A.02.02_-_Synopsis_GAES_-_Category_1_Only_-_14_December_2018_-_Amd_02.docx

General A-E Services for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville Center

I. GENERAL INFORMATION

Document Type: Solicitation (AMENDMENT 02) Solicitation Number: W912DY-19-R-0008 Posting Date: 15 November 2018 Response Date: 14 January 2019 NAICS Code: 541330 Engineering Services Product Service Code (PSC): C211- Architect & Engineering Services - General

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

II. DESCRIPTION

The purpose of Amendment 02 is to provide the Government’s responses to the questions and answer phase, which closed on 10 December 2018. There are strikethrough changes or changes in red. There will be no extension to the response date at this time.

CONTRACT INFORMATION. This is not a Request for Price Proposal (RFPP). This is a Request for Capability Statement. This procurement is for Architect & Engineering (A-E) services and will be procured in accordance with (IAW) Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 36.6, A-E Services procedures and Selection of A/E Statute.

The U.S. Army Engineering and Support, Huntsville Center (CEHNC) intends to procure four (4) suites of a firm, fixed-price (FFP), Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC) for General A-E Services (GAES). Work will be issued by negotiated firm-fixed-price or labor-hour task orders. The Period of Performance (POP) is a one (1) year base with four (4) one-year options, for a total of five (5) years. The total IDC contract value shall not exceed a shared capacity $49 million. The small business size standard for NAICS 541330 is $15M. The Government’s minimum obligation shall not exceed the minimum guarantee of $1,000.00 for the life of each contract. The capacity will be shared between all four categories and there will be one statement of work (SOW) for the entire IDC.

When CEHNC conducted market research to maximize small business usage, many A-E forms showed relevant experience in multiple Functional Areas; therefore the A-E services will be divided into four (4) categories covering (7) Functional Areas (FAs). There is not an incumbent for this requirement.

THIS NOTICE IS FOR CATEGORY 1 ONLY (see Project Information).

The Government intends to solicit separate submissions for each of the four (4) categories identified below. Separate submissions are required for each category. Therefore, contractors shall submit a SF330 for each category to be considered for award in the various categories. The following is the tentative schedule for each of the categories to be solicited:

*NOTICE: For details on each of the Categories, please see Project Information below. The capacity is shared between all four categories and there will be one statement of work (SOW) for the entire IDC.

The main activities that comprise the source selection process for this A-E IDC:

1. Public Announcement.

2. Receipt of SF330 Data.

3. Conduct Pre-Selection Evaluation Board (if needed).

4. Conduct Source Selection Evaluation Board (i.e. interviews, ranking, report etc.)

5. Approval of Selections.

6. Issuance, Evaluation, and Negotiation of Price Proposals (Request for Price Proposal).

7. Preparation of Contract Award Documents.

a. After the evaluation of qualifications has taken place and a determination of the most highly qualified firms has been made, the Government will issue a Request for Pricing Proposal for review and negotiation as needed for an award. If negotiations are not successful with an A-E firm, negotiations will be conducted with the next most highly qualified firm, and so on, until the anticipated number of A-E contracts are awarded.

b. If a small business is anticipated to receive an IDC award, the Contractor shall adhere to FAR 52.219-14 – “Limitations on Subcontracting”. If an “other than” small business is anticipated to receive contract award under these IDC suites, an acceptable small business subcontracting plan shall be submitted prior to award of the basic contract. It will be incorporated into the contract and set forth an agreement that Small Business (SB), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Women Owned Small Business (WOSB), HUBZone Small Business, Veteran Owned Small Business (VOSB), and Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) concerns will have the maximum practicable opportunity to participate in the performance of the contract.

III. PROJECT INFORMATION: The Contractor(s) shall provide engineering and architectural services primarily in support of USACE Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville programs. These services may include but are not limited to the following seven (7) functional areas (FA): (1) General Military Facilities Design/Studies to include but not limited to Architectural and Engineering designs, drawings, plans, specifications (all major disciplines to include AT/FP), Design-Build RFP development; bid document preparation, Design criteria development, Construction Cost Estimation/Schedule Preparation, Facility condition surveys/studies; testing; HAZMAT surveys; GIS surveys; engineering forensics, Value Engineering Studies, Specification updates and policy input, Design reviews, Independent Technical Reviews (ITR) support, Site planning, Facility Planning, Economic Analysis, Construction Cost Estimating, Construction Phase Support (2) Facility Commissioning to include but not limited to Fundamental, enhanced, and retro-commissioning and post-occupancy validation HVAC, electrical, plumbing, control systems (3) Facilities Cybersecurity to include services primarily related to real property facility systems (HVAC, controls, etc.) and NOT related to personal property or non-installed equipment (4) Facility High-Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) Studies/Design (5) Facility Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA), Reliability, Availability, & Maintainability (RAM), and TEMPEST Analyses (6) General Military Facility Cost Engineering/Estimating to include but not limited to Planning estimates, parametric estimates, and detail estimates, Reviewing cost portions of DD1391 documents, Development of schedules and project controls documentation (7) Explosives and Blast Engineering to include but not limited to Development of Explosive Safety Plans, Explosives effects/mitigation, Protective construction, Explosives safety studies/reports.

a. Based on the market research, the Government made the determination that seven (7) FAs would be combined in the following four (4) categories:

FA 2. Facility Commissioning

FA 5. Facility Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA), Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (RAM), and Tempest Analyses FA 7. Explosive and Blast Engineering

b. The Government anticipates each category will have up to three (3) firms for the small sub-suite (small businesses) and three (3) firms for the unrestricted sub-suite. The following is the number of firms per sub-suite on the GAES IDC. The A-E Firms shall identify clearly which sub-suite they are proposing on and proposal for other categories other than the highlighted one below are not being accepted at this time.

3 Unrestricted

3 Unrestricted

3 – Various Specialties

3 Unrestricted

3 Unrestricted

IV. LOCATION. Projects for this requirement include the following areas: United States and its Territories, Afghanistan, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the Republic of Korea. It is anticipated that a majority of the work will be performed in the office of the A-E firms.

V. SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS. When on a military installation, the Contractor and all associated sub-contractors employees shall:

a. Comply with applicable installation, facility and area commander installation/facility access and local security policies and procedures (provided by Government Representative). The Contractor shall also provide all information required for background checks to meet installation access requirements to be accomplished by installation Provost Marshal Office, Director of Emergency Services or Security Office. Contractor workforce

b. Comply with all personal identity verification requirements as directed by DoD (Department of Defense), Headquarters Department of Army (HQDA) and/or local policy. In addition to the changes otherwise authorized by the changes clause of this contract, should the Force Protection Condition (FPCON) at any individual facility or installation change, the Government may require changes in the Contractor security matters or processes. Additional security requirements may apply such as those required to fulfill OPORD 2013-74 (Integrating Antiterrorism (AT) and Operations Security (OPSEC) into the USACE Acquisition Process).

VI. SELECTION CRITERIA. The source selection process for this acquisition will evaluate the following primary selection criteria, which are listed in descending order of importance. The Government reserves the right to reject any and all offers.

A. PRIMARY SELECTION CRITERIA

1. Criteria 1: Specialized Experience & Technical Competence

The A-E Firm shall submit 4 to 6 key projects that demonstrate the proposed team’s recent and relevant experience as follows:

a. Submit 3 to 4 projects relevant to the design of military facilities, design-build RFP development, bid document preparation, design criteria and specification development, construction cost estimation and schedule preparation, facility condition surveys, value engineering studies, design reviews, site planning and design, facility planning, economic analysis, and construction phase support (limited to when the A-E was the Designer of Record)

b. Submit 1 to 2 projects that demonstrate the proposed team’s recent and relevant experience in facility commissioning to include fundamental, enhanced, and retro-commissioning along with post-occupancy validation of HVAC, electrical, plumbing, and control systems.

1.1 Key projects may be performed by the prime contractor, joint-venture partners, or key subcontractors that are being proposed as team members on this proposal. A key subcontractor is defined as a subcontractor where there is a demonstrated history of project partnership where they have performed (and are anticipated to perform) at least 20% of the overall effort on a project.

1.2 The Offeror shall provide a sufficient amount of information to allow for a clear evaluation of the items listed below.

1.3 A summary of the overall project may be submitted, however, the material shall be clear to highlight the specific work that the proposing team directly performed for each project.

1.4 Each project will be submitted using SF330 Part I, Section F form (no more than one (1) page) per project.

1.5 The A-E Firm should not submit a base contract IDC as a project example.

1.6 The A-E Firm shall not submit multiple task orders as a single project example unless they are the design phases of a single project such as the (1) Zero to 35%, (2) 35% to 65% and (3) 65% to 100% design packages or similar.

1.7 Phases of design for a single site that produce final designs for construction in each task order should not be submitted as a single project.

1.8 For a submitted project to be considered ‘recent’: The product directly led to a construction project (design, design-build RFP, etc.) and the associated construction project must have been completed in the last five (5) years. A design-build (D-B) RFP Development project is not considered a construction project.

a. Construction projects must be at least 50% complete and the design 100% by the time the SF330 is submitted for Government review. Any other product types must have been submitted and accepted in the last eight (8) years.

b. For projects related to FA 2, commissioning, the project must have been completed within the last five (5) years. Otherwise, the key project will not be considered ‘recent’ and will not be acceptable for further evaluation.

1.9. Relevancy of key projects will be evaluated in terms of: depth of involvement, construction project complexity, and customer (of equal importance).

a. Depth of involvement: A Firm that has been directly involved in a greater number of critical disciplines on the project will be considered more relevant than if the firm has been involved in fewer critical disciplines on the project. For FA 2, commissioning, a project where the Firm has been designated as the commissioning agent will be considered more relevant than if the firm has been involved in a support or consulting role during facility commissioning.

b. Project complexity: Large, complex projects will be more relevant than smaller, less complex projects. Design of new facilities will be considered more relevant than the design of additions, alterations, or renovations of existing facilities. Commissioning of new facilities will be considered more relevant than the design of additions, alterations, or renovations of existing facilities.

c. Project types: For key projects demonstrating design experience, relevant product types could include full designs, partial design/bridging documents, or the development of RFP documents (in descending order of importance). For commissioning experience, key projects demonstrating experience in planning and executing total building commissioning will be more relevant than other types of commissioning projects. For key projects demonstrating other types of work, demonstrated diversity among those projects will be considered more relevant than a presentation of similar projects.

d. Customer: DOD projects will be considered more relevant than other federal and private sector projects. Other federal projects will be considered more relevant than private sector projects.

2. Criteria 2: Professional Qualifications Using SF330 Part I, Section E, the Firm shall submit one (1) resume for each of the following key personnel:

i. Lead Program Manager

ii. Lead Project Manager

iii. Lead Architect

iv. Lead Mechanical Engineer

v. Lead Electrical Engineer

vi. Lead Civil Engineer

vii. Lead Structural Engineer

viii. Lead Environmental Engineer

ix. Lead Fire Protection Engineer

x. Lead Communications Specialist

xi. Lead Commissioning Specialist It is requested that the Firm not submit any resumes beyond what is being requested. It is recommended instead that the personnel be reflected in the organization chart, identify professional engineers (PE) and registered architect (RA).

2.1 Key engineers and architects shall be registered RA or PE in at least one (1) state (which excludes the Lead PgM, Lead PM, Lead Commissioning Specialist, and Lead Communications Systems Professional). Dual-hatting of disciplines is unacceptable. The Lead Commissioning Specialist should have at least 8 years’ experience in facility commissioning planning and execution. The Lead Communications Systems Professional must have attained the Registered Communications Distribution Designer (RCDD) credential.

2.2. The submitting A-E Firm shall provide a Certificate of Authorization, equivalent certification, or (otherwise) a letter explaining why the firm may, by law, practice architecture and/or engineering in at least one state, territory, or jurisdiction of the United States as required by FAR 36.601-4(b). This information should be provided after SF330 Part I, Section H.

2.3. The A-E firm shall submit a matrix that demonstrates each key person and the key project that they have participated in using SF330 Part I, Section G.

2.4. The A-E 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. This org chart should be no greater than 11x17 and may not exceed one (1) page using SF330 Part I, Section D.

2.5. The Government will evaluate the relevant experience and career longevity of the key personnel relative to the scope of this requirement with greater consideration given to the key personnel team who has: (1) had a longer career of having specialized in relevant projects and (2) demonstrated a history of having worked together on the key projects listed.

a. The lack of a PE or RA license in any key discipline that requires a license or the lack of an RCDD credential for the Lead Communications Systems Professional discipline will constitute an unsatisfactory rating for this criteria.

b. Lack of a Certificate of Authorization will constitute non-responsiveness and will constitute an unsatisfactory rating for this criteria.

c. The organization chart will be evaluated for concerns related to high-risk operations which may affect the rating.

2.6. Criteria 1, 2, 4 and 5 will be evaluated using the following adjectival rating methodology:

COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Blue

Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Purple

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Green

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and 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.

Yellow

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

3. CRITERIA 3: PAST PERFORMANCE

3.1. For all of the key projects submitted for Criteria 1, The A-E Firm shall submit a Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ).

a. For key projects performed for the U.S. Government, the Contractor shall provide a copy of the final signed performance evaluation from the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). If the Contractor does not have a CPAR for a submitted project, they shall provide a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) in accordance with paragraph 3.1(b) below.

b. For non-Government projects, the contractor must solicit Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) to be completed by a project/customer representative (see Appendix A – Past Performance Questionnaire). These questionnaires should be submitted to customers by the proposing A-E firm with instructions to return the questionnaire to the A-E Firm for inclusion in the SF330.

3.2 Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture (JV), teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

3.3. CPARS or PPIRs may be queried for all prime, JV, and key subcontractors. In the event that adverse past performance information is obtained outside the PPIRS or CPARS query and the A-E Firm did not have the opportunity to respond, the A-E Firm will have the opportunity to comment if the firm is selected for discussion IAW FAR 36.602-3(c) or if adverse past performance is the determining reason why the firm is not selected as most highly qualified.

3.4. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's likelihood of success in performing the solicitation's requirements and delivering high quality products and services as indicated by that Offeror's record of past performance.

a. In this context, “Offeror” refers to the proposed prime contractor and its proposed key subcontractors. The prime contractor(s) and proposed key subcontractor(s) will be assessed individually, and the results will then be assessed in their totality to derive the Offeror’s Past Performance rating.

b. For prime contractors or key subcontractors whose firms are divided into severable segments (i.e. division, group, unit, etc.) the past performance will only be evaluated as it relates to those segments of the firm(s) that will actually perform the work.

3.5. Past Performance references will first be reviewed to determine the relevancy of the past performance information.

a. Past performance shall have occurred within the eight (8) years for design projects that resulted in construction and five (5) years for all other projects prior to the closing date of this solicitation and be similar in scope and complexity to this requirement to be considered relevant. The evaluation will use four levels of relevancy as shown in the Table below.

b. 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.

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

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

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

4. Criteria 4: Capacity

The A-E firm should provide a logical narrative explanation (with charts or other aids as necessary) to analytically demonstrate their capacity to perform the following additional workload above and beyond other work projected to be performed during the period of performance of this IDC. This information will be provided in SF330 Part I, Section H.

4.1 For firms proposing as large (unrestricted) businesses:

a. Provide specific details on your current and projected capacity to perform the ADDITIONAL workload of two (2) relevant task orders with a total combined fee of $1M over a 6-month period.

b. Provide specific details on your current and projected capacity to perform the ADDITIONAL workload of a single task order with a fee of $2M over a 12-month period.

4.2 For firms proposing as small businesses:

a. Provide specific details on your current and projected capacity to perform the ADDITIONAL workload of two (2) relevant task orders with a total combined fee of $500K over a 6-month period.

b. Provide specific details on your current and projected capacity to perform the ADDITIONAL workload of a single task order with a fee of $1M over a 12-month period.

More consideration will be given to firms who can effectively demonstrate a greater capacity to effectively handle additional workload.

5. Criteria 5: Knowledge of Locality

The A-E firm shall provide a logical narrative explanation (with charts or other aids as necessary) to demonstrate their familiarity with having worked (or ability to work) in multiple geographic locations. This information will be provided in SF330 Part I, Section H.

5.1. Greater consideration will be given to the A-E firms with the capability to perform work in diverse locations rather than only having experience in one geographic area due to the geographical diversity anticipated of the task order requirements.

5.2. If two (2) or more firms are technically equal, the secondary criteria will be used as “tie-breakers” and the final ranking of firms decided.

SECONDARY SELECTION CRITERIA

The table below shows secondary criteria in descending order of importance includes:

6. Criteria 6: Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business Participation

The Government will evaluate the extent of participation of small businesses (including SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB, and SDVOSB). The greater the participation, the greater the consideration will be given.

a. 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.

b. The following clauses will be incorporated into the resultant contracts:

FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns

FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan

FAR 52.219-16, Liquidated Damages- Subcontracting Plan

FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting

DFARS 252.219-7003, Small Business Subcontracting Plan

7. Criteria 7: Volume of DoD Contract Awards

a. The A-E firm shall provide a statement of the volume (expressed in total number of contracts) of DOD A-E contract awards or contracts that have been active in the last 12 months). The objective is to ensure an equitable distribution of DOD A-E contracts among qualified firms, including small business concerns.

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

VII. JOINT VENTURE /MENTOR- PROTÉGÉ AND SUBCONTRACTOR REQUIREMENTS:

When proposing as a joint venture,

a. 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.

b. 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.

c. When proposing key subcontractors (those expected to perform at least 20% of the overall effort for this IDC), proposing firms shall submit a letter of commitment signed by the subcontractor verifying the subcontractors commitment for the duration of the IDC.

VIII. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS.

Interested parties are to:

a. Submit One (1) SF330 (see Engineering Pamphlet (EP 715-1-4, Competing for A-E Contracts Awarded by USACE) for instructions on completing your submission. (Appendix B – Blank SF330)

b. The SF330 and supporting information shall be submitted in 3-ring binder(s)

c. The tabs for the binder(s) shall be as follows:

Tab 1 – SF330 Tab 2 – SF330 Supporting Documents Tab 3 – Documents excluded from page count

Firms shall submit one original copy of their submittal with four (4) additional copies, for a total of five (5) printed copies.

d. Each binder submitted shall include a CD/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.

i. The digital files shall be provided in a word searchable PDF format.

ii. Each disc should be externally labeled with the volume(s) number(s), date, solicitation number and the Offeror’s name. Self-extracting .exe files are prohibited.

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

Zip disks are not permitted.

e. The SF330 Part 1 shall not exceed 60 pages, including no more than ten (10) pages for Section H. 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).

f. 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”

g. 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/PPIR/CPAR reports. Ensure to include the DUNS number and email address of the point of contact in Part I, Section H. Offerors shall register in the System for Award Management (SAM) prior to submission of SF330s. Pages exceeding the allowable page count will not be evaluated. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited. Double-sided printing is preferred.

This notice and the solicitation will be issued in electronic format only. Paper copies of the notice and solicitation will not be available.

h. Other methods of requesting this notice or the solicitation will not be honored. The solicitation will be posted to FedBizOpps. Firms can search for the solicitation under Solicitation Number: W912DY-19-R-0008. Offerors can register on the FedBizOpps site for the vendor collaboration tool so that possible partnerships and subcontracting opportunities may be identified.

It is the offeror’s responsibility to check the internet address provided as necessary for any posted changes to this solicitation and all amendments.

i. 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.

j. In 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.

IX. Submissions shall be submitted to:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville Center

CEHNC-CT-PREAWARD

ATTN: Sharla R. Andrews / Kijafa T. Johnson-Cooper 5021 Bradford Drive NW Huntsville AL 35816

a. Hand carried submissions shall be dropped off at the same location proposals 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 Time, Monday-Friday, excluding federal holidays.

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

c. FACSIMILE OR EMAIL TRANSMISSIONS ARE UNACCEPTABLE.

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

THIS NOTICE IS FOR RESPONSES TO CATEGORY 1 ONLY.

X. Questions in reference to this notice are to be submitted to the Government by Monday, 10 December 2018 by 2:00 PM Central Time via ProjNet (www.projnet.org) using Bidder Inquiry Key: 78PV6P-CRIKB9. Responses to the questions will be posted on FBO.

XI. Point of Contacts:

Sharla Andrews (Contract Specialist) Kijafa T Johnson-Cooper (Contracting Officer) Office Number: (256) 895-7429 Office Number: (256) 895-1614 Sharla.R.Andrews@usace.army.mil Kijafa.T.Johnson-Cooper@usace.army.mil

CATEGORY 1 ONLY

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

1. 7730141 (Pg. 15 of Synopsis) Please provide a new bidder inquiry key to collect questions for Category 1.

Answer: Please refer to the Synopsis Amendment 01, Page 15 of the Synopsis.

2. 7730346 (Criteria 1.9(b)) Criteria 1.9(b): Please confirm that the last sentence in this paragraph should read: "Commissioning of new facilities will be considered more relevant than the commissioning [not design] of additions, alterations, or renovations of existing facilities."

Answer: Yes, that is correct. The sentence should read ‘Commissioning of new facilities will be considered more relevant than the commissioning of additions, alterations, or renovations of existing facilities’.

3. 7730348 (Criteria 1(c)) Criteria 1(c): Functional area (FA) (1) includes several key support services that will not/cannot be demonstrated on a contract for full design services, including design-build RFP development, design criteria development, facility condition surveys/studies; specification updates and policy input; etc. By prioritizing full design projects in Criteria 1.9 (c), above other forms of support services, it is in the offeror's best interest to only present full design projects; however, we feel this is not in the best interest of CEHNC, to effectively evaluate the qualifications of an AE firm on only this one area of service if a wide range of support services may be necessary. We suggest that the requirements be altered to require X# full design projects, as this is currently the most important form of experience, and request X# projects demonstrating experience with one of the other support services. This will still prioritize full design experience, but also allow the Government to evaluate and select an offeror who has successfully provided support with these broader services.

Answer: The Government will not be making any changes to this requirement at this time.

4. 7730349 (Page 5, Criteria 1.8 & Page 8, Criteria 3.5) Criteria 1.8: We respectfully request that the Government modify the five-year requirement in criteria 1.8 and 3.5 (a) to 8 years OR remove the requirement that construction projects must be at least 50% complete in criteria 1.8 (a). This is a necessary change as many Government projects experience a multi-year holding period between completion of the AE's initial services and the start of construction. Very few Government projects meet BOTH of these requirements.

Answer: Please see changes to Criteria 1.8(a) and 3.5(a) in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

5. 7731305 (Page 5)

On page 5 in Criteria 1: Specialized Experience and Technical Competence the A-E firm is required to submit 1-2 projects demonstrating teams experience in facility commissioning. We request that a resume for a Certified Commissioning Agent (CxA) be added to the list of key personnel.

Answer: Please see changes to Criteria 2 and Criteria 2.1 in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

6. 7731309 (Page 13)

In section VIII (e) the page limit is 60 pages with an 8 page limit on section H. We request an increase in page allowance for Section H to completely address all solicitation requirements.

Answer: Please see changes to Section VIII (e) in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

7. 7734246 (Page 7, Section 2.4)

We request that the Government allow the organization chart required in Section 2.4 by 11 x 17 and count as singular page.

Answer: Please see changes to Section 2.4 in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

8. 7738807 (Page 4, Criteria 1)

Criteria 1 asks the A-E firm to submit 4 to 6 key projects that demonstrate the team's recent and relevant experience. Is there a page limit for each of the six key Example Projects in Section F? One Page or more per project?

Answer: Please see changes to Section 1.4 in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

9. 7738841 (Page 8, Criteria 2)

The table on page 8 shows how criteria 1, 2, 4, and 5 will be evaluated, and the description in the table talks about "Approach," but nowhere in the solicitation/criteria do you ask about Management Approach. Do you want to see our Design Quality Management Approach, Quality Controls, and Cost controls? And if so, can it be shown in Section H?

Answer: There is no requirement to demonstrate management approach. An Offeror may include such information within the allotted page limit in Section H.

10. 7738855 (Page 8, Paragraph 3.1.a)

You state: "For key projects performed for the US Government, the contractor shall provide a copy of the final signed performance evaluation from the CPARS. Will you allow us to submit a PPQ for key projects performed for the US government in cases where we did not get a final signed CPAR from the Government?

Answer: Please see changes to Section 3.1(a) in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

11. 7738866 (Page 5, Paragraph 1.8)

Please confirm that a D-B RFP Development project is not considered a "Construction" project and as such, needs only to be completed and accepted in the last five years, but does not have to be 50% or more construction complete.

Answer: A design-build (D-B) RFP Development project is not considered a construction project.

12. 7740137 (Page 13, Paragraph VIII c.)

Page 13, paragraph VIII c. (Submission Requirements) of the solicitation shows three tabs to be used in organizing the 3-ring binder submittal. Can you elaborate on what material is to be included in Tab 2? The solicitation shows: "Tab 2 – SF330 supporting Documents." Whatever material is included here, does it count toward the 60 page count? Where do we include Part IIs?

Answer:

Tab 1 – SF330 Form in its entirety (Part I & II)

13. 7740146 (Page 13, Paragraph VIII c.)

Page 13, paragraph VIII c. (Submission Requirements) of the solicitation shows three tabs to be used in organizing the 3-ring binder submittal. Can you confirm that Tab 1, typically referred to as Part 1, should only contain Sections A thru I. I refer you to page 7, paragraph 2.2 where you state that a Certificate of Authorization: "...should be provided after SF330 Part I, Section H. So this would put it between Section H and Section I which is technically Part 1 and within the 60 page limit. However, page 14, paragraph VIII g. states that the Certificate of Authorization is excluded from the 60 page count.

Answer: Please see changes to Section 2.2 and refer to VIII (g) in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

Tab 1 – SF330 Form in its entirety (Part I & II)

14. 7740154 (Page 13, Paragraph VIII c.)

Page 13, paragraph VIII c. (Submission Requirements) of the solicitation shows three tabs to be used in organizing the 3-ring binder submittal. Can you confirm that "Tab 3 – Documents excluded from page count" should contain only the items listed on page 14, paragraph VIII g. "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/PPIR/CPAR reports."

Answer: Yes, Tab 3 – Documents excluded from page count" should contain only the items listed on page 14, paragraph VIII g. "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/PPIR/CPAR reports."

15. 7740213 (Page 13 & 14, Paragraph e & f)

Page 13, paragraph VIII e. discusses the SF330 Part 1 and goes on to say: "...use no smaller than Arial or New Times Roman 10-font type." However, Page 14 paragraph VIII f. states that "paper parameter and font restrictions do not apply to the SF330 form." but goes on to show paper parameters directly below. So what are the font and paper parameters for this SF330 submittal?

Answer: If the A&E Firm is not using a fillable SF330 Form, the font use should be no smaller than Arial or New Times Roman 10-font type.

16. 7751722 (Submission Requirements)

Please note 11 questions were uploaded in .pdf file:

Pro2Serve Questions - GAES Category 1 RFP.

Answer:

(1) Is the Offeror required to submit unique projects for each sub-criteria (a) and (b)? Or can the Offeror submit a total of 6 projects with at least 1 to 2 that include scope that address both scope in (a) design/design support and (b) facility commissioning? Submit unique projects for 1 (a.) and 1 (b.) Please make it clear which functional area the project is submitted for.

(2) This requests the “submitting A-E firm” provide a Certificate of Authorization. If a key subcontractor is named, does that key subcontractor need to provide the same documentation? No

(3) One of our key subcontractor’s project is being considered for use in Section F, but they typically do not prime contracts and perform as a subcontractor. Therefore, they only have PPQs from their Prime AE contractor and not from the government (ie CPARS). Will the key subcontractor’s PPQ from their Prime AE contractor be allowable? Yes

(4) May we submit CPARS or existing PPQs (including existing in the USACE/NAVFAC PPQ (Form PPQ-0), if they have already been completed by our customer? Yes, as long as it is the final rating for a given project.

(5) May we use the standard USACE/NAVFAC PPQ form for a key project submitted for Criteria 1? Please use the form listed in Section 3.1 (b) in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

(6) Is Criteria 4 specific to the Prime contractor only, to the Prime and Key Subcontractors or to all team firms? The explanation provided by the Contractor for criteria 4 should demonstrate their capacity to perform the work listed in 4.1 or 4.2 and may include any members of their team.

(7) Is Criteria 7 specific to the Prime contractor only, to the Prime and Key Subcontractors or to all team firms? Prime

(8) Are Letters of Commitment required for all proposed key subcontractors, or only those firms subcontracting to a joint venture? Please see Section VII(c) in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

(9) As certain SF-330 supporting documentation is listed as those items specifically excluded from the 60-page count (thus belong behind Tab 3), please confirm which specific documents should be placed behind Tab 2.

Tab 1 – SF330 Form in its entirety (Part I & II)

Tab 2 – SF330 Form Supporting Documents (reference documents which are included in the page count)

Tab 3 – Documents excluded from page count (For example: cover letter, section tabs, abbreviation/acronym page letters of commitment, the certificate of authorization, and PPQs/PPIR/CPAR reports.

(10) Please confirm that 5 CDs are required to be submitted? Please see Section VIII(c) in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

(11) Is Arial Narrow 10-point allowable for graphics and tables/charts? The font use should be no smaller than Arial or New Times Roman 10-font type.

17. 7751800 (Criteria 2, Page 6)

Because the RFP is requesting firms to submit 1 to 2 commissioning projects, will the government consider including a Lead Commissioning Specialist as one of the key personnel found in Criteria 2: Professional Qualifications.

Answer: Please see changes to Criteria 2 and Criteria 2.1 in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

18. 7751817 (Criteria 6, Page 12)

In order to effectively respond to Criteria 6, Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Participation, can the government confirm the small business goals that should be used as a baseline when determining small business participation?

Answer: Please refer to Criteria 6(a) in Amendment 02 of Synopsis. The Government will not be providing the information.

19. 7751840

III. Project Information states the contractor(s) shall provide "engineering forensics" as part of FA1. Can the Government please define in additional detail what type of engineering forensics may be a part of this contract?

Answer: Forensic engineering is the application of engineering principles to the investigation of failures or other performance problems. For this requirement, the focus will be on facility related forensic engineering.

20. 7751841 (Page 3, Project Information) Can the Government explain what is meant by engineering forensics found in III. Project Information?

Answer: Forensic engineering is the application of engineering principles to the investigation of failures or other performance problems. For this requirement, the focus will be on facility related forensic engineering.

21. 7752043 (1.8.a & 3.1.a)

The solicitation defines relevant design projects as projects that the design is 100% complete AND construction is 50% complete at the time of SF330 submission. The solicitation requirements further restrict key projects performed for the US Government, by requiring the contractor to provide a copy of the final signed performance evaluation from the CPARS. Will you accept Interim CPARs for US government projects meeting the relevancy criteria but final CPARs are not yet available?

Answer: Please see changes to Criteria 1.8(a) and 3.5(a) in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

22. 7752050 (3.1.b)

Will you accept PPQs that we have on file completed by customers for relevant projects that have been prepared for prior government submissions?

Answer: Please see changes to Section 3.1(a) in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

23. 7752261 (Section 1.9b, Project Complexity)

The solicitation states that large, complex projects will be more relevant than smaller, less complex projects. Can the government describe what defines large and complex? Particularly when considering the evaluation of a small business's submittal.

Answer: Please refer to Section VI Selection Criteria – Primary Selection Criteria in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

24. 7752290 (Sections VI and VIII )

Please define what belongs under each Tab. (for example, where do the Certificate of Authorization and SF330 Part II belong?)

Section VIII. C states:

"The tabs for the binder(s) shall be as follows:

Tab 1 – SF330 Tab 2 – SF330 supporting Documents Tab 3 – Documents excluded from page count"

Section VIII. E states "The SF330 Part 1 shall not exceed 60 pages"

Section VIII. G states "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/PPIR/CPAR reports."

VI. A. 2.2 states: "The submitting A-E Firm shall provide a Certificate of Authorization, equivalent certification, or (otherwise) a letter explaining why the firm may, by law, practice architecture and/or engineering in at least one state, territory, or jurisdiction of the United States as required by FAR 36.601-4(b). This information should be provided after SF330 Part I, Section H."

Answer: Please see changes to Section 2.2 and refer to VIII (g) in Amendment 02 of the Synopsis.

Tab 1 – SF330 Form in its entirety (Part I & II)