W912EP23R0026 AM 0004 SF 30.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

New Lock Control Building and Associated Upgrades at Ortona Lock and Dam, Glades County, Florida

A. See Continuation Sheet for Amendment details.

B. The due date is not extended C. All other Terms and Conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 38

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W912EP23R0026

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

31-Oct-2023

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

04-Dec-2023

CODE

USA ENGINEER DISTRICT, JACKSONVILLE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

701 SAN MARCO BLVD

JACKSONVILLE FL 32207-8175

W912EP 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SF 30 CONTINUATION SHEET

W912EP23R0026 New Lock Control Building and Associated Upgrades at Ortona Lock and Dam, Glades County, Florida

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

1. SPECIFICATIONS:

The text changes have been updated with additions noted by green text and deletions noted by red line/cross-outs, and pertain only to changes made by this amendment. The entire section is replaced if there is any change. The Project Table of Contents and Submittal Register are replaced without underlines and cross-outs if there are changes to these documents. New sections are added without underlines and cross-outs.

DELETE Section 00100A and REPLACED with the attached updated Section 00100A

(End of Summary of Changes)

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00100 - INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

The following have been modified:

00100A

SECTION 00100B A

PHASE I

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

A. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUIREMENT

The Jacksonville District Contracting Division has a requirement from the South Florida Operations Offices (SFOO) – Operations Division to provide a request for proposal for a single award of a Firm Fixed Priced (FFP) contract, utilizing Two-Phase Design-Build Selection Procedures (See FAR 36.303). This single award FFP Contract is issued to obtain design-build services for a proposed new high performance sustainable lockhouse building. This building will serve as a lock and spillway control building for the Ortona Lock and Dam. This new building (approximately net conditioned 1,343 square feet including garage) is intended to house equipment that controls the operations of the lock and dam. The overarching building code is UFC 1- 200-01 which has modifications and provisions to the International Building Code, however this building must also be designed as a High-Performance Sustainable Building per UFC 1- 200-02, in particular Chapter 2. The building must be structurally and architecturally designed as a hurricane storm shelter in accordance with ICC

500. The structure including all openings must be inherently missile impact resistant without any additional protection required to be installed by the user, such as shutters. Option work includes conduit runs to be designed and installed around the lock to the control center within this building, to support future installation of a new control system under a separate contract. Other option work includes demolition of the existing control house after occupancy of the new control house.

Design Work includes, but is not limited to, calculations, plans, and specifications. Included in the design is the proper phasing of all activities coordinated among disciplines, and the removal of existing conditions to include utilities and occupants of the affected areas. The Contractor shall take into consideration that the existing structure will remain occupied during construction of new structure and phase demolition accordingly. Design must be signed and sealed by a Registered Professional Architect, Registered Professional Engineer, or other Registered Professional, for the discipline of work required. Design must be in accordance with design standards required within the contract.

This contract will have a period of performance of 686 calendar days. In accordance with FAR 36.204 -- Disclosure of the Magnitude of Construction Projects, the magnitude associated with this requirement is between $1,000,000.00 and $5,000,000.00.

B. BASIS FOR AWARD

Proposals must meet the criteria stated in the RFP to be considered for Phase I qualification.

To qualify, proposals must demonstrate capability in accordance with the evaluation criteria in Section 00100A, and responsibility in accordance with FAR 9.104. The most highly qualified proposals are determined by a comparative assessment of Phase I proposals. The Source Selection Authority will select up to five of the most highly qualified Phase 1 offerors to submit proposals for Phase 2. A rating of Unacceptable for any Element will result in a rating of Unacceptable for the entire Factor.

Final award will be based upon the Phase 2 evaluation. Phase 2 offerors will submit a price proposal and a design technical and schedule proposal, then Trade-Off procedure will be used to determine overall award. All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

The acquisition will utilize the Two-Phase Design-Build Selection Procedures (See FAR 36.303). In Phase 1 of the two-phase design-build selection procedure, interested firms or joint venture entities (referred to as “offerors”) submit certain specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully execute the design-build construction contract resulting from this solicitation. The Government will evaluate the performance capability proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein and will short-list the Phase 1 offerors to a maximum of five of the most highly qualified offerors to compete for the design-build contract in Phase 2. The Two-Phase solicitation will be prepared in accordance with FAR Part 15, and with phase 2 evaluation factors developed in accordance with FAR 15.304.

The Government intends to make award without holding discussions with offerors. The Government may hold discussions if the Source Selection Authority later determines them to be necessary. Therefore, offerors are encouraged to include their best terms and conditions in their offers for Phase 1 and Phase 2. By submitting an offer in response to this solicitation, offerors are agreeing to comply with all terms and conditions contained in the solicitation. Unless the solicitation specifically invites the offeror to submit exceptions, the Source Selection Authority may reject any offer that contains exceptions. In this solicitation, the words “offer” and “proposal” are used interchangeably.

(See definition of “offer” at FAR 2.101.) Except for any portions of the offeror’s proposal incorporated into the resulting contract by specific reference, the terms and conditions included in the solicitation, including any amendments, shall take precedence over the offeror’s proposal.

D. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

In Phase One, only responsible firms that are System for Award Management (SAM) registered small business, Joint Ventures, and Mentor Protégé under the selected NAICS of 236220, Commercial and Institutional Building Construction, are eligible to submit an offer. For Phase Two, only the Offerors that are selected because of Phase One evaluations may submit a Phase Two proposal. Contractors submitting an offer as a joint venture must provide a copy of the executed joint venture agreement with the initial proposal. Also, if the joint venture involves an 8(a)-small business, the offeror shall submit evidence from the offeror’s SBA Servicing Agency that the offeror has notified and discussed the proposed joint venture with the appropriate SBA personnel.

The joint venture or Mentor Protege must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) as a joint venture for an award to be made.

Offerors are reminded that if it is an 8(a) or HUBZone joint venture, it shall ensure that it complies with the applicable requirements of 13 CFR Parts 124 and 126, respectively.

E. OTHER GENERAL REVIEW

Debarred List

Offerors will be checked in SAM to ensure there are no exclusions listed. Any Offeror who is listed with exclusions will be eliminated without further consideration.

Minor Informalities

Proposals will be checked for minor informalities or irregularities. The Contracting Officer will follow guidance at FAR 15.305 when resolving minor informalities or irregularities. The Contracting Officer either will give the Offeror an opportunity to cure any defect resulting from a minor informality or irregularity or waive the defect, whichever is to the advantage of the Government.

PHASE 1 PROPOSAL AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

Factor 1 – Technical Merit- Technical Merit is significantly more important than Past Performance. Technical merit consists of three subfactors as shown below:

Element 1 - Specialized Experience Element 2 – Organization and Technical Approach Element 3 – Key Subcontractors

Factor 2 – Past Performance – Second most important factor, slightly less important than Factor 1.

PHASE 1 FACTOR SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION METHODS

FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL MERIT

In responding to this factor, the objective should be to instill confidence that the offeror thoroughly understands the requirements and complexities of this project, has the knowledge, expertise, and experience required to meet or exceed the terms and conditions of these specifications, and the ability to successfully accomplish and complete the requirements of this contract within the required time frames as specified.

ELEMENT 1 – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

Specialized Experience -Submission Requirements

The prime contractor and the design firm(s) (or prime contractor if design is to be self-performed) shall each demonstrate recent, relevant experience on projects that are similar in nature, magnitude, and complexity tothe work described in this solicitation, using Construction – Specialized Experience form – (Attachment 2), and Design – Specialized Experience Form – (Attachment 3) at the end of the section. Offerors may identify projects that are similar to the types listed below in Relevant Specialized Experience. If the Offeror is a joint venture, each firm shall provide information, demonstrating experience relevant to their role on this project.

Submit projects that are currently well underway or completed and turned over no longer than ten

(10) years preceding the date of this solicitation. A well underway project is defined as 100% designed and at least 80% construction progress completed. If a project is presented and has not been completed, the offeror shall explain which elements of the work are not completed and the completion percentage. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division or unit submitting the offer or by the team member. Design firms may list prime contractors they have worked for or government, private, or commercial customers.

The Offeror shall select the design firm(s), if projects were design-build, so identify them.

Relevant Specialized Experience for Evaluation Consideration:

General construction projects for commercial or industrial new facility construction not less than 1,250 SF, to include high- performance green buildings, including buildings conforming to ASHRAE 90.1, IgCC, and ICC 500 storm shelter design and construction, including work related to civil-site design and construction, geotechnical investigations, shallow foundation design and construction, concrete and CMU structural design and construction, architectural design and construction including large missile- impact resistant architectural finishes and fenestrations, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing design and construction. Contractor must demonstrate strong experience in executing and managing design-build projects. Contractor must also demonstrate experience applying UFC requirements to design and construction.

Using the Construction – Specialized Experience Form, the offeror shall submit five (5) projects similar to the type described in Relevant Specialized Experience. Construction experience not related to Relevant Specialized Experience will not be evaluated. The maximum number of submitted projects that will be evaluated is five (5) projects. If more than 5 projects are submitted, only the first 5 projects will be evaluated.

Using the Design – Specialized Experience Form, the offeror shall submit five (5) projects similar to the type described in Relevant Specialized Experience. Design experience not related to Relevant Specialized Experience will not be evaluated. The maximum number of submitted projects that will be evaluated is five (5) projects. If more than 5 projects are submitted, only the first 5 projects will be evaluated.

SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE -EVALUATION CRITERIA

The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, related experience of the prime contractor and design firms in design, construction, or design-build, as relevant to their role on this project. The design firm(s) or the design capabilities of the prime contractor will be evaluated only for experience in Relevant Specialized Experience. Higher evaluation ratings will be given for construction projects examples which are similar in function, scope, complexity, location, and size to this solicitation and clearly demonstrate the offeror’s abilities to execute the projects successfully while maintaining cost and schedule. In addition, this criterion will be evaluated for the quantity and quality of experience demonstrated. The greater the relevance and the more recent the prior project experience, the higher the rating assigned during evaluations. Demonstration of experience in completing projects that had the unique characteristics of the proposed project will be evaluated favorably.

Higher evaluation ratings will be given for projects where the Offeror has previously worked with the A-E firm.

The Government may place greater importance on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor, depending upon overall role and relevancy considerations. Federal Government project experience will not be inherently more important than non- Federal Government project experience.

The offeror must submit the requested information to demonstrate a record of recent, related experience in both design and construction, for projects that are similar to the Relevant Specialized Experience (which may include similar state or local government or private counterparts) included in this solicitation. Recent experience includes projects well underway (see above criteria) or those completed and turned over within ten (10) years of the proposal issue date for this solicitation for design or construction experience. Joint Venture partners should each demonstrate experience commensurate with their role on this project or explain in a detailed narrative how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project.

To receive credit for extent (amount) of experience, the offeror and its proposed design firm(s) shall demonstrate a history of recent, relevant experience.

The Government will consider extent of recent experience, degree of relationship of such experience, demonstrated familiarity with applicable codes and local conditions. Some examples of relevancy may include, but not be limited to:

Nature, magnitude, complexity, and location Dates (80% completed or completed no more than ten (10) years preceding date of Solicitation)

Firm’s role and extent of work self-performed (brokering out all work and simply “placing the sidewalks” on a cited project are examples of less relevant experience)

The Government does consider previous D-B experience a strength, even if the experience is on different type projects than this project. Similarly, the Government considers previous recent teaming experience among the team members as value added, even if on different type design and, or construction projects than this project.

The more relevant the experience, the more credit will be given.

The firm(s) or prime contractor preparing the design must demonstrate qualifications and experience in design considerations and development of designs of the types listed in Relevant Specialized Experience.

ELEMENT 2 – ORGANIZATION AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Provide information that describes the offeror’s organization and intended technical approach to executing the design-build contract per the detailed requirements herein. Concisely and clearly, describe the organizational and technical approach to project management, design, and construction execution.

Organization: Describe what firms, their resources and how their resources will be utilized, their roles and responsibilities and any contractual arrangements that have been established. Identify the design firm(s) chosen, if not to be self-performed. Clearly describe any teaming or joint venture arrangements, including a clear description of each firm’s roles and responsibilities on the project. The offeror shall document unequivocal teaming arrangements with its design firms(s) using the format in (Attachment 7). Include an organizational chart illustrating the organization, including key personnel and the proposed quality control group(s). The chart shall depict the key positions and names of personnel, their firm affiliations and their job locations (function or physical location), their job/position title within the organization. Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing how the design and construction process will be managed and the authorities and delegations of authority within the team.

Key Project Personnel Capabilities and Experience: Provide a consolidated list of key personnel with name, position title and description of project responsibility for each. Indicate whether each individual has had a significant role in any of the cited project examples. If alternates are proposed for key personnel, the rating will consider the lesser qualified or experienced person, if there is a difference. Include key designers, whether employed by the prime or by a design subcontractor. For each person provide a brief resume, using the Key Personnel Resume forms (Attachment 5) at the end of this section. The following personnel must be identified:

Project Manager

Design Quality Control Manager

Special Inspector of Record

Architect

Landscape Architect

Interior Designer

Civil Engineer

Structural Engineer

Geotechnical Engineer

Mechanical Engineer

Fire Protection Engineer

Electrical Engineer

Telecommunications Engineer

Specifications Technician

Construction Quality Control Manager

Site Superintendent

Site Safety and Health Officer

All designers of record must be registered in accordance with contract clause: 52.236-25, Requirements for

Registration of Designers.

In accordance with the non-substitution clause in Section 00800, Limitations on Substitutions for Certain Positions and, or Subcontractors, a letter of commitment must be provided for any proposed major subcontractor or key personnel.

A major subcontractor is defined as any subcontractor that is crucial for successfully completing the project.

The key subcontractor identified for this project is for electrical installations, controls, and fire protection installation.

Key Personnel for this project are all the disciplines identified in paragraph “Key Project Personnel Capabilities and Experience” above.

A letter of commitment is defined as a letter from the subcontractor or key person on official Company letterhead (1) addressed to the prime contractor, (2) identifying the work they intend to perform, and (3) stating that they are willing to be bound to perform the identified work if the prime receives this contract. Failure to provide a letter of commitment from proposed major subcontractor or key personnel will be noted as a weakness. Use the form letter (attachment 6) at the end of this section to provide letters of commitment.

Quality Control: Describe the team’s quality control approach, corporate systems and capabilities to maintain quality control of the design and construction. Describe the proposed quality control organization, including the proposed staffing plan. Provide specific information on how you will manage design quality control, track the design evolution and changes during design to meet the schedule and to facilitate Government reviews.

Provide information on how you will handle internal and external requests for information, shop drawings, submittal reviews and approvals, progress meetings, site visits, contract completion, closeout, as-builts, and completion documentation. In addition to the required designer-of-record (DOR) roles specified within the RFP for maintaining integrity of the design, describe any other DOR involvement in the quality control process, if any. There is no need to submit a quality control plan as the successful offeror will provide that after award. In Phase 1, the Government is interested in demonstrable capabilities to assure and control quality and how the offeror can achieve or exceed the contract’s minimum quality control system requirements.

EVALUATION CRITERIA:

Organization: The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the organization and technical approach. The Government will evaluate the firm’s understanding of the design-build process (and the requirements described in the Division 01 requirements of the Solicitation) and the capability to execute the project.

The Government will evaluate clarity and strength of the overall organization, the structure and staffing to execute the entire scope of work. The Offeror is required to select and commit to design firms to achieve an “acceptable” rating. Joint venture participant’s contribution to the organization should be commensurate with their skills and background.

Key Personnel Capabilities and Experience: The Government will evaluate the required information to determine how well the offeror identifies and demonstrates that its key personnel meet or exceed minimum qualifications necessary, which includes previous satisfactory experience in similar type work, to manage, control and perform the design, and to perform construction. Use the Letter of Commitment (attachment 6). Performance of key personnel proposed for this project may be taken into account when it comes to the attention of the Government. The Government will evaluate how well the offeror demonstrates that it has the necessary structure and experienced, qualified personnel within its organization to effectively manage, control, administer and execute the integrated design and construction operations, quality control program and subcontracts. This shall be achievable with other projected on-going work. The Government will give additional consideration to previous design-build experience. Evaluate whether designers of record are registered (a requirement), experienced and qualified.

Project Manager: This is the individual who has the direct responsibility for all operations on the site. This individual shall have a recognized four-year college degree in engineering or related technical field or business/management, minimum experience of five years (or minimum experience of ten years in lieu of a four-year degree) in managing and supervising construction and, or engineering.

for projects similar in scope of the contract. Professional(s) shall be familiar and conversant with the various codes and standards applicable to the scope of work. The Project Manager for a contract shall oversee task accomplishment, administer all instructions, and answer all questions from the Contracting Officer pertaining to the tasks during the life of the contract.

Design Quality Control Manager: This individual must be a person who has verifiable engineering or architectural design experience and is a registered professional engineer or architect with a minimum of 5 years’ experience overseeing design projects.

Special Inspector of Record: The SIOR must be a registered Professional Engineer with five years of related experience overseeing special inspections of new vertical construction.

Architect: The Architect must be a registered architect, active within any state, with at least 5 years licensed design experience in similar projects.

Landscape Architect: The Landscape Architect must be a registered landscape architect, active within any state, with at least 5 years licensed design experience in similar projects.

Interior Designer: The Interior Designer must possess at minimum a NCIDQ certification with a minimum 5 years design experience, or be a state licensed Interior Designer within any state.

Civil Engineer: The Civil Engineer must be a registered Professional Engineer, active within any state, with at least 5 years licensed design experience in similar projects.

Structural Engineer: The Structural Engineer must be a registered Professional Engineer, active within any state, with

Geotechnical Engineer: The Geotechnical Engineer must be a registered Professional Engineer, active within any state, with at least 5 years licensed design experience in similar projects.

Mechanical Engineer: The Mechanical Engineer must be a registered Professional Engineer, active within any state, with at least 5 years licensed design experience in similar projects to this scope of work.

Fire Protection Engineer: The Fire Protection DOR must be a registered Professional Engineer, active within any state, who has passed the fire protection engineering written examination administered by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveys (NCEES) with at least 10 years of licensed design experience.

Electrical Engineer: The Electrical Engineer must be a registered Professional Engineer, active within any state, with

Telecommunications Engineer: The Telecommunications Engineer must be a registered Professional Engineer, active within any state with a minimum 2 years of licensed design experience, or a Building Industry Consulting Services International (BICSI) Registered Communications Distribution Designer (RCDD) with at least 5 years related experience.

Specifications Technician: The specifications writer must have a minimum of two (2) years’ experience on a minimum of four (4) projects writing construction specifications in UFGS format using SpecsIntact software.

Construction Quality Control Manager: The minimum requirements for the key person identified by the offeror to perform the Quality Control during the construction are at least 5 years’ experience in Quality Control during the construction of the types listed in Relevant Specialized Experience or commercial or industrial type experience of similar size, scope, and technical consideration.

Site Superintendent: The minimum experience requirements for the Superintendent are at least five years of experience , superintendent, managing multiple trades and subcontractors during the construction of the types listed in Relevant Specialized Experience of commercial or industrial type experience of similar size, scope, and technical consideration.

Site Safety and Health Officer: The SSHO is required to have a minimum of five years of construction industry safety experience. If the individual possesses a Third-Party, Nationally Accredited (ANSI or National Commission for Certifying Agencies - NCCA) SOH-related certification, only four years of experience is needed. The SSHO is required to have completed the 30-hour OSHA General Industry safety class. The SSHO shall report to an officer of the company, and not the project manager.

ELEMENT 3 – KEY SUBCONTRACTORS

Submission Requirements:

Identify the Key Subcontractor chosen for site/civil, structural, architectural, mechanical, electrical, and fire protection, describing the extent of their involvement on past projects similar to the project types listed in the Relevant Specialized Experience. Submit no more than five (5) Specialized Experience forms (attachment 2), using the same requirements as described in the Phase 1 Specialized Experience submission requirements, including past performance ratings. The ratings may be from either the owner or the prime contractor if the firms were subcontractors on the cited projects. The offeror shall document unequivocal teaming arrangements with its key subcontractors. Use the Letter of Commitment (attachment 8) at the end of this section. Contractors who will self-perform may submit five additional specialized experience forms in this section.

Any construction work to be self-performed by the offeror must be clearly identified. Include description of in-house labor crews and a list of equipment owned or leased by the offeror which is expected to be used within the project.

In accordance with the non-substitution clause in Section 00800, Limitations on Substitutions for Certain Positions and, or Subcontractors, a letter of commitment must be provided for any proposed major subcontractor or key personnel.

Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate the specialized experience of the Key Subcontractors required above, using the same criteria as in the Factor 1 Technical Merit, Element 1 Specialized Experience in Phase 1 evaluation, as applicable to their role on this project. No substitution will be allowed without contracting officer approval below:

LIMITATIONS ON SUBSTITUTIONS FOR CERTAIN POSITIONS AND, OR SUBCONTRACTORS

The award decision for this contract was based, in part, on an evaluation of the personnel and, or subcontractors the Contractor included in its proposal for the positions and, or items of subcontracted work identified at the end of this paragraph. The Contractor agrees these personnel and, or subcontractors will be employed as described in its proposal and no substitutes will be employed without prior written approval of the Contracting Officer or Administrative Contracting Officer. The Contractor further agrees that any proposed substitutes shall meet or exceed the qualifications of the original personnel and, or subcontractors. If the Contractor’s proposal did not name a subcontractor for an identified item of work, the Contractor will not be allowed to subcontract that item of work without prior approval of the Contracting Officer or Administrative Contracting Officer. The limitations described herein shall apply to the following positions and, or items of subcontracted work: Project Manager, Design Quality Control Manager, Special Inspector of Record, Architect, Landscape Architect, Interior Designer, Civil Engineer, Structural Engineer, Geotechnical Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, Fire Protection Engineer, Electrical Engineer, Telecommunications Engineer, Construction Quality Control Manager Site Superintendent, Site Safety and Health Officer.

Once the individual rating for Sub-Factor 1, Specialized Experience, the rating for Sub-Factor 2, Organizational and Technical Approach and Sub-Factor 3, Key Subcontractors, are assigned, an overall Technical Merit Rating will be assigned.

FACTOR 2 – PAST

PERFORMANCE SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Offerors shall submit one NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 4), completed and signed by an Owner of the Project (Client) point of contact or “POC” for each of the projects submitted under Element 1, Specialized Experience and Element 3, Key Subcontractors. All pages of each NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire must be initialed and dated on the bottom right-hand corner by the POC. Failure to provide a completed and signed NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire for each project as described above may be noted as a deficiency. If a Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) record is available for any of the projects submitted under Element 1 - Demonstrated Experience, and Element 3 Key Subcontractor, the CPARS record may be submitted in lieu of the completed Past Performance Questionnaire or an official Performance Evaluation from a non-federal agency.

The Owner of the Project (Client) or “POC” is defined as the entity that took ownership of the project after construction was complete.

If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed Past Performance Questionnaire from the Owner of the Project (Client), before the proposal receipt date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the Questionnaire (Blocks 1-8) that contains contract and client information for the submitted project. Note: it is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure that the client’s point of contact information is current and correct. The client POC reflected in Blocks 1-8 should also be familiar with the past performance they are being asked to verify and informed that they will be contacted by the Government to verify past performance.

The Government reserves the right to obtain copies of all CPARS records contained in the Federal Government’s CPARS database for the offeror or offeror’s major subcontractors.

EVALUATION METHOD

The past performance evaluation is an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The assessment considers each offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant past performances in supplying services that meet the solicitation requirements. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation.

The first evaluates whether the Offeror’s past performance is relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired.

The technical evaluation team will evaluate the demonstrated experiences provided by the offeror under Element 1 and Element 3 above.

Relevancy will be determined based on the timeframe for project completion given under Element 1 and Element 3 and the level of similarity between the offeror provided demonstrated experiences and the solicitation requirements. For example, a demonstrated experience provided under Element 1 or 3 that was completed within the last ten years (measured from the date of the solicitation) that involves essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as this solicitation requires will most likely be given a relevancy rating of Very Relevant (see Relevance Rating Definitions below).

The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed a demonstrated experience submitted in Element 1 and Element 3. This will be determined by utilizing the completed NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaires or submitted CPARS records. The POC provided on the NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire will be contacted to verify the past performance ratings provided. If the POC cannot be contacted, the past performance rating will be noted as “Unknown”. It is the offeror’s responsibility to ensure that the POC’s contact information is current (i.e. names, addresses, telephone numbers and email addresses). The point of contact should be familiar with the performance they are intended to verify and be aware that they will be contacted by the Government.

Once Relevancy Ratings are assigned and Past Performance Ratings are verified, the Government will conclude the past performance evaluation with a performance confidence assessment. The performance confidence assessment will be based on the relevance of the projects provided and the ratings received based on the submitted and completed NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaires as well as CPARS if available.

The performance confidence is the level of risk associated with the offeror as it relates to the probability that the Offeror will successfully complete this project (see Performance Confidence Assessments Definitions below).

PAST PERFORMANCE RATINGS

The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in completing projects that are similar to the solicitation requirements. A relevancy rating of very relevant, relevant, somewhat relevant, or not relevant will first be assigned for projects submitted under specialized experience and past performance.

Past Performance Relevancy Rating Definitions

Adjectival Rating Description

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

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and this requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

Past Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Definitions

Adjectival Rating Description

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

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

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the offeror’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.

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

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

PHASE 1 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

The SSEB will be established to conduct the evaluation of proposals received in response to this solicitation. The evaluation will be based on the content of the proposal, and any information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information. The SSEB will not consider any proposal incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

EVALUATION

Each member of the SSEB will evaluate and rate the proposals independently and subsequently assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor and element . Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts for the Phase 1 submission, and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to determine their performance capability.

The Source Selection Authority, independently exercising prudent business judgment, will select not more than five (5) of the most highly qualified offerors to compete for the design-build award in Phase 2.

DEFINITIONS

Deficiency - is a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See

FAR 15.001.

Weakness - means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR

15.001.

Significant Weakness -in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

Strength - is an aspect of an offeror's proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Significant Strength -is an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal that has appreciable merit or appreciably exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Deviation - Proposal implies or specifically offers a deviation below the specified criteria. The offeror may or may not have called the deviation to the Government’s attention. A Deviation is Considered a Deficiency. The proposal must conform to the solicitation requirements for award.

EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

General: The Government will review the proposals and rate the quality of each evaluation factor and element (if any). Each member of the SSEB will rate each proposal against the specified evaluation criteria in the Solicitation requirements. The technical rating assigned will reflect the degree to which the proposal meets or does not meet the minimum requirements through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of a proposal. After all proposals are rated, the Source Selection Authority will determine which Offerors are rated as most highly qualified offerors under Phase 1 to short-list for participation in Phase 2.

Rating System: After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies, the SSEB will assign an adjective rating of “Outstanding”, “Good”, “Acceptable”, “Marginal”, or “Unacceptable” to each factor and element to reflect the Government's confidence in each offeror's technical ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the solicitation. The adjectival ratings shall be assigned, using the following criteria, which incorporate a proposal risk assessment:

COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATING METHOD DEFINITIONS

Color Rating

Adjectival Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and, or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and, or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

Evaluators will apply the adjectival rating for the definition that most closely matches the evaluation. Packaging the Proposal FOR PHASE 1

NOTE: The only authorized transmission method for proposal in response to this solicitation is electronically via Solicitation Module of PIEE at https://piee.eb.mil. No other transmission methods (email, facsimile, regular mail, DOD SAFE, hand carried, etc.) will be accepted. All proposals received after the exact time specified for receipt shall be treated as late submissions. For instructions on how to post an offer, please refer to the Posting Offer demo: https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/xhtml/wbt/sol/solicitation/proposals.xhtml

It is the offeror’s responsibility to obtain written confirmation of receipt of all electronic files of the full proposal by the Contracting office.

The submission date for all Volumes shall be no later than the date and time specified in Block 13 of the SF 1442 of the RFP.

FILE DESCRIPTION: To ensure your submission is received and processed appropriately, it is important that interested parties carefully ensure their electronic files adhere to the following naming convention: Each filename shall begin with the solicitation number, followed by the word “RESPONSE”, followed by your firm’s name, and finally a brief file description.

Submit proposals in Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) as two separate electronic files. Offerors may use compression utility software such as WinZip or PKZip to reduce file size and facilitate transmission. The two electronic files shall be named as follows:

W912EP23R0026 RESPONSE_COMPANY NAME_Volume I Technical Merit.pdf Tab A - Standard Form 1442 and the Proposal Data Sheet (Attachment 1) Tab B - Element 1 Specialized Experience Tab C - Element 2 Organizational and Technical Approach Tab D - Element 3 Key Subcontractors

W912EP23R0006_COMPANY NAME_VOLUME II

Tab A - Past Performance Submittals for Projects Submitted for Element 1 Tab B - Past Performance Submittals for Projects Submitted for Element 3 Tab C - Include a letter from your bonding company on letterhead stating per project and aggregate bond capability.

File Organization, Formatting, and other instructions. Although hard copies are not accepted, each file shall be clearly indexed, and logically assembled. Font size shall be 10 or larger. Pages shall be letter sized. Offerors shall prepare proposals in the English language. Proposals shall be in a narrative format, organized and titled so that each section of the proposal follows the order and format of the factors. Information presented should be organized so as to pertain to only the evaluation factor in the section that the information is presented. Information pertaining to more than one evaluation factor should be repeated in the section for each factor.

Include a “File Description” for each file(s) you upload. The “File Description” will be included in the email notice to each of the recipients you choose to have access your file(s). Note: Do not enter Privacy Act Data (Personal Identification Information (PII)) in the File Description.)

Upload Completion and Deadline. Interested parties shall submit responses no later than the date on this announcement page. The time and date of proposal receipt will be the upload completion / delivery time and date recorded within Solicitation Module of PIEE. Offerors should be prudent with the time allocated for uploading files to allow for unexpected delays in the transmittal process. Submissions after the deadline will be considered late and as such will be processed in accordance with FAR 15.208.

PHASE 1 DOES NOT INVOLVE PRICING SUBMISSION. DO NOT SUBMIT PRICING INFORMATION

WITH PHASE 1 PROPOSALS.

Offerors are responsible for providing a clear, well-organized proposal. Each volume shall contain the offeror’s Name/Address/Telephone Number/E-mail address and the following (if applicable): Table of Contents, List of Tables, List of Figures and, or List of Appendixes. No information may be incorporated into the proposal by reference.

When completing the information for transmittal at the PIEE/JAM website, you will be asked to enter email addresses for the recipients. Use the email addresses below to submit your proposal to both the Contract Specialist and the Contracting Officer. When your proposal is submitted via the PIEE/JAM website, the website will provide notification of the submittal to the recipients.

The Contract Specialist is Mr. Chad Manson at chad.d.manson@usace.army.mil The Contracting Officer is Mr. William Wallace at William.J.Wallace@usace.army.mil

Submit the two electronic files using the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) at https://piee.eb.mil. A help guide can be found at https://piee.eb.mil/#help-piee.

Non-CAC card holders: This type of drop-off allows a non-authenticated user (Guest) to upload a file that has been requested by an authenticated user. An authenticated user must first execute the "Request a Drop-Off" procedure to obtain a "Request Code" for external delivery to the non-authenticated user.

You must contact Mr. Chad Manson at chad.d.manson@usace.army.mil and Mr.