those required under this solicitation.

X

5.2.5.7 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with construction of asphalt concrete airfield pavements in sections similar to those required under this solicitation.

X

5.2.5.8 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with removal and disposal of petroleum contaminated soils.

X

5.2.5.9 At least one (1) project example shall demonstrate experience with installation or repair of buried line sensor intrusion detection systems for military airfields.

X

SECTION 00 22 16 - ATTACHMENT 2

OFFEROR EXPERIENCE FORM

PLEASE USE THIS FORM. USE ONE FORM PER PROJECT

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

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

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

9. Name of Owner/Client POC:

10. Telephone Number of Owner/Client POC:

11. Email Address of Owner/Client POC:

12. General Scope of Construction Project:

13. Describe/demonstrate how the project is relevant to the RFP in the following areas, as stated in the Definitions:

14. If applicable, explain how the project is relevant to the RFP in the following areas, as defined in Factor 1:

(a) Construction and commissioning of Type III Hydrant Fueling Systems:

(b) Construction of Portland cement and asphalt concrete airfield pavements:

(c) Construction of buried line sensor and CCTV intrusion detection systems:

15. Describe your role and responsibility during construction of the project (indicate what work your firm self- performed and/or What work you subcontracted out, if applicable):

16. Summarize your performance evaluation by Customer/Client, if known:

ATTACHMENT 3

LETTER OF COMMITMENT OF KEY SUB-CONTRACTOR

(USE SUB-CONTRACTOR’S COMPANY LETTERHEAD)

TO: Contracting Officer:

SUBJECT: Letter of Commitment for Proposed Contract for:

Dear Sir or Madam:

I hereby indicate my commitment that, in the event of an award of a contract to

(Fill in name of Proposer), (insert name of subcontractor) will fulfill the duties of (state role on project).

Sincerely, (Signed by Authorized Official)

Date:

SECTION 00 22 16 – ATTACHMENT 4

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:

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.

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.

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

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT YOUR EVALUATION OF THE

CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

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 OF PERSONNEL/LABOR:

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

E VG S M U N

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

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

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

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

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines

E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT:

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

E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

f) Have there been any indications that the Contractor has had any financial E VG S M U N problems? If yes, please explain below.

6. SAFETY / SECURITY:

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

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

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.

E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL:

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations

(including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

E VG S M U N

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

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

E VG S M U N

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this Contractor.

E VG S M U N

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

PART III – RETURN INFORMATION:

It is preferred that your questionnaire be returned to the Offeror.

The questionnaires can also be emailed to: Lorraine.Q.Laurente@usace.army.mil mailto:Lorraine.Q.Laurente@usace.armuy.mil

Request for Proposals (RFP) W912DW20R0017 "Repair of Fuel Hydrant System Spots 25-28 at Fairchild Air Force Base, Spokane, WA.”

This project w ill be procured on an Unrestricted Basis.

Per DFARS 236.204(ii), Disclosure of the magnitude of construction projects is estimated betw een $10,000,000 and $25,000,000. NAICS Code 236220, Size determination $39,500,000.00

Funds are not currently available for this acquisition. No contract aw ard w ill be made until appropriated funds are made available from w hich payment for contract purposes can be made.

Technical inquiries and questions relating to the proposal procedures or bonds are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at http://projnet.org/projnet. Please see Section 00 21 16, Bidder Inquiry for further instructions.

NOTE: See Block 13A - The government w ill only accept electronic copies of submission. See instruction of submission under section 00 21 16 Para 1.11 "Proposal Submittals"

HYUN TOWNSLEY 206-316-4381

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

09-Jul-2020

(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 _______10 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________730 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 ______________10 Sep 2020 (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 _______120 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

USA ENGINEER DISTRICT, SEATTLE

ATTN: CENWS-CT

4735 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH, BLDG. 1202

SEATTLE WA 98134-2388

W912DW

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

10:00 AM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

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

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

206-764-6817FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

W912DW20R0017 92

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