W912DY23R0012 - Synopsis_HAESI Amd 01 - 9 August 2023.pdf

INDEFENITE DELIVERY CONTRACT (IDC) FOR ARCHITECTURAL &

ENGINEERING (A-E) SERVICES IN SUPPORT OF HUNTSVILLE ARCHITECT

ENGINERING SUPPORT INDFEINITE DELIVERY CONTRACT (HAESI), U.S. ARMY

CORPS OF ENGINEERS, HUNTSVILLE CENTER

GENERAL INFORMATION

Document Type: Combined Synopsis/Solicitation – Amendment 01

Solicitation Number: W912DY23R0012

Posting Date: 13 July 2023

Response Date & Time: 14 August 2023 at 1200 noon CST

25 August 2023 at 1200 noon CST

Title: Huntsville Architect Engineering Support Indefinite Delivery Contract (HAESI)

NAICS Code: 541330 Engineering Services

Product Service Code

(PSC):

C219 - Architect and Engineering – General: Other

CONTRACTING OFFICE ADDRESS:

FedEx/UPS Mailing Address:

5021 Bradford Dr., Suite B Huntsville AL, 35805-4301

USPS Mailing Address:

P.O. Box 1600 Huntsville, AL 35807

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 (fo rmally known as the Brooks Act) as implemented per the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.6, Subpart 236.6 of the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations Supplement (DFARS) and Subpart 5136.6 of the Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS); the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Acquisition Instructions (UAI); and Engineering Pamphlet (EP) 715-1-7, “Architect-Engineer Contracting in USACE”.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville Center (CEHNC) plans to award a multiple award Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC) suite with a target of 7 awardees using full and open competition (unrestricted) with a small business reserve. Firms will be selected for negotiation based on demonstrated competence and qualifications for the required work.

The multiple award IDC suite will have one, twenty-four-month base ordering period and one thirty-six-month option period for a total of sixty months. FAR 52.217-9, “Option to Extend the Term of the Contract”, and FAR 52.217-8, “Option to Extend Services” not to exceed six months, will be evaluated and included in the contract and pursued as needed. Work will be issued by negotiated Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) task orders (TO). CEHNC intends to award a minimum of seven IDCs (three most highly rated other than small business Firms and four most highly rated small business Firms) for this acquisition; 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 is 541330, which has a small business size standard of $25,500,000. The applicable Product Service Code (PSC) for this acquisition is “C219 - Architect and Engineering - General”. The total estimated capacity amount to be shared among all awardees is $49,000,000.00. The Government’s minimum obligation shall not exceed the minimum guarantee of $2,500.00 for the life of the IDC. To be eligible for an IDC award, a Firm must be registered in System for Award Management (SAM) at the time of their submission. Register via the SAM website at https://sam.gov. In addition, FAR 52.236-

23, Responsibility of the Architect-Engineer Firm, applies to this acquisition.

The main activities that comprise the selection process for this A-E IDC suite are as follows:

1. Public Announcement

2. Receipt of Standard Form (SF) 330, Architect-Engineer Qualifications

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

4. Conduct Selection Evaluation Board

5. Approval of Selections by Selection Authority

6. Issuance, Evaluation, and Negotiation of Price Proposals

7. Preparation of Contract Award Documents

2. REQUIREMENTS INFORMATION:

The A-E Firm will be required to provide all personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, and supervision to perform design of military facilities, and architecture, engineering, and planning services with focus on the sustainment, restoration, and maintenance of existing Department of Defense facilities. Services may include design development (full plans and specifications); design-build Request for Proposal (RFP) development; engineering surveys and studies; site investigations; medical facility planning; commissioning; construction phase services; and technical review assistance.

A. Location. Work under this multiple award IDC will be in support of multiple locations throughout the Contiguous United States and its Territories plus outside the Contiguous United States such as Germany, Japan, and the Republic of Korea. Other foreign jurisdictions outside the Continental United States may be added to the geographic scope of the base MATOC if deemed appropriate after an analysis of relevant statutes and regulations, including the Competition in Contracting Act, and approval of a FAR Part 6 J&A for an out-of-scope change if appropriate, and analysis of international agreement terms between the United States and the https://sam.gov/ respective foreign jurisdiction. The selected A-E Firms shall perform all work IAW commonly accepted practices, quality, and professional standards for the industry including adherence to all applicable codes, regulations, technical standards, instructions, specifications, and installation, local, state, federal and international requirements. The work may necessitate travel to work sites and Government installations for the purposes of data collection, meetings, etc. However, the bulk of the work is anticipated to be performed in the home offices of the Firm.

B. Security Considerations. All selected A-E Firms and associated subcontractors’ employees shall comply with applicable installation, facility and area commander local security policies and procedures (provided by Government representative). The Firm shall also provide information required for background checks to meet installation/facility access requirements of the installation Provost Marshal Office, Director of Emergency Services or Security Office. The A-E Firms’ workforce must comply with all personal identity verification requirements as directed by DoD, HQDA and/or local policy (refer to FAR 52.204-9, Personal Identity Verification of Contractor Personnel). In addition to the changes otherwise authorized by the Changes clause of this contract, should the Force Protection Condition (FPCON) at any installation or facility change, the Government may require changes in contractor A-E Firm security matters or processes.

C. Information Security. At a minimum, all documents submitted to the Government shall be marked Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) at the top and bottom of each page IAW the Controlled Unclassified Information sections of DoD Manual 5200.01 DoD Information Security Program. The A-E Firm shall put into place a system to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of data, photographs, reports, and other material generated or acquired as a result of this contract.

Access to data, maps, photographs, and similar material under the Firm’s controls shall be limited to those with a valid need. Paragraphs 9.1 through 9.8 of the attached Statement of Work (SOW) apply to all TOs for which contractor A-E Firm employees have an area of performance within a DoD-controlled installation, facility, or area.

D. Classified Information. When required to handle classified information, the Firm shall properly safeguard all classified material IAW applicable regulations outlined in the DoD

Industrial Security Manual and input information on the DoD Contract Security Classification Specification (DD Form 254). Access to classified information is only authorized at the A-E facility, DIA facilities, or other DoD activities as directed by the Contracting Officer. The A-E Firm shall strictly adhere to the security guidance stated in the National Industrial Security

Program Operating Manual (NISPOM) DoD 5220.22-M regarding the safeguarding of information and the use of Defense Security Service approved computer systems to process classified information. The A-E Firm shall transmit classified documents by a designated courier or escort cleared for access. Classified documents shall be stored in a General Services

Administration-approved security container, an approved vault, or closed area. It is suggested that the A-E Firm have Secret Internet Protocol Router (SIPR) capability to ease in coordination efforts with Defense Intelligence Agency’s (DIA) secure server.

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 Subpart 36.6, DFARS Subpart 236.6 and AFARS Subpart 5136.6, using the selection criteria listed below:

PRIMARY SELECTION CRITERIA

The primary criteria are listed in descending order of importance:

CRITERIA DESCRIPTION

Criterion A Specialized Experience & Technical Competence

Criterion B Professional Qualifications

Criterion C Past Performance

Criterion D Capacity

Criterion E Knowledge of Locality

A. Criterion A – Specialized Experience & Technical Competence

The Government will evaluate the specialized experience and technical competence of each

Firm. The firm’s depth of specialized experience will be measured by evaluating as demonstrated by six relevant and recent Key Example Projects. The firm’s breath of specialized experience will be measured by evaluating the volume of relevant work the firm has performed recently. Submitting multiple projects under a single Key Example Project

(even if performed under the same contract or task order) will be disqualified. The offeror may submit a severable portion of a contract/task order that meets the requirements above as a Key Example Project. If they do, they must identify the contract/task order the project was performed under by referencing the contract/task order number within the description of the Key Example Project narrative. They must also ensure the information provided about the project (such as the period of performance and cost) is limited to the project (and not other scope items delivered as part of the contract/task order). The period of performance and cost of the project are expected to be estimated as a portion of the overall

Contract/task Order effort. that the Firm has submitted. Relevant projects consist of the following types:

1. Design of military facilities

2. Design-build RFP development

3. Facility commissioning

4. Bid document preparation

5. Design criteria and specification development

6. Construction cost estimation and schedule preparation

7. Facility condition surveys

8. Value engineering studies, design reviews, site planning and design,

9. Facility planning

10. Economic analysis, and

11. Construction phase support (limited to when the A-E was the Designer of Record)

Strength of key projects will be evaluated in terms of Project Complexity, Depth of Involvement, Customer, Project Type, and Age of Project. The weight of each of these measures are of equal importance.

• Project Complexity: Large, complex projects will be more relevant than smaller, less complex projects.

• Depth of Involvement: A team that has been directly involved in a greater number of critical disciplines on a project will be considered stronger than if the team has been directly involved in fewer, less critical disciplines on the project.

• Customer: Department of Defense projects will be considered stronger projects than other federal or non-federal projects. Other federal and non-federal projects will be considered equal in strength.

• Project Types: a team that has demonstrated a variety of project types will be considered stronger than those who have only demonstrated fewer.

• Age of Project: A key project will only be considered “recently completed” if the final completed product was accepted within the last five years from the submittal due date.

Key projects that were completed more than five years ago or are currently less than 100% complete will still be evaluated, however, they will be considered weaker than a recently completed key project.

B. Criterion B – Professional Qualifications

The Government will evaluate the qualifications of each firm. Section D, Section E, and Section

H of SF 330 Architect – Engineer Qualifications will be used for the evaluation.

1) The A-E Firm shall have on staff (or provide through consultant[s]) personnel with Professional Engineering licensure. The Firm is to also include a statement that they have the ability with their staff or through their consultant(s) to obtain Professional Engineering licen sed staff for any of the locations that require state specific Professional Engineering Licensure. The requirement to provide state specific licensure will be located in task orders when the project requires it.

2) Resumes demonstrating experience and associated qualifications are required for the following disciplines. Provide resumes for those individuals expected to be primarily assigned to perform work under the contract at the working level. The evaluation will consider education, training, licensure, registration, certifications, longevity with the Firm, and relevant experience of specified disciplines performing the role for which they are proposed to be used on the contract.

Firms shall clearly identify the role of each individual on each resume submitted specific to the roles specified herein. Individuals may fill multiple roles (e.g., Project Manager and Electrical

Engineer) but this must be clearly indicated.

Firms shall submit resumes identifying key personnel for each of the following disciplines:

1. Lead Program Manager

2. Lead Project Manager

3. Lead Architect

4. Lead Mechanical Engineer

5. Lead Electrical Engineer

6. Lead Civil Engineer

7. Lead Structural Engineer

8. Lead Fire Protection Engineer

9. Lead Cost Engineer

10. Lead Cybersecurity Engineer*

11. Communications System Professional

12. Lead Power Systems Controls Engineer

13. Lead Commissioning Specialist

*The Lead Cybersecurity Engineer should have at least five (5) years’ experience with facility related cybersecurity projects and shall have at a minimum, a DoD 8570.01-M approved Information Assurance

Architecture and Engineering (IASAE) level I or II Certification including Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP), Cyber Security Service Provider (CSSP), and CompTIA Advanced Security Practitioner (CASP +Ce). The cybersecurity engineer should have a thorough knowledge of Unified

Facility Criteria (UFC) 4-010-06 "Cybersecurity for Facility-Related Control Systems", and Unified Facility Guide Specification (UFGS) 25 05 11 "Cybersecurity for Facility-Related Control Systems" and experience in applying cybersecurity control measures to control system platforms without impacting the functionality of the control system.

Work Management and Teaming. IAW the SF 330, Section H, the Firm shall provide their proposed management plan that references the organizational chart provided in Section D of the SF 330. The plan should describe the A-E’s proposed work management approach for executing the work to be performed under this contract including team composition, roles and responsibilities of key team members and each subcontracted Firm and its approach for ensuring high quality work products performed by the Firm and their subcontractors. The plan shall include information on quality control processes and procedures, cost and schedule control, coordination of in-house disciplines and consultants, and relevant experience working with each of the subcontractors on similar projects. Section C, Section D, Section G and Section H of the SF 330 will be used to evaluate this criterion.

In reviewing the above project management and teaming information, the evaluation board will consider how the Firms, including Joint Venture (JV) and Offerors using of affiliates, subsidiaries, parent, LLC, LTD member companies, propose to execute the scopes of work.

Organization of the Firm’s team will be evaluated IAW Section 4 Submission Requirements (e.g., JV, Mentor-Protégé, etc.).

C. Criterion C – Past Performance

The Government will evaluate each Firm’s Past Performance as follows:

1) Past Performance will be evaluated primarily upon official information available about the

Key Example Projects submitted. However, the Government reserves the right to evaluate past performance evaluation information from any other relevant sources for recent and relevant projects performed by the prime Firm, Key Subcontractors and JV Partners. The Government may elect to consider any credible and reliable information obtained from other sources. The relevance of such past performance information will be evaluated prior to consideration. In the event adverse past performance information is obtained from the Past

Performance Questionnaire (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.

2) A Firm’s overall past performance will be evaluated from the degree of confidence that the Government anticipates the Firm will perform successfully based on the information provided. The government will assign a Confidence Rating based on this evaluation. The Confidence Ratings will first be adjusted based on the relevance of the projects. Projects with lower Relevance Ratings will tend to lower the overall Confidence Rating.

3) Past performance submitted must match the Key Example Project period of performance described for the project on the SF330 Part I, Section F must fall within the period of performance of the submitted CPARS/PP.

Past Performance (Criterion C) will be evaluated using the following adjectival rating methodology:

ADJECTIVAL DEFINITIONS

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

Relevant Past/present performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicita tion 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.

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. Criterion D – Capacity

The Government will evaluate each Firm’s capacity to perform work as follows:

1) Greater consideration will be given to Firms who can effectively demonstrate a greater capacity for their proposed team to effectively handle additional work of the type demanded of this contract relative to their present workload. Simply stating that a Firm has a certain amount of capacity without demonstrating it through a clear, understandable explanation derived by resource and workload analysis will not be given additional consideration.

2) The board will not assign a rating on the clarity of explanation, but on the amount of additional capacity effectively demonstrated.

3) Capacity is not simply a measure of the depth of the overall resources available to the A-E

Firm, but rather a measure of the proposed team to perform tasks under this contract. The prime contractor needs to demonstrate that they have the core competencies to perform work required under the contract. In order to meet or exceed the requirements of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.219-14, "Limitations on Subcontracting", the prime contractor along with “similarly situated” subcontractors must have the capacity to perform at least 51% of the work over the life of the contract. “Similarly situated” subcontractor means a first-tier subcontractor, including an independent contractor that has the same small business program status as that which qualified the prime contractor for the award and that is considered small for the specified NAICS code (example - if prime is a WOSB, then subcontractors that are WOSB would count towards the goal). The Firm should address how it will meet these requirements based upon the assumption that the items listed under “Specialized Experience and Technical Competence” above constitute the preponderance of the work to be performed under this contract.

4) The SF330 Part II documents may be considered to determine the availability and number of team members who are competent to perform the target requirements.

E. Criterion E – Knowledge of Locality

Greater consideration will be given to Firms who have demonstrated greater geographic diversity of project experience and capability. A Firm who has worked projects in several locations

Outside the Continental United States will be given more consideration than those who have worked on projects located only in the Continental United States. A Firm that has worked projects located in several diverse locations within the Continental United States will be given more consideration than a Firm that has only worked on projects in fewer, regionalized locations within the Continental United States.

Criterion 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” among firms that are essential technically equal, 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

Criterion F Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business Participation

Criterion G Volume of DoD Contract Awards

F. Criterion F – Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business

The Firm must provide their intended subcontracting targets (as a percentage of Total Acquisition Value of the contract) in the following categories:

• Small Business (SB)

• Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB)

• Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB)

• HUBZone Small Business (HUBZone)

• Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB)

• Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB)

Small Businesses submitting as the prime A-E will automatically be given the highest level of consideration for this criterion. The greater the participation, the greater the consideration will be given.

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

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 27% or more for small business participation and proposes a percentage that meets or exceeds three or more subcategory small business goals.

Small businesses are not required to subcontract to other small business firms and may be rated outstanding based on offering 27% or more for small business participation. For other than small 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 25% or more for small business participation and proposes a percentage to meets or exceeds two 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 25% for small business participation. For other than small 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 20% overall SB Participation goal. Small businesses are not required to subcontract to other small business firms and may be rated acceptable based on offering 20% for small business participation. For other than small 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 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 other than small 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 other than small 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 are for services performed within the U.S. and U.S. territories; only foreign Outside the Continental United States locations may be excluded.

Small Business Participation Minimum Quantitative Requirements

SB SDB WOSB HubZone VOSB SDVSB

10% 5% 2% 1% 2% 1%

1. 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 – Other than small 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 Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (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 will report a failure to comply with the subcontracting plan in the annual CPARS report to allow the Firm an opportunity to explain their failure to comply.

G. Criterion G – Volume of DoD Contract Awards

Greater consideration will be given to those Firms who have been awarded a lesser total dollar amount of stand-alone DoD contracts and task orders in the last twelve months than those who have been awarded a greater total amount.

This is evaluated via the Firm’s total dollar value of all stand-alone contracts and TOs as provided in Part I, section H of the SF330. This consists of those requirements awarded by the

Department of Defense in the last twelve (12) months to the Prime Contractor A-E Firm or Joint- Venture Partnership. IDC capacity or capacity of unawarded options will not be considered under this criterion.

Criterion F and G will be evaluated using the following adjectival rating methodology (in the event of a tie among Firms among Primary Selection Criteria):

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.

4. PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS:

The A-E Firm’s SF330 documentation must conform to the following special instructions . See EP 715-1-4 for further instructions and tips for preparing your submission:

Part I – Contract Specific Qualifications: The SF 330 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 SF 330 Part I is submitted for the entire team. The contents of Part I shall not exceed 35 pages (8.5” X 11”). Pages that extend beyond this limit will be removed from the submittal and will not be evaluated. This page limitation only applies to the official contents of Sections A through I of Part I. Cover letters, tab pages, acronym tables, and other such pages do not count against this limit. Firms may use no smaller than 10-point font for narrative, organizational charts, graphs, tables, or matrices. Charts, graphs, etc., may have only that amount of text to explain the item.

A. Part I – Section A: General Information. Fill out completely.

B. Part I – Section B: General Information. Fill out completely. Include the prime Firm’s

POC name, email address, and contractor A-E Firm Unique Entity ID (UEI) number and CAGE Code in this Section.

C. Part I – Section C: Partner Firms. Fill out completely. Only the Prime contractor A-E

Firm, JV Partners, and Key Subcontractors are required to be listed. For work not performed by the prime, JV Partner or Key Subcontractor, DO NOT identify any other Firms in the accomplishment of the work.

D. Part I – Section D: 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 shall not exceed a single side of one page. Non-key personnel may also be referenced on the organization chart.

E. Part I – Section E: Key Personnel Resumes. The A-E Firm shall submit one resume for each of the following key personnel (preferably in the following order):

▪ Lead Program Manager

▪ Lead Project Manager

▪ Lead Architect

▪ Lead Mechanical Engineer

▪ Lead Electrical Engineer

▪ Lead Civil Engineer

▪ Lead Structural Engineer

▪ Lead Fire Protection Engineer

▪ Lead Cost Engineer

▪ Lead Cybersecurity Engineer

▪ Communications System Professional

▪ Lead Power Systems Controls Engineer

▪ Lead Commissioning Specialist

Each resume shall not exceed one page. Each field in the resume form should be filled out (or otherwise indicate that the field is not applicable). Key persons may not necessarily develop the work products required in each TO but will be directly responsible for overseeing any work associated with their discipline under this IDC.

While allowable, it is requested that the Firm not submit any resumes for other positions beyond what is being requested. If necessary, please indicate additional personnel in the organization chart (Part I – Section D) without a resume.

F. Part I – Section F: Example Key Projects. Firms shall submit six Key Example Projects (no more/no less) that demonstrate the proposed team’s relevant and recent experience using Section F forms. Each project shall not exceed two single sided pages.

The final field of each Key Example Project form (Block 25, “Firms from Section C involved in this project”) must include the name of the prime, each JV partner, and or each key subcontractor Firm that worked on the project, their role(s)and the percentage of overall project effort (labor hours) they contributed in that role.

G. Part I – Section G: Key Personnel Participation Matrix . Fill out completely.

H. Part I – Section H: Additional Information. The contractor A-E Firm may provide any additional information the A-E Firm feels would help in describing their qualifications. It may also be used to provide information specifically requested by the Government.

Information specifically requested to be provided in Section H includes:

1) Quality Control Process: Describe the A-E Firm’s Quality Control Management approach tailored to this procurement. The approach should include:

a. The name and contact information of the individuals responsible for safety, quality control implementation and oversight.

b. Comprehensive description and explanation of the system that will be in place at the time of contract award to assure quality is maintained.

c. A process that allows the Government to verify sufficient internal contractor A-E

Firm review was performed.

d. A systematic review process that ensures quality of deliverables is tracked for all TOs awarded under this IDC to note trends in overall quality over the period of performance.

2) Capacity Demonstration. The Firm shall provide a logical narrative explanation to analytically demonstrate their capacity to perform additional workload above and beyond work on other contracts projected to be performed during the period of performance of this IDC. This is not simply a measure of the depth of a team’s resources (i.e., number of people), but a measure of the proposed team’s ability to provide the specific expertise required under this specific contract. Use charts, aids, and a narrative of the calculations in a way that simply but effectively explains ho w the Firm’s additional capacity was derived. The analysis should discuss capacity in terms of full time equivalent (FTE) employees.

The analysis of capacity should discuss a Firm’s ability to effectively schedule projects to maximize available resources while considering deadlines. It should also discuss the ability of the prime to bring on and manage subcontractors to meet demand.

3) Knowledge of Locality. The Firm shall provide a logical narrative explanation (with charts or other aids as necessary) to demonstrate their familiarity and capability of working in multiple geographic locations to include locations Outside the Continental

United States.

4) Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business. The Firm shall provide their intended subcontracting targets (as a percentage of Total Acquisition Value of the contract) in several small business categories.

5) Volume of DoD Contract Awards: The Firm shall provide the total dollar value of all stand-alone contracts and TOs awarded by the Department of Defense in the last

12 months to the Prime Contractor A-E Firm or Joint-Venture Partnership. Do not include IDC capacity or capacity of unawarded options.

6) Volume of Relevant Work: The contractor will provide a narrative broadly describing the volume of similar relevant work they have performed within the last five three years (from the time of submission). The contractor may use narrative, simple charts, and graphs to accurately describe the scope and volume of the work meeting the definition of para. 3.A.(3) above. The Government does not specify a format or required data items for this information. However, too little verifiable information may make it difficult for the Government to evaluate.

I. Part I – Section I: An authorized representative of the Firm must sign the document confirming that the information in Part I of the SF330 is factual.

Part II: Architect-Engineer General Qualifications: Part II provides basic information about the capabilities and experience of a Firm and is not specific to a contract. The Firm must provide one updated and signed form for each Prime Contractor A-E Firm, Joint-Venture Partnership, and Key Subcontractor on the proposing team and is prepared on a branch office basis. It must include 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. There is no page limit to Part II, however, it must only include Architect-Engineer General Qualifications information.

Supplemental Information: Supplemental information being requested by the Government will be provided after the Part II information in a separate tabbed section. There is no page limit to Supplemental Information section, however, it should only include the information specifically requested below (as applicable). The following items will be included with each item identified with the appropriate file tabbed name:

A. Past Performance Information: For each Key Example Project provided in Part I –

Section F, the A-E will provide past performance information (described below) in the order provided in Section F (above).

1) For each Key Example Project performed for the U.S. Federal Government, the A-E Firm shall provide a copy of the most recent (preferably “final”) signed CPARS performance evaluation associated with the contract/task order under which the project was performed.

2) For each Key Example Project which DID NOT require a CPARS evaluation, the A-

E Firm shall solicit a PPQ to be completed by the customer representative of the project who was directly involved in the oversight of the A-E Firm’s work. The PPQ must focus on the work performed specifically by the offeror’s proposed contract team members (Prime and Key Subcontractors only). A customer representative is a technical representative of the ultimate customer or agent of the customer responsible for oversight of the contractor. This would not include the prime contractor or other commercially contracted intermediary.

3) In lieu of requesting a new PPQ from the customer, the A-E may include a PPQ previously provided by the customer for the same Key Example Project from a previous proposal.

4) These questionnaires must include instructions to send the responses back to the proposing Firm for timely inclusion into their submission of SF330 A-E Qualifications. A PPQ template (Attachment 1) has been provided for use. The solicitation number and A-E Firm’s name shall be clearly indicated on the PPQ.

Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the customer point of contact.

5) The Government reserves the right to evaluate past performance evaluation information from any other relevant sources for recent and relevant projects performed by the prime A-E Firm, JV Partners, and Key Subcontractors. The Government may elect to consider any credible and reliable information obtained from other sources. The relevance of such past performance information will be evaluated prior to consideration. If 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.

B. Joint-Venture Partnership Agreement: If proposing as a JV, all members of the JV shall sign a written agreement designating one Firm with the authority to bind the other member(s) of the JV. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements may eliminate the SF330 A-E Qualifications submittal from further consideration. If this is an 8(a), HUBZone, or Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned JV, 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.

In addition, a small business JV offeror shall submit, with its offer, the representation required in paragraph (c) of FAR 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications- Commercial Products and Commercial Services, and paragraph (c) of FAR 52.219-1, Small Business Program Representations, in accordance with 52.204-8(d) and 52.212- 3(b) for the following categories:

(A) Small business;

(B) Service-disabled veteran-owned small business;

(C) Women-owned small business (WOSB) under the WOSB Program;

(D) Economically disadvantaged women-owned small business under the WOSB

Program; or

(E) Historically underutilized business zone small business.

C. Mentor-Protégé Agreement: If 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.

5. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

A. Interested parties are to submit an SF330 Architect-Engineer Qualifications package.

SF330’s and supporting information shall be submitted via the Solicitation Module of PIEE at https://piee.eb.mil by Monday, 14 August 2023 at 1200 noon CST Friday, 25

August 2023 at 1200 noon CST. All submissions shall be submitted in word searchable Adobe PDF format with no smaller than 10-point font. It is the responsibility of the Firm to ensure that all files contained therein are readable, complete, and accessible without a password. Offerors must be registered in PIEE in order to submit a proposal. All Firms are encouraged to register in the PIEE Solicitation Module as soon as possible. The registration instructions are available at:

https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/ce/cap/docs/piee/PIEE_Solicitation_Module_Vendor_ Access_Instructions.pdf .

Failure to successfully register in PIEE will prevent the Firm from completing the submission for this acquisition. For instructions, please refer to the Posting Offer demo available at: https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf . Questions about how to submit your proposal shall be directed to the PIEE help desk at 866-618-5988.

In the event of a PIEE System outage within 24 hours of the proposal due date that prevents the Offeror from submitting a timely proposal, the Offeror shall notify the Contracting Officer, via email at CEHNC-HAESI@usace.army.mil and erika.d.white@usace.army.mil , at least 2 hours before the proposal is due and include a screenshot of the error message or outage notification. The notification may be in conjunction with verbal notification, but verbal notification alone shall not be sufficient.

For the purposes of establishing timely proposal submission, the Government will use the date and time an Offeror’s entire submission is successfully uploaded in PIEE Solicitation Module or in the event a PIEE submission was unavailable the Government will use the time and date provided by the mailroom. The Government cautions Offerors that electronic submissions are not instantaneous and file uploads are subject to system connectivity. Submissions may take several minutes or hours, and Offerors should print confirmation information for their files.

B. The Government will not be responsible for SF330 Architect-Engineer Qualifications package to be delivered to any location or to anyone other than those designated to receive the package on its behalf. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that SF330 Architect-Engineer Qualifications package are submitted so as to reach the designated recipient within the required suspense date and time. Offerors are responsible for allowing sufficient time for the package to be received IAW the instructions provided.

C. Facsimile transmissions WILL NOT be accepted.

https://piee.eb.mil/ https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/ce/cap/docs/piee/PIEE_Solicitation_Module_Vendor_Access_Instructions.pdf https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/ce/cap/docs/piee/PIEE_Solicitation_Module_Vendor_Access_Instructions.pdf https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf mailto:CEHNC-HAESI@usace.army.mil mailto:erika.d.white@usace.army.mil

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

E. The penalty for making false statement in the SF330 Architect-Engineer Qualifications package is prescribed in 18 U.S.C. 1001.

F. Questions in reference to this notice are to be submitted to the Government by 26 July

2023 by 1200 noon CST via ProjNet (www.projnet.org) using the bidder inquiry key MJADDD-WHRTAE. Responses to questions will be posted on ProjNET and PIEE via an amendment. No questions will be answered by email or telephonically; and no additional questions will be accepted on ProjNet after the stated date and time above.

6. POINT OF CONTACTS

Christopher Griffin (Contract Specialist) Office Number: (256) 895-1114 Email: Christopher.Griffin@usace.army.mil

Erika White (Contracting Officer) Office Number: (256) 895-1152 Email: Erika.d.White@usace.army.mil

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

2. HAESI Statement of Work

3. Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP) template

4. Sample Letter of Commitment for Key Personnel

5. Sample Letter of Commitment for Key Subcontractor http://www.projnet.org/ mailto:Christopher.Griffin@usace.army.mil mailto:Erika.d.White@usace.army.mil