Amendment R0001_4-8-2022.pdf

W68MD920551263

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 W912DW22R0004

Amendment R0001

(Please see Continuation Page for more details)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 42

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 08-Apr-2022

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W912DW22R0004

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

16-Mar-2022

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer 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

08-Apr-2022

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:

W912DW22R0004

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

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

This amendment one (0001) provides for the following:

1. Sections 00 21 16, 00 22 00 and Pre-Award Information Page for Section 00 45 00 were revised.

2. The Davis Bacon Act Wage Determination WA2022072 was revised to modification number 2 published on 25

February 2022.

3. Provisions/Clauses: The following provisions/clauses were revised:

52.203-14, Display of Hotline Poster(s) 52.225-11, Buy American—Construction Materials Under Trade Agreements 52.204-8, Annual Representations and Certifications

4. The proposal due date/time remains the same at 1:00 PM (PST) on Monday, 18 April 2022.

5. 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.

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

W912DW22R0004 R0001

SECTION 00 21 16

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 SITE VISIT

1.10 ACCURACY IN PROPOSALS

1.11 PROPOSAL SUBMITTALS

1.12 PROPOSAL FORMAT

1.13 BID GUARANTEE

1.14 JOINT VENTURE AND TEAMING ARRANGEMENT PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK:

The scope of project includes all work required for Department of Veteran’s Affairs American Lake (VAAL) Phase 2A Site Development at Lakewood, WA.

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 following-

The VAAL Phase 2A Site Development project includes demolition and hazardous materials abatement of five (5) existing buildings, existing parking area and underground utilities. The work also includes but is not limited to construction grading, pavements, utilities, lighting, and landscaping for a 650-vehicle parking lot and 1000 feet of two-lane roadway. Utilities will include drainage, sanitary sewer, watermain, electrical, telecommunication, steam and geothermal.

1.2 MAGNITUDE OF CONSTRUCTION:

In accordance with DFARS 252.236.204, the magnitude of construction is estimated to be in the range of $10,000,000 to $25,000,000.

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 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:

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 SAM.gov under RFP number W912DW22R0004. A list of interested vendors (potential Offerors and subcontractors) is available at this website.

NOTE: SAM.gov is the 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.

1.6 OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS:

All questions or comments should be posted in ProjNet. (See below)

BIDDER INQUIRY (ProjNet):

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.

a. 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.

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

c. 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.

d. The RFP Number is: W912DW22R0004

e. The Bidder Inquiry Key is: NQ793C-I3C2TY

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.

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.

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.

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 Provision 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 SITE VISIT:

An organized site visit has been scheduled. See Section 00 21 00, 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:

To be determined (TBD) prior to due date of proposal. Please note this information supersedes the instructions in block 8 of the SF1442.

Instructions for Submitting Electronic Proposal:

TBD prior to due date of proposal.

1.12 PROPOSAL FORMAT:

a) Technical Proposal (Volume I): Submit one (1) “electronic copy” in PDF.

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 1 – Relevant Experience of Offeror, Attachment 1.

Tab B which contains submittal for Factor 2 – Relevant Experience - Utility Relocations, Attachment 1.

Tab C which contains submittal for Factor 3 - Past Performance of Offeror, Attachment 3 (If needed).

Tab D which contains Letters of Commitment (Attachment 2 if applicable).

b) Price proposal and Pro Forma information (Volume II): Submit one (1) “electronic copy” in PDF.

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).

Joint Venture Agreement or Teaming Arrangement (including first-tier small business subcontractor) (If applicable).

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

1.13 BID GUARANTEE:

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

Bid Bonds (SF24) must be accompanied by a Power of Attorney containing an original OR electronic signature from the surety, which must be affixed to the Power of Attorney after the Power of Attorney has been generated.

Computer generated and signed Powers of Attorney will be accepted if accompanied by a certification from a current officer of the surety attesting to its authenticity and continuing validity.

Digital scans, or photographed or otherwise reproduced images, of ink signatures are not considered acceptable "electronic signatures." If a required submitted document does not contain electronic signatures, you must submit original hard-copy documents. Current SF24 forms are available at the following website:

https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms

Send Your Hard Copies:

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 98134-2388

1.14 JOINT VENTURE & TEAMING ARRANGEMENT PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS:

Joint Ventures: Joint Ventures are considered as Prime Contractors. When proposing as a joint venture, all members of the joint venture shall sign the SF 1442, 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 executed joint venture agreement shall be submitted with the 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 16 for evaluation.

Teaming Arrangement. As defined under FAR Subpart 9.6, a teaming arrangement means:

1. Two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor; or

2. A potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.

Offerors submitting a subcontractor project and offerors wishing to demonstrate experience showing working relationships with proposed teaming partners must submit the following:

a. Provide a listing of the team arrangement members’ corporate name (no abbreviations), address, point of contact, phone number, DUNS Number, unique entity identifier from SAM.gov and Cage Code.

b. Submit a copy of the fully executed teaming agreement between each team member. All teaming agreements shall:

1. Clearly identify the expected relationship, roles and responsibilities between the firms, Prime contractor, and of the subcontractor or other entity (type and proportion of work to be performed); and;

2. Shall be signed by the appropriate individual(s) of each firm.

END OF SECTION 00 21 16

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 responsible Offeror submitting the Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable (LPTA) proposal in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.101-2. This solicitation will result in the award of a firm-fixed price construction contract.

The evaluation of each proposal will be solely on the basis of evaluation factors found in this section (00 22 00). The Government will evaluate each proposal on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis only with respect to the non-price evaluation factors (criteria) described herein. To be considered for award, a proposal must be rated “Acceptable” in every non-price factor. Award will be to the Offeror who presents the Acceptable proposal (Factors 1, 2 and 3) with the overall total lowest price (based on the total of all line items on the Bid/Price Schedule).

The Offeror’s proposal shall contain a response to all factors and meet the minimum submittal requirements stated.

Penalty for making false statements in proposals is prescribed in 18 U.S. Code § 1001.

In accordance with FAR 15.306(a)(3), the Government intends to evaluate proposals and make award without discussions.

2.0 FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

TABLE 1: Technical and Non-Technical Evaluation Factors and Price Factor: Description:

Factor 1 Relevant Experience of Offeror Factor 2 Relevant Experience of Team Factor 3 Past Performance of Offeror

Acceptability of your proposal will be based on all non-price Factors receiving an acceptable rating by the Government (Please see the evaluation method of each Factor below of how “acceptability” will be determined in Factors 1, 2 and 3). The proposal will be evaluated according to the criteria for each Non-Price Evaluation Factor of this section.

3.0 EVALUATION PROCESS:

Proposals will be evaluated by a Source Selection Evaluation Board.

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 Non-Price Evaluation Factors found within this section (00 22 00).

3. Price Evaluation. The Government will evaluate price for fairness and reasonableness using 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 or 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 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.

Past Performance is the assessment of the Offeror’s probability of successfully completing the minimum RFP requirements.

Recent - All submitted projects shall be 100 percent construction complete, accepted by the client, and completed within six (6) years of the issue date of this solicitation, i.e., all submitted projects shall have a completion date on or before the issue date of this solicitation.

Similar is not identical but showing a resemblance in qualities or characteristics of the project.

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

4.0 EVALUATION FACTORS:

4.1 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 are not eligible for award consideration. NO assumptions may be made by the Government. Your proposal must clearly demonstrate the requisite experience to receive an acceptable rating for each of the following factors:

Table 2: Evaluation Factors: Location: Description:

Factor 1 Volume 1, Tab A Relevant Experience of Offeror Factor 2 Volume 1, Tab B Relevant Experience of Team Factor 3 Volume 1, Tab C Past Performance of Offeror

5.0 FACTOR 1 – Relevant Experience of Offeror:

5.1 Definitions for Factors 1.

For the purpose of Factor 1 the following definitions (characteristics) will apply:

Complexity means the many varied elements of work or sequencing of the work required for a project of this nature.

Magnitude means the dollar value of the project examples is equal to or greater than $12,000,000.

Scope means containing many of the elements of work and of physical size in terms of square feet, lineal feet, square yards, cubic feet, cubic yards, or tons of material. Elements of work include asphalt paving, underground telecommunications, electrical, steam lines, watermains, sanitary sewer and storm water treatment facilities, and landscaping.

Reference definitions from paragraph 3.1 for the terms “recent” and “similar.”

5.2 Submission Requirements for Factor 1 (The page limit for this factor is two (2) typewritten pages per project, single-sided):

The Offeror shall submit project experience for a minimum of two (2) and no more than three (3) recent construction projects demonstrating relevant experience as the Prime Contractor on projects with a construction value of at least $12,000,000. If more than three (3) projects are submitted, only the first three (3) will be evaluated, in the order they are presented in the proposal.

Offeror shall demonstrate specific minimum experience in the following areas:

Submitted project(s) must at a minimum demonstrate the Offeror as Prime Contractor on project(s) of similar scope, magnitude, and complexity as defined in paragraph 5.1.

Offeror must use Attachment 1, Offeror or Key Subcontractor Experience Form. Use one form for each project.

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. Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts, where numerous Task Orders are summed up to meet the minimum construction dollar value identified herein, are not acceptable.

Notes:

If the Offeror is submitting any projects as a partner of a Joint Venture (JV), the DUNS, unique entity identifier from SAM.gov and CAGE Code for each firm representing the JV must be included in the proposal. (See Attachment 1). Submit a copy of the fully executed Joint Venture Agreement (See Section 00 21 16 for details).

5.3 Rating Method and Standard for Factor 1– Relevant Experience of Offeror:

The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of submitted projects by reviewing the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and Past Performance Information Retrieval system (PPIRS), when available.

Table 3 will be used to evaluate Factor 1:

Table 3: Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method Rating: Description:

Acceptable: Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

A rating of Acceptable will be given if all the criteria for Factor 1 are met.

A rating of Unacceptable will be given if any of the criteria for Factor 1 is not met.

6.0 FACTOR 2 (Volume 1, Tab B) – Relevant Experience of Team:

6.1 Definitions for Factor 2:

For Factor 2 the following definitions (characteristics) will apply:

Complexity means the many varied elements of work or sequencing of the work required for a project of this nature.

Magnitude means the dollar value of the project examples is equal to or greater than $5,000,000.

Scope means containing many of the elements of work and of physical size in terms of square feet, lineal feet, square yards, cubic feet, cubic yards, or tons of material. Elements of work include asphalt paving, underground telecommunications, electrical, steam lines, watermains, sanitary sewer and storm water treatment facilities, and landscape.

Key Subcontractor means an entity other than the Prime who at a minimum directly performed at least 50% of all major or critical aspects of the work. The Key Subcontractor will be part of the team performing on this requirement. The Offeror must submit Attachment 2 (Letter of Commitment) for each Key Subcontractor which submitted project example(s) for evaluation.

Team is the prime contractor and its subcontracting firms, taken as a whole.

Reference definitions from paragraph 3.1 for the terms “recent” and “similar.”

6.2 Submission Requirements for Factor 2 (The page limit for this factor is three (3) typewritten pages per project, single-sided):

The Offeror shall submit project experience for a minimum of two (2) and no more than four (4) recent construction projects demonstrating relevant experience as the Prime Contractor, Offeror acting as a Key Subcontractor or performed by a proposed Key Subcontractor of projects with a construction value of at least $5,000,000. Offerors may resubmit projects from Factor 1 for Factor 2.

If more than four (4) project examples are submitted, only the first four (4) will be evaluated, in the order they are presented in the proposal.

Offeror shall demonstrate specific minimum experience in the following areas.

The submitted projects, when combined, must demonstrate experience in all three (3) areas indicated below. Note all three (3) areas do not necessarily need to be present in any one project. However, projects which do not demonstrate at least one of the three (3) areas will not be evaluated. An individual project is considered relevant if it at a minimum meets at least one of the following three (3) areas:

6.2.1 Demolition of existing buildings containing hazardous material and requiring abatement of similar scope.

6.2.2 Underground Utility construction or relocation with similar scope and complexity.

6.2.3 Asphalt or Concrete Paving with similar scope.

Table 4: “Example” Chart for Factor 2 Showing Specific Minimum Experience for Each Project:

Submitted Projects:

Demolition of ex. bldgs. containing hazmat and requiring abatement

Underground Utility construction or relocation

Asphalt or Concrete Paving

1 X X 2 X 3 X 4 X

Additionally, submit at least one representative photo or drawing with labels or marking of the document noting the especially relevant areas above.

Offeror must use Attachment 1, Offeror or Key Subcontractor Experience Form. Use one form for each project.

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. Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts, where numerous Task Orders are summed up to meet the minimum construction dollar value identified herein, are not acceptable.

If the submitted project(s) were not self-performed by the Prime contractor, the Offeror must submit a “Letter of Commitment” for the Key Subcontractor(s) which will be completing work for this proposed project. (Please use Attachment 2 found at the end of this Section 00 22 00). Note: This is a requirement.

Any substitution of Key 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 Sub- Contractor(s).

6.3 Evaluation Method for Factor 2:

The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of submitted projects by reviewing the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and Past Performance Information Retrieval system (PPIRS), when available.

Table 5 will be used to evaluate Factor 2:

Table 5: Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method Rating: Description:

Acceptable: Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

A rating of Acceptable will be given if all the criteria for Factor 2 are met.

A rating of Unacceptable will be given if any of the criteria for Factor 2 is not met.

7.0 FACTOR 3 (Volume 1, Tab C) – Past Performance of Offeror:

7.1 Submission Requirements for Factor 3:

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 evaluated to determine whether the Offeror’s past performance is recent, and relevant or not relevant to the RFP, for each project submitted under Factors 1 and 2 (no more than seven

(7) projects). Recent and relevant projects for the purposes of the past performance evaluation are those projects completed within the past six (6) years from the RFP issue date featuring work which is similar in scope, magnitude, and complexity to what is required in the RFP. Next, the past performance will be evaluated to determine how well the Offeror performed on the prior contracts. If the proposal is from a Joint Venture or Partnership, Past Performance information for each partner will be reviewed.

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.

NOTE: If a CPARS rating is not available for ALL projects submitted under Factors 1 and 2, Offerors are strongly urged to submit a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for those project(s) completed within the past six (6) years.

An Offeror should not submit a PPQ when a completed CPARS evaluation is available. If both are submitted, only the CPARS will be evaluated. 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 Caroline Mueller at caroline.b.mueller@usace.army.mil prior to the proposal closing date and time. 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 email confirmation upon receipt. If the Offeror does not receive the confirmation, it is its responsibility to follow up to ensure the Government has received the information before the due date of your proposal.

Additional sources of Past Performance information for evaluation include, but are not limited to, the following:

Offeror may submit past performance information using the attached Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for projects completed within six (6) years submitted under Factors 1 and 2.

The Government may obtain past performance information from other established systems such as the Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS) or other databases; as well as from other sources available to the Government, such as the Defense Contract Management Agency; and interviews with Government personnel with personal knowledge of the Offeror’s performance capability, interviews with organizations familiar with the Offeror’s performance, among others.

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.

6.2 Rating Method and Standard for Factor 3 – Past Performance of Offeror.

Table 6 will be used to evaluate Factor3:

Note: In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered acceptable.

7.0 PRICE:

Price Evaluation:

Award will be made to the Offeror who present the Acceptable proposal (Factors 1, 2 and 3) with the overall total lowest price. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by totaling all line items of the Bid/Price Schedule.

This Source Selection is conducted with the expectation of adequate price competition – normally competition establishes price reasonableness and a comparison of proposed prices will satisfy the requirement to perform a price analysis. A price reasonableness approach will be utilized by the Government to determine that the proposed prices are fair and reasonable as described in FAR 15.305(a)(1).

All offers with separately priced line items or sub-line items will be analyzed to determine if the prices are unbalanced (FAR 15.404-1(g)). The Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items and/or sub-line items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated

Table 6: Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method 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. (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.

or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

SECTION 00 22 00 - ATTACHMENT 1

OFFEROR or KEY SUBCONTRACTOR EXPERIENCE FORM

PLEASE USE THIS FORM PER SUBMITTED PROJECT

Factor 1 – Relevant Experience of Offeror Factor 2 – Relevant Experience of Team

Note: A separate Word version of this document will be accessible on 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 (Or Key Subcontractor):

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, unique entity identifier from SAM.gov 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 defined in Factor 1 and/or 2:

(a) Complexity:

(b) Magnitude/Cost:

(c) Scope:

17. 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).

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

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

20. Submit at least one representative photo or drawing with labels or marking of the document noting the especially relevant areas.

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:

SECTION 00 22 00 – ATTACHMENT 3

THE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ)

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: unique entity identifier from SAM.gov:

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.

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): ________________________________________________________

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 established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E VG S M U N

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

Yes No

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

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the Contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.

Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

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

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

E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL

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

E VG S M U N

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

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

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

E VG S M U N

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

ATTACHMENT 3 - RETURN INFORMATION:

It is preferred that your questionnaire be returned to the Offeror. However, you may also send your completed questionnaire directly to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers by email to both John Scola at john.p.scola@usace.army.mil and Caroline Mueller at caroline.b.mueller@usace.army.mil

End of Section 00 22 00

SUBMIT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION IN VOLUME II (PRICE PROPOSAL)

PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

SECTION 00 45 00

1. Company Name and Address:

2. Point of Contact Name:

Email address:

Telephone Number:

Fax Number:

3. Electronic Transfer Payments will now be required for all new contracts. Do you currently receive Electronic Transfer Payments from this agency? (Agency codes 00005524/00006482)

Yes No

4. Name of Bank and Branch:

Personal Banker:

Telephone Number: Fax Number:

5. Name of Bonding Agent Company:

Agent’s Name:

Telephone Number: Fax Number:

6. Contractors are required, before receipt of contract award to ensure that their firm is registered in the government website entitled System for Award Management (SAM) and that all information required is current and up to date at https://www.sam.gov.

Ensure that your company’s information is updated for the following areas:

CORE DATA: Ensure that your business types are correctly filled in.

What is your business type?

(Examples of Business types: Small Business (SB), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB), Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone), Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), and SBA 8(a)).

DUNS Number or unique entity identifier from SAM.gov:

CAGE Code:

TAX ID:

REPS & CERTS: Ensure that you have certified the FAR and DFARs provisions (clauses) listed on the Reps & Certs pages.

CORE DATA – Business Types updated: Yes Date:

REPS & CERTS – Certified Yes Date:

7. Please provide the following information; it will not be used to evaluate or rank bids. It will be used solely as a reference check for our internal files. List no more than three projects that are substantially complete or have been completed within the last ten years that are similar to this project. Projects should be listed in the following order: Federal projects, state projects, city/county projects, and then commercial projects. Use the following format:

a) Title & Location of Project:

Agency/Company:

Point of Contact (Name &Title):

Email address:

Telephone Number: Award Amount: $ Years of Completion:

b) Title & Location of Project:

Agency/Company:

Point of Contact (Name &Title):

Email address:

Telephone Number: Award Amount: $ Years of Completion:

c) Title & Location of Project:

Agency/Company:

Point of Contact (Name &Title):

Telephone Number: Award Amount: $ Years of Completion:

8. List all outstanding uncompleted projects, in the following format:

a) Title of Project:

Agency/Company:

Award Amount: $ Est. Completion Date:

b) Title of Project:

Agency/Company:

Award Amount: $ Est. Completion Date:

52.204-8 ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS (JAN 2022)

(a)(1) The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this acquisition is 238910 Site Preparation Contractors.

(2) The small business size standard is $16,500,000.

(3) The small business size standard for a concern that submits an…