Synopsis_-_BMD_-_01_May_2019.pdf

INDEFENITE DELIVERY CONTRACT (IDC) FOR BALLASTIC MISSILE DEFENSE

(BMD) PROGRAM ARCHITECTURAL-ENGINEERING (A-E) SERVICES

GENERAL INFORMATION

Document Type: Combine Synopsis/Solicitation Solicitation Number: W912DY-18-R-0062

Posting Date: 01 May 2019 Response Date & Time: 03 June 2019 by 2:00 P.M. Central Standard Time (CST)

Title: Ballistic Missile Defense Program A-E Services NAICS Code: 541330 Engineering Services

Product Service Code

(PSC):

C1BF- Missile Systems Facilities

CONTRACTING OFFICE ADDRESS:

US Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville Center P.O. Box 1600, Huntsville, AL 35807-4301

1. CONTRACT INFORMATION. This is not a Request for Price Proposal (RFPP).

This acquisition is being procured In Accordance With (IAW) the 40 United States Code (U.S.C) Chapter 1101 et seq, “Selection of Architects and Engineers” statute (formerly known as the Brooks Act) as implemented per the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Sub Part 36.6, Sub Part 236.6 of the Defense Acquisition Regulations Supplement (DFARS) and Sub Part 5136.6 of the Army Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS); the USACE Acquisition Instructions (UAI); and Engineering Pamphlet (EP) 715-1-7, “Architect-Engineer Contracting in USACE”.

The U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center (CEHNC) Huntsville, plans to award a multiple award Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC) suite on an unrestricted basis. Firms will be selected for negotiation based on demonstrated competence and qualifications for the required work.

The multiple award IDC suite will have one (1) thirty-six (36) month base ordering period and one (1) twenty-four (24) month option ordering period, for a possible total of five (5) years. FAR 52.217-9, “Option to Extend the Term of the Contract” will be included in the contract to pursue the established option ordering period and FAR 52.217-8, “Option to Extend Services” not to exceed six (6) months of services, will be included in the contract and pursued as needed. Work will be issued by negotiated Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) and Cost-Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) task orders. It is anticipated that this acquisition will result in the award of at least three (3) but no more than five (5) contracts; however, the Government reserves the right to award more, less, or none at all if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government.

The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code for this procurement is 541330—Engineering Services with a small business size threshold of $15,000,000. This announcement is open to all businesses regardless of size. The applicable Product Service Code (PSC) for this acquisition is “C1BF - –Missile Systems Facilities”. The total capacity to be shared among all awardees will be $249,000,000.00 ($249M). The contract is anticipated to be awarded in fiscal year 2020. The Government's minimum obligation shall not exceed the minimum guarantee of $2,500.00 for the life of each contract. This requirement will be an unrestricted full and open competitive acquisition with no awards reserved for small business firms.

To be eligible for contract award, a firm must be registered in System for Award Management (SAM) at the time their submission is submitted. Register via the SAM Internet site at http://www.sam.gov. The firm must have an approved Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) system, and have the professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of the required services at the time their submission is submitted. If a large business is selected for this contract, it must comply with FAR 52.219-9, “Small Business Subcontracting Plan”, regarding the requirement for a subcontracting plan on that part of the work it intends to subcontract. The plan is not required with submittal, but will be required with the price proposal of any large business selected for negotiations.

IAW FAR 52.236-23, Responsibility of the Architect-Engineer Firm, the A-E firm shall be responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy, and the coordination of all designs, drawings, specifications, and other services furnished by the Firm under this contract. The Firm shall, without additional compensation, correct or revise any errors or deficiencies in its designs, drawings, specifications, and other services.

The main activities that comprise the selection process for this multiple award A-E IDC suite:

1. Public Announcement

2. Receipt of SF330 Data, Architect-Engineer Qualifications

3. Conduct Pre-Selection Board (if needed)

3. Conduct Selection Evaluation Board

4. Approval of Selections by Selection Authority

5. Issuance, Evaluation, and Negotiation of Price Proposals

6. Preparation of Contract Award Documents

2. REQUIREMENTS INFORMATION: Specific work requirements defined in the base contract will be implemented in subsequent task orders. This multiple award IDC suite will be used to procure highly specialized A-E design services in support of the evolving global Missile Defense System. This contract will provide technical support for the design of new facilities and sites in support of the deployment of Missile Defense sites for the Government. This support is for the development and rehabilitation of tactical, tactical support, and non-tactical facilities supporting the Missile Defense mission including missile control buildings, industrial workshops, power plants, communications facilities, administration buildings, new and rehab road work, utility work, and building systems work, and various other facilities as needed to meet the Missile Defense mission.

http://www.sam.gov/

To successfully complete these projects requires specialized engineering services including, but not limited to, High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP), Reliability, Availability, Maintainability (RAM), and Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analyses (FMECA) design and analysis. These designs require firm experience in radar, missile launch and command and control facilities, communications infrastructure in support of command control and battle management systems, tactical support facilities, non-tactical facilities and various other facilities that may be required to support the Missile Defense mission. The designs require firm expertise in determining the facility and weapons system interface requirements and the follow-on design of radar, missile launch, tactical support facilities and various other facilities that may be required.

Specific requirements are expected to include, but will not be limited to the following:

• Design of facilities and sites including the preparation of design criteria, A-E designs, specifications, design-related analyses and studies.

• Economic analyses and cost estimates.

• Additional support may include the following: environmental documentation; permits;

special studies; other environmental activities as required by federal, state, and local laws and regulations; feasibility studies, geotechnical investigations and topographical mapping services, programmatic support services, as-builts, and engineering and design during construction. Improvements that occur as a result of the evolution of weapon system design may drive modifications to the existing sites to assure operational conformity. It is critical that the firm possess extensive experience related to services described above and comply with mandatory Federal, State, and military regulations and standards.

Due to the ballistic missile threat from rogue nations rapidly changing, the Department of Defense (DoD) needs maximum flexibility for the Missile Defense system including the support of experienced A-E firms who can provide quick turnaround on designs of highly complex state-of-the art Missile Defense requirements. In order to successfully achieve the goal of deployment, facility designs required by this contract require a challenging level of coordination with the designs and procurements of the weapons system firms. The spiral development concept being used to develop the Missile Defense systems result in frequent technology and criteria evolution, requiring maximum flexibility in terms of defining emerging requirements, unpredictable funding streams and demanding schedules. The Missile Defense program shall have experienced A-E firms with the knowledge, expertise, and financial stability to perform the services necessary to support this critical mission.

a. Location. The program involves A-E services to support the BMD Program at diverse locations throughout the Contiguous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, US Territories and possessions; USACE Transatlantic Division (TAD), North Atlantic Division (NAD), and Pacific Ocean Division (POD) such as Europe, Asia, and Australia; and other Missile Defense installations. Excluding site visits for fact-finding, meetings, consultation and information gathering; work outside of the United States and outlying areas (as defined in FAR 2.101) will be at the firm's United States Place of Performance.

b. Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Disclosure Statement. The A-E shall provide the CAS

Disclosure Statement required by Public Law 100-679. Describe the A-E’s cost accounting practices as well as any joint ventures or subcontractor cost accounting practices.

Accounting system approval is per FAR 16.104(i) and 16.301-3(a)(3). The CAS Disclosure Statement shall be used to determine the cost accounting adequacy.

c. Security Considerations. The firm will be required to comply with all installation security requirements. Only firms who hold a facility security clearance at the secret level at the time their submission is submitted will be eligible for award under this acquisition. It is anticipated that some task orders may involve classified data and work in Secret and Top Secret secure areas. A DD254 may be required. The firm will be required to store and generate classified material. The firms’ personnel may be required to obtain gate badges to access the work site at certain installations and facilities. The appropriate security requirements and applicable clauses will be included in the awarded contract. This acquisition will not be acquiring information technology products or services. Each A-E prime and each member of a joint venture partner firm shall have, at the time of submission, a Facility Clearance at the Secret level. Each A-E Prime and each member of a joint venture partner firm shall also demonstrate employee secret security clearances as well as ability to store and process classified material IAW Executive Order (EO) No. 13526.

3. SELECTION CRITERIA: Firms that demonstrate higher aggregate qualifications relevant to the primary selection criteria are considered to be the most highly qualified firms. If two or more firms are technically equal, the secondary criteria will be used as “tie-breakers” and the final ranking of the most highly qualified firms will be decided after interviews are conducted. If justified by the submissions, a sufficient number of firms will be recommended to ensure that at least two (2) most highly qualified firms remain “in reserve” when negotiations commence on the final contract. Negotiations for fully burdened labor rates in each labor category will take place with the most highly qualified firms. The selection process for this acquisition will be IAW EP 715-1-7, FAR Sub Part 36.6, DFARS Sub Part

236.6 and AFAR Sub Part 5136.6, utilizing the selection criteria listed below:

PRIMARY SELECTION CRITERIA

The primary criteria are listed in descending order of importance:

CRITERIA DESCRIPTION

Criteria a. Specialized Experience & Technical Competence Criteria b. Professional Qualifications Criteria c. Past Performance Criteria d. Capacity Criteria e. Knowledge of Locality

(a) Criteria a: Specialized Experience & Technical Competence

1. Firms shall submit key projects that demonstrate the proposed team's recent and relevant experience as described below. A project is defined as efforts leading to the completion of a specific requirement. Individual task orders from an IDC can be submitted as one (1) project. Multiple projects performed under a multiple-award contract that are submitted as a key project will be disqualified from further evaluation. Each project will be submitted using one (1) SF330 Part I, Section F form per project:

2. Firms proposing must submit three to five (3-5) key projects that demonstrate recent and relevant experience in the design of facilities in support of the deployment of the ballistic missile defense systems or designs demonstrating similar core competencies. Key projects are expected to include specialized analytical techniques and features such as FMECA, RAM analyses, HEMP survivability, Anti-Terrorism Force Protection, explosives safety site plans, prediction of explosive effects, protective construction to mitigate explosive effects, extreme environmental conditions, TEMPEST, Secret Compartmentalized Information Facilities, physical and electronic security systems, power plants, facilities in support of the ballistic missile defense system, radar facilities, communication facilities, and intrusion detection systems requirements. The Government will consider only the first five (5) key projects in the submission; any additional projects will not be evaluated.

3. A key project will only be considered recent if the firm demonstrates through documentation that the completed design product has been accepted by the ultimate project owner within the last ten (10) years and led to a construction project which is no less than 50% complete at the time of the release of this Synopsis. Otherwise, the key project will NOT be considered recent and will be eliminated from further evaluation.

4. Greater relevance will be assigned to key projects: (1) that demonstrate greater complexity; (2) where the firm has demonstrated greater depth of involvement; (3) where the firm has performed a greater portion of the design of the overall facility; (4) and where the project involves a greater number of features as described in paragraph 3(a)(2) above.

Projects with a greater relevance will be evaluated higher than those with lesser relevance.

5. Key projects may be performed by the prime contractor A-E Firm, joint-venture partners, or key subcontractors that are being proposed as team members for this Synopsis submission.

A key subcontractor is defined as a subcontractor which is expected to perform 10% or more of the total contract effort across all task orders awarded on this contract. The effectiveness of the proposed project team (including management structure; coordination of disciplines, offices and/or subcontractors; and prior working relationships) shall be demonstrated.

6. Key projects shall clearly state what specific role the firm and or key subcontractors had including the names and roles of key personnel being proposed.

7. The A-E firm shall submit an unconditional letter of commitment signed by an authorized representative of each key subcontractor firm. A sample letter of commitment (LOC) is attached to this Synopsis.

(b) Criteria b: Professional Qualifications

1. Certificate of Authorization (or equivalent): The A-E firm shall provide a Certificate of Authorization or, an equivalent certification demonstrating that the firm may, by law, practice architecture and/or engineering in at least one (1) state, territory, or jurisdiction of the United States as required by FAR 36.601-4(b). If the A-E firm cannot provide such certification, the firm must provide a letter explaining the authority for the firm, by law, to practice architecture and/or engineering in at least one (1) state, territory, or jurisdiction of the United States as required by FAR 36.601-4(b). If the firm has not provided sufficient authorization documents or justification as requested, the firm will be disqualified for further consideration. This information should be provided in SF330 Part I, Section H.

2. Evaluation of Key Personnel: The qualifications of proposed personnel will be evaluated in terms of education, professional credentials, training, registration, relevant and specialized experience, career longevity with the firm, and teaming experience among key personnel. Using SF330 Part I, Section E, the firm must submit one (1) resume for each of the key personnel listed below. Each field in the resume form should be filled out (or otherwise indicate that the field is not applicable). If the firm has not provided a resume for each of the required key disciplines the submission will be considered non-responsive and will be rated “Unacceptable” for this criteria. Each key person shall perform and develop the work products required in each task order. Multiple personnel shall not be submitted for a single key personnel position. Dual-hatting of key discipline positions is not allowed.

a. Program Manager

b. Project Manager

c. Architect

d. Mechanical Engineer

e. Electrical Engineer

f. Civil Engineer

g. Geotechnical Engineer

h. Structural Engineer

i. Environmental Engineer

j. Fire Protection Engineer

k. Communications Systems Professional. This person must have attained the Registered Communications Distribution Designer (RCDD) credential.

l. Quality Control Manager

m. Cost Engineer or Cost Estimator. This person must demonstrate proficiency with the 2nd Generation Micro-Computer Aided Cost Engineering System (MII) cost estimating software.

n. Scheduler. This person must have demonstrated field construction experience with Primavera scheduling software.

o. Electronic Security System Designer with six (6) years of experience.

Additionally, the resumes submitted shall demonstrate the following credentials/competencies are possessed by one (1) of the key personnel above or by another identified discipline whose resume is separately submitted:

• LEED Accredited Professional (AP)

• Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection. Minimum of six (6) years’ experience required.

• Experience in the predication of explosive effects and protection construction design to mitigate explosive effects

• Experience in High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) design

The Program Manager (PgM), Project Manager (PM), and Quality Control Manager (QCM), each key engineer, and the Electronic System Security Designer (ESSD) must be a registered Professional Engineer in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory. Each key Architect must be a Registered Architect in at least one (1) U.S. state or territory. The lack of a required credential for any key discipline will constitute an “Unacceptable” rating for this criteria. If a submitted key discipline works for a subcontractor to the primary firm then they should demonstrate successful project execution as a subcontractor with the primary firm over a period of time. The A-E firm shall submit unconditional letters of commitment from key personnel individuals not currently employed by the prime or key subcontractor.

3. Evaluation of Key Project Teaming Experience: The firm shall submit a matrix that demonstrates each key person and any key projects that they have participated in using SF330 Part I, Section G. A higher rating will be given to those matrices demonstrating teams where a greater percentage of its members have worked together on more key projects.

Greater consideration shall be given to key personnel demonstrating participation in key projects submitted under Criteria A, Specialized Experience & Technical Competence.

4. Evaluation of the Organization Chart: The firm shall submit an organization chart of the proposed team that clearly demonstrates the team and organizational relationships among key personnel, delineates responsibility, and identifies for which firm each person directly works. The organization chart may not exceed one (1) page and will use SF330 Part I, Section D.

(c) Criteria c: Past Performance

1. Past Performance will be evaluated primarily upon official information available about the key projects that have been submitted under Criteria A, the Specialized Experience & Technical Competence criteria.

2. For key projects performed for the U.S. Federal Government submitted under Criteria A, the Specialized Experience & Technical Competence criteria, the A-E firm shall provide a copy of the most recent signed performance evaluation from the A-E Firm Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS).

For key projects performed for a non-Federal Government submitted under Criteria A, the Specialized Experience & Technical Competence criteria, or if the prime or key subcontractor was subcontractor to the firm that received the CPARS evaluation for the contract, the A-E firm shall solicit Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) to be completed by a ultimate owner who was directly involved in the oversight of the firm's work. The questionnaires must include instructions to send the responses directly to the Contracting Officer responsible for this acquisition and include the name of the acquisition and the name of the prime contractor firm with which it is associated.

3. Past Performance Questionnaire. The PPQ included in this Synopsis is provided for the Offeror to submit to the ultimate owner for each project (that does not have a CPARS) the Offeror submitted under Criteria A, the Specialized Experience & Technical Competence criteria.

PPQs shall clearly indicate the following information:

• Solicitation Number

• Offeror’s Name

• Relevant Project Number (Project 1, Project 2, Project 3, etc.)

PPQs shall be submitted via email only to the Contracting Officer Lashonda Smith at Lashonda.C.Smith@usace.army.mil and Contract Specialist Sharla Andrews at Sharla.R.Andrews@usace.army.mil directly from the client/reference (not the Offeror) prior to the Synopsis closing date. Offerors should follow-up with the clients/references to ensure timely submittal of the questionnaires.

In the event that a completed PPQ form is not provided, the Offeror should provide a "PPQ Point of Contact (POC) List", with their submission which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s).

The Offeror shall include a list of all the clients who were sent a PPQ. The PPQ POC List shall include:

a. Solicitation Number

b. Company Name mailto:Lashonda.C.Smith@usace.army.mil mailto:Sharla.R.Andrews@usace.army.mil

c. Contract Number

d. Government Agency

e. POC Last Name, First Name

f. POC Title

g. POC Telephone Number

h. POC E-mail Address

i. Date

Firms should provide a most recent CPARS or PPQs for only the projects submitted under the Criteria A, the Specialized Experience & Technical Competence criteria.

The Offeror may submit completed PPQs for key projects that had been previously obtained and submitted under another pervious acquisition. However, in such cases, the Offeror must ensure that the PPQ is supplemented with contact information of a customer contact who is aware of the project and can attest to the PPQ responses. If in doubt, submit a new PPQ to the customer.

4. The Government reserves the right to evaluate past performance evaluation information from any other relevant sources, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) and Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) for recent and relevant projects performed by the prime A-E firm, key sub-contractors and joint venture partners.

The Government may elect to consider any credible and reliable information obtained from other sources. In the event that adverse past performance information is obtained from the PPQ or other sources, the firm will have the opportunity to respond to any adverse information received which it had not had a previous opportunity to comment.

5. A firm's overall past performance will be evaluated from the degree of confidence that the Government anticipates the A-E firm will perform successfully based on the information provided. Additionally, the confidence ratings will be adjusted based on the relevance of the projects. Unsatisfactory or Marginal rating for one (1) or more evaluations will weigh more heavily than higher past performance ratings for this criteria.

6. Past performance submitted must match the relevancy requirements described under Criteria A, the Specialized Experience & Technical Competence criteria to be considered relevant. The evaluation will use four (4) levels of relevancy. More relevant past performance will be treated as a stronger predictor of future success and will therefore have more influence on the overall performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

ADJECTIVAL DEFINITIONS

Very Relevant Past/present performance effort involved essentially the same cope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Past/present performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires Somewhat Relevant Past/present performance effort involved some scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

Past Performance will be evaluated using the following adjectival rating methodology:

Substantial Confidence

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

Satisfactory Confidence

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

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

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

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the firm’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

(d) Criteria d: Capacity

Demonstrate capacity or an effective organization structure, project team and quality management plan to accomplish up to an estimated five (5) task orders simultaneously, with an estimated value of $5 million each in a one (1) year period of time. Specifically, the Offeror should describe its approach to rapidly ramping up/down as work load increases/decreases. The evaluation will consider the management approach, coordination of disciplines and subcontractors, and quality control procedures to complete the aforementioned projects. This information should be provided in SF330 Part I, Section H.

(e) Criteria e: Knowledge of Locality

1. Greater consideration will be given to firms with the experience and capability of performing work on projects:

(a) in diverse locations;

(b) in extreme, and geographically remote locations;

(c) in the targeted areas of execution described in paragraph 2(a) above.

2. The firm shall provide a logical narrative explanation (with charts or other aids as necessary) to demonstrate their familiarity and capabilities. This information will be provided in SF330 Part I, Section H.

Criteria a, b, d, and e will be evaluated using the following adjectival rating methodology:

Outstanding Submission meets requirements and indicates exceptional qualifications and an understanding of the requirements.

Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Submission meets requirements and indicates adequate qualifications and an understanding of the requirements.

Submission contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable Submission meets requirements and indicates adequate qualifications and an understanding of the requirements.

Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Submission does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated adequate qualifications and an understanding of the requirements. The submission has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Submission does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Submission is un-awardable.

SECONDARY SELECTION CRITERIA

The secondary criteria will be used as “tie-breakers. The secondary criteria will only be used as a "tie-breaker,” if necessary, in ranking the most highly qualified firms. The secondary criteria will not be commingled with the primary criteria in the evaluation. The secondary criteria are listed in the order of importance.

CRITERIA DESCRIPTION

Criteria f. Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business Participation Criteria g. Volume of DoD Contract Awards

(f) Criteria f. Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business Participation

The Government will evaluate the extent of participation of small businesses (including Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB), HUBZone, Veteran- Owned Small Business (VOSB), and Service- Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB)). The greater the participation, the greater the consideration will be given.

1. Firms that are “other than” a small business concern proposing shall include an estimated percentage of involvement of each SB category. Small Businesses submitting as the prime A-E will automatically be given the highest level of consideration for this criteria.

2. Small Business (SB) and Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) Participation will be adjectivally rated according to the guidance provided below:

ADJECTIVAL DEFINITION

Outstanding Submission indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives. Proposal demonstrates substantive commitment to SB firm(s), e.g., an enforceable commitment for this procurement with SB firms; Proposal identifies the complexity and variety of work small businesses are to perform; Proposal demonstrates its commitment to far exceed the overall SB Participation goal by offering 25% or more for small business participation and proposes a percentage that meets or exceeds three

(3) or more subcategory small business goals. Small businesses are not required to subcontract to other small business firms and may be rated excellent based on offering 25% or more for small business participation. For large business prime -displays past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9. Risk of unsuccessful performance in meeting SB objectives is very low.

Good Submission indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives. Proposal demonstrates substantive commitment to SB firm(s), e.g., an enforceable commitment for this procurement with small business firms; Proposal identifies the complexity and variety of work small businesses are to perform;

Proposal demonstrates commitment to exceed the SB Participation goal by offering 20% or more for small business participation and proposes a percentage to meets or exceeds two (2) or more subcategory small business goals. Small businesses are not required to subcontract to other small business firms and may be rated good based on an offering that exceeds 20% for small business participation. For large business prime - displays past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9. Risk of unsuccessful performance in meeting SB objectives is low.

Acceptable Submission indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives. Offeror is a large or small business (SB).

SB firm(s) are specifically identified in the proposal; Proposal demonstrates a substantive commitment to SB firm(s), e.g., an enforceable commitment for this procurement with small business firms; identifies the complexity and variety of work small businesses are to perform; and demonstrates commitment to meet the 15% overall SB Participation goal. Small businesses are not required to subcontract to other small business firms and may be rated acceptable based on offering 15% for small business participation.

For large business prime - displays past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9. Risk of unsuccessful performance in meeting SB objectives is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Submission does not clearly meet requirements and does not clearly indicate a feasible approach and understanding of the requirements.

SB firm(s) are not clearly identified in the submission; or submission does not clearly demonstrate a commitment to SB firm(s), for example enforceable commitment with at least one firm through utilization of Joint Venture, mentor/protégé or teaming agreement;

does not clearly identify the complexity and variety of work small businesses are to perform; or does not clearly demonstrate commitment to meet the SB Participation goal; and meet any subcategory small business goals. For large business prime – does not clearly display past performance in complying with FAR 52.219- 8 and 52.219-9. Risk of unsuccessful performance in meeting SB objectives is high.

Unacceptable Submission is unacceptable, does not meet requirements and/or does not demonstrate a feasible approach and understanding of the requirements. Submission contains one or more deficiencies for example SB firm(s) are not identified in the submission; or submission does not demonstrate a commitment to SB firm(s); or does not identify the complexity and variety of work small businesses are to perform; or does not demonstrate commitment to meet the SB Participation goal and does not meet at least any subcategory small business goals. For large business prime does not display past performance complying with FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-

9. Risk of unsuccessful performance in meeting SB objectives is very high.

The Small Business Participation minimum quantitative requirements are based on analysis to ensure small business utilization either as a prime or subcontractor during contract performance.

SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION MINIMUM QUANTITATIVE

REQUIREMENTS (EST.)

Small Business Category % of Total Acquisition Value Small Businesses (SB) 10% Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDB) >1% Women-Owned Small Businesses (WOSB) >1% HUBZone Small Businesses (HUBZone) >1% Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (VOSB) >1% Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses

(SDVOSB)

>1%

3. To ensure that all categories of small business concerns have the maximum practicable opportunity to participate, the following clauses will be incorporated into the solicitation and resultant contracts:

• FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns - Small Business

Utilization evaluations information will be housed within the official contract file.

• FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan and DFARS 252.219- 7003, Small Business Subcontracting Plan - Large businesses will be required to provide an acceptable Small Business Subcontracting Plan (SBSP). In addition, the large business prime contractors will be required to submit a semi-annual Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS) report to ensure approved subcontracting goals are being met. During the evaluation phase and before task order issuance eSRS and CPARS data will be reviewed to ensure compliance with prior subcontracting goals.

• FAR 52.219-16, Liquidated Damages- Subcontracting Plan – Pursuant to FAR 19.705-7(b), Liquidated Damages will be assessed in the amount of damages attributable to the firm’s failure to comply in the amount equal to the actual dollar amount by which the Contractor failed to achieve each subcontract goal.

The Contracting Officer shall report a failure to comply with the subcontracting plan in the monthly CPARS report to allow the firm an opportunity to explain their failure to comply. Further, eSRS quarterly reports will be required from each firm, until it is clear that they are on track to meeting their subcontracting goals.

(g) Criteria g. Volume of DoD Contract Awards

1. The A-E firm shall provide a statement of the volume, in SF330 Part I, Section H, (expressed in total number of A-E contracts and total value of each contracts) of DoD A- E contract awards or contracts that have been active in the last 12 months. Include awards to all branch offices of a firm, except as indicated in DFARS PGI 236.602- 1(a)(6)(A)(2). For IDCs, consider the total value of task orders actually issued by agencies in the last 12 months, and not the potential value of the contracts. For all types of contracts, do not consider options that have not been exercised. The objective is to ensure an equitable distribution of DoD A-E contracts among qualified firms, including small business concerns.

2. Contract awards may be obtained from CPARS, verified, and updated during the interviews with the most highly qualified firms.

4. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Interested parties are to submit one (1) SF330 (see Engineering Pamphlet (EP 715-1-4, Competing for A-E Contracts Awarded by USACE) for further instructions on completing your submission for Government’s review.

a. Offeror shall submit four (4) hard copies of the complete submission package (to include SF330 forms and supporting information). Each hard copy shall be provided separately in a 3-ring binder. Each binder submitted shall include a compact disk (CD) or digital video disc (DVD ROM) containing a complete copy of the contents of that respective binder. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure that the CD/DVD ROM and all files contained therein are readable, complete, and accessible without password.

1. The digital files shall be provided in word searchable PDF format per CD/DVD ROM. Preference is for one (1) word searchable PDF, if possible.

2. Each disc should be externally labeled with the date, solicitation number and the Offeror's name. Information posted on self-extracting .exe files and Zip disks are not prohibited and will not be evaluated.

If the electronic copy and hard copy of the submission differ, the hard copy will govern.

b. The Government will not be responsible for submissions delivered to any location or to anyone other than those designated to receive submissions on its behalf. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that submissions are submitted so as to reach the designated recipient of submissions by the date and closing time. Offerors are responsible for allowing sufficient time for the submission to be received in accordance with the instructions provided.

c. SF330 Part I - Contract Specific Qualifications. The SF330 Part I presents the corporate team members and their roles in the proposed contract, an organization chart, resumes of the key personnel to be assigned to the contract, projects which illustrate the team's experience in the required type of work, the key personnel's participation in the example projects, and any other qualifications relevant to the announced contract. A single SF330 Part I is submitted for the entire team.

The SF330 Part I shall not exceed 60 pages, including no more than ten (10) pages for Section H. Charts, graphs, etc., may have only that amount of text to explain the item and shall not contain excessive text that circumvents the page and font limits. The org chart may printed on one (1) folded 11” x 17” sheet which will count as one page per printed side. Each side of a sheet of paper is considered one page; use no smaller than Arial or New Times Roman 10-font type; and a page number should appear at the bottom of each page (along with the submission revision number for the amended page, if amended).

Include the prime A-E firm's DUNS number and email address of the point of contact in the SF 330 Part I, Section H.

Paper Parameters - Paper parameter and font restrictions do not apply to the SF330 form.

• Margins: Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1”

• Gutter: 0”

• From Edge: Header, Footer – 0.5”

• Page Size: Width – 8.5”

• Page Size: Height – 11”

The following pages are excluded from the 60 page count: cover letter, section tabs, abbreviation/acronym page, letters of commitment, the certificate of authorization, and PPQs/PPIRs/CPAR reports. Be sure to include the DUNS number and email address of the point of contact in Part I, Section H. Offerors shall register via the System for Award Management (SAM) internet site at http://www.sam.gov prior to submission of SF330s. Pages exceeding the allowable page count will not be evaluated. The use of hyperlinks in submission is prohibited. Double-sided printing is preferred.

d. SF330 Part II - General Qualifications. The SF330 Part II provides basic information about the capabilities and experience of a firm and is not specific to a contract. Part II is required for the prime firm and each subcontractor, and is prepared on a branch office basis. It includes the type of ownership, small business type (if applicable), point of contact, number of personnel in each discipline, profile of the firm's experience, and annual volume of work.

http://www.sam.gov/

e. Joint Venture/Mentor-Protégé and Subcontractor requirements:

When Joint Venture, or under a Mentor Protégé or Teaming Agreement:

1. All members of the joint venture shall provide a draft written agreement designating one (1) firm with the authority to bind the other member(s) of the joint venture. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements may eliminate the submission from further consideration.

2. If this is an 8(a), HUBZone, or Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned joint venture, the Offeror should ensure that it complies with the applicable requirements of 13 CFR Part 124, 13 CFR Part 125, and 13 CFR Part 126 respectively.

3. When proposing as part of a Mentor-Protégé Agreement, include a signed copy of the agreement and the Small Business Administration approval of the agreement with the

SF330.

4. When proposing key subcontractors (those expected to perform at least 10% of the overall effort for this multiple award IDC suite), proposing firms shall submit a unconditional letter of commitment signed by the subcontractor verifying the subcontractors commitment for the duration of the multiple award IDC suite.

Other methods of requesting this Notice or the Synopsis shall not be honored. The Synopsis will be posted to Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) at https://www.fbo.gov/. Firms can search for the Synopsis under Solicitation Number: W912DR-18-R-0062. Offerors can register on the FBO site for the vendor collaboration tool so that possible partnerships and subcontracting opportunities can be identified. This Notice and the Synopsis will be issued in electronic format only. Paper copies of the Notice and Solicitation will not be available.

It is the Offeror’s responsibility to check the FBO site as necessary for any posted changes to this solicitation and all amendments.

• A project-specific design quality control plan shall be prepared and approved by the

Government as a condition of contract award, but is not required with this submission.

• In SF330, Section H, indicate the estimated percentage involvement of each firm on the proposed team.

No additional project information will be given to firms during the announcement period.

https://www.fbo.gov/

f. Submissions shall be submitted to:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville Center

CEHNC-CT-PREAWARD

ATTN: Sharla R. Andrews / Lashonda C. Smith 5021 Bradford Drive NW Huntsville AL 35805

1. Hand carried submissions shall be dropped off at the same location submissions are to be submitted for this acquisition. The mailroom entrance is located at the back of the building and is clearly marked from the outside. The mailroom personnel will receive the packages, date stamp, x-ray as appropriate and contact the person identified on the package. Hours of operations for the mailroom hours is 0800-1500 Central Standard Time (CST), Monday-Friday, excluding federal holidays.

2. Hand carried submissions shall be date stamped by the mailroom personnel by the specified due date and time.

3. FACSIMILE OR EMAIL TRANSMISSIONS ARE UNACCEPTABLE.

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

Questions in reference to this notice are to be submitted to the Government by Wednesday, 15 May 2019 by 3:00 PM Central Standard Time via ProjNet (www.projnet.org) using bidder Inquiry Key: K7V4I7-WW3IPN. Responses to the questions will be posted on FBO. No questions shall be answered by email or telephonically.

5. POINT OF CONTACTS

Sharla Andrews (Contract Specialist) Office Number: (256) 895-7429 Email: Sharla.R.Andrews@usace.army.mil

LaShonda Smith (Contracting Officer) Office Number: (256) 895-7795 Email: Lashonda.C.Smith@usace.army.mil

Attachments:

1. Sample Letter of Commitment for Key Personnel

2. Sample Letter of Commitment for Key Subcontractor

3. Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

4. Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP)

5. BMD Statement of Work mailto:Sharla.R.Andrews@usace.army.mil mailto:Lashonda.C.Smith@usace.army.mil