RFP__SF1442_Vol_1_of_3_18R0015.pdf

Request for Proposal

W912ER18R0015

SF 1442 for

Pierside Mini-Mart NSA 2, Bahrain

Volume 1 of 3 Solicitation Instructions

Contract Clauses

US Army Corps of Engineers Middle East District

PROJECT TITLE: Pierside Mini-Mart, NSA2 Bahrain

This is a design-bid-build project consisting of new facility construction of a one story retail building in accordance w ith the Scope of Work.

There are also utilities and related site improvements in the project.

The Magnitude of Construction is betw een $1,000,000 and $5,000,000.

Notes: (a) The Government reserves the right to incorporate the aw ardee proposal into the contract and distribute the proposal as deemed necessary. Any deviations from the proposal must be approved by the Contracting Officer. (b) The contractor is required to provide all documentation requested in this solicitation (tender) to include Defense Base Act (DBA) Insurance after contract aw ard and prior to Notice to Proceed. (c) A bid bond is required for this acquisition. (d) Performance and Payment Bonds (30%) are required for this acquisition.

Funds are authorized but are not presently available for this acquisition. No contract award will be made until funds are made available.

ANDREA L GREENE 540-665-3149

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

21-Mar-2018

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

X

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______20 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________445 calendar days after receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________FAR 52.211-10

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________2 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________21 Apr 2018 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______90 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS-CETAM-CT

MIDDLE EAST DISTRICT, CETAM-CT

PO BOX 2250

WINCHESTER VA 22604-1450

W912ER

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

02:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

W912ER18R0015 67

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 1 Job Mobilization & De-mobilization

FFP

Mobilization and De-mobilization in accordance with the contract documents FOB: Destination

NET AMT

0002 1 Job Construct Pierside Mini-Mart

FFP

Construct Pierside Mini-Mart in accordance with the contract documents

0003 1 Job Construct Support Facilities

FFP

Construct Support Facilities in accordance with the contract documents

0004 1 Job OPTION Option 1 - Emergency Power System

FFP

Option 1 - Emergency Power System (Generator) for Pierside Mini-Mart in accordance with the contract documents.

0005 1 Job OPTION Option 2 - Landscape Irrigation System

FFP

Option 2 - Landscape Irrigation System and additional landscape plantings in accordance with the contract documents

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

0001 445 dys. ADC 1 US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS-

CETAM-CT-C

MIDDLE EAST DISTRICT

CETAM-CT

P O BOX 2250

WINCHESTER VA 22604-1450

000-000-0000

W26WKS

0002 445 dys. ADC 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0003 445 dys. ADC 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0004 445 dys. ADC 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0005 445 dys. ADC 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

SECTION 00 21 00 INDEX

ITEM DESCRIPTION

A AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS

B PROPOSAL CHECKLIST

C BASIS FOR AWARD

D FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

E EVALUATION APPROACH

F PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

G DISCUSSIONS

PROVISIONS BY FULL TEXT

52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT

52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST

52.236-27 SITE VISIT (CONSTRUCTION)

52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

252.204-7004, ALT A ALTERNATE A, SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT

252.204-7008 COMPLIANCE WITH SAFEGUARDING COVERED DEFENSE

INFORMATION CONTROLS

252.215-7008 ONLY ONE OFFER

A. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS

Funds are authorized for this project but are not currently available. No award will be made under this solicitation until funds are made available to the Agent.

B. PROPOSAL CHECKLIST

B.1 General. Offerors shall submit their proposals in two separately bound volumes: Volume I – Non-Price (Technical) Proposal and Volume 2 – Price Proposal. Do not submit pricing information in the non-price proposal.

Electronic or faxed proposal submissions will not be considered. Proposals shall be clearly marked on the outside of the package with the solicitation number.

B.2 FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors-Competitive Acquisition applies to this acquisition and may be viewed electronically at: http://farsite.hill.af.mil/.

B.3 The submission and evaluation criteria for each of the evaluation factors are detailed in paragraph E and associated subparagraphs of this section. The proposal checklists below may be used to assist offerors in complying with the solicitation’s submission requirements. Specific information regarding proposal submission may be found in paragraphs E and F of this section.

VOLUME I – NON-PRICE (TECHNICAL) PROPOSAL:

1. ____Cover Letter (see content instructions in paragraph B.4, below).

2. ____Table of Contents – Non-Price (Technical) Proposal

3. ____FACTOR 1 – MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL APPROACH documentation as described in the Factor 1 Submission Requirements

4. ____FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

a. Experience Overview Sheet (Attachment 1)

b. Experience Information Sheets (Attachment 2)

c. Completed PPQs (Attachment 3)

VOLUME 2 – PRICE PROPOSAL:

5. ____Cover Letter (see content instructions in paragraph B.4, below).

6. ____Table of Contents – Price Proposal

7. ____Signed Solicitation Offer and Award (SF1442), completion of blocks 14 through 20C, to include acknowledgments of all amendments, if any.

8. ____Completed Proposal Schedule (Section 00 11 00)

9. ____Price Breakdown Sheet (Attachment 4)

10. ____Completed Representations and Certifications (Section 00 45 00).

a. If an offeror is a Corporation, completed Corporate Certificate.

b. If an offeror is a partnership, completed Authority to Bind Partnership, and provide a copy of the

Partnership Agreement.

c. If an offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), then completed Corporate Certificate (if JV partner is a

Corporation), or Partnership Agreement (if JV partner is a partnership) for each member of the JV, and provide a copy of the JV agreement.

B.4 Cover Letter. Include the following information in your cover letter:

1. Solicitation Number

2. Business Name and Address of the offeror

3. Company CAGE Code, DUNS Number, and Tax I.D. Number (TIN)

4. Authorized company representative name, telephone number, and valid company email address

5. Acknowledgment of any amendments issued (amendment number and date acknowledged by offeror)

C. BASIS FOR AWARD

C.1 The award will be made to the offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government, using the procedures set forth in FAR 15.101-1, with appropriate consideration given to the three evaluation factors:

Factor 1 – Management and Technical Approach Factor 2 – Past Performance Factor 3 – Price

C.2 In determining the best value to the Government, each non-price factor is of equal importance to each other, and when combined, are of approximately equal importance to the price factor.

C.3 In accordance with FAR 15.101-1, award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offer.

D.1 FACTOR 1 – MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

D. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal. Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below. A comprehensive description of each factor’s submission requirements and evaluation criteria are detailed in paragraph and subparagraphs E of this section.

D.1 FACTOR 1 – MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

This factor will be evaluated based on the adequacy and feasibility of the offeror’s management and technical approach. The components to be evaluated are 1) the offeror’s licensure, 2) prior experience, 3) organization, and 4) preliminary schedule. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach,” Paragraph E of this section. During evaluations of each proposal, the Government will assign an adjectival rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings.

D.2 FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

This factor will be evaluated on the recency, relevancy, and quality to determine a confidence assessment rating. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph E of this section.

D.3 FACTOR 3 –PRICE

This will be a Firm Fixed-Price (FFP) contract. The Government will evaluate each price proposal for completeness, balance, and reasonableness. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph E of this section.

E. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be submitted in accordance with the proposal instructions provided in the solicitation and shall be subject to evaluation by the SST. The overarching evaluation approach for all factors is as follows:

1. Adequacy of Response: The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the RFP (completeness).

2. Feasibility of Approach: The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

Offerors will be evaluated based on the factors listed below. Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government in accordance with the procedures discussed in FAR 15.101-1, and utilizing an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described herein.

FACTOR 1 – MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

FACTOR 3 – PRICE

E.1 FACTOR 1: MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL APPROACH

The Government shall evaluate each offeror’s Management and Technical Approach submission and will rate each offeror based on the adequacy and feasibility of the offeror’s proposal in response to the submission requirements below.

E.1.1 Management and Technical Approach Proposal Submission Requirements

E.1.1.1 The offeror’s submission under this factor shall not exceed forty (40) pages in length. A page is considered one sheet of paper with text on the front and/or back. The page limit does not include one cover/title page. Pages that exceed the page limitation will not be evaluated.

E.1.1.2 The Management and Technical Approach consists of four components: 1) Licensure, 2) Prior Experience,

3) Organization, and 4) Preliminary Schedule.

E.1.1.2.1 LICENSURE: The offeror must be licensed to perform construction in Bahrain and shall submit a copy of their current licensure in the offeror’s name. A copy of the offeror’s licensure will not count toward the page limitation for this factor.

E.1.1.2.2 PRIOR EXPERIENCE: An offeror shall provide a narrative that outlines how its experience on prior projects will enable it to successfully perform the requirements of this solicitation. Although the offeror may highlight any experience it has gained, an offeror’s narrative should address the following challenges:

Hiring qualified laborers and maintaining a qualified workforce.

Procurement and shipping of long lead items.

Obtaining access to work locations, e.g. base access.

Coordination with host nation authorities during contract performance.

The offeror may address its experience in areas other than those outlined above, so long as the offeror demonstrates how the experience relates to the requirements of this solicitation, such as gained innovative techniques, process improvements, etc. which will enable the offeror to successfully complete this project. The offeror should specifically address any interim or final CPARS ratings of "Unsatisfactory," and how the offeror plans to overcome the issues that resulted in an "Unsatisfactory" rating on any future Government contracts. For purposes of this evaluation, the focus is on the offeror’s prior experience in construction and related challenges, not on those project metrics required to conduct a past performance relevancy evaluation. Offerors should note that the confidence assessment completed under the Past Performance factor is not related to the Government’s assessment under Factor 1 – Management and Technical Approach. Further, the offeror’s narrative under Factor 1 is not limited to a discussion of “recently completed” and “relevant” projects, as those terms are defined in Factor 2 – Past Performance.

E.1.1.2.3 ORGANIZATION: The offeror shall submit an organization chart and narrative of its management structure. The organization chart should include a well-defined organization and clear lines of authority, responsibility, and communication, including the relationship between its home office, site office (office which is directly responsible for execution of this project), and USACE. The chart should also include titles and explanations of the major responsibilities and authorities for key personnel in the home office, support office, and site offices.

The chart should clearly identify where the key personnel identified are physically located (e.g., whether these persons will be on-site or at some other location), and whether filled by the prime contractor or subcontractor personnel. The roles of any JV partners and/or major subcontractors must be clearly stated in this section.

E.1.1.2.4 PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE: The offeror shall provide a detailed narrative and preliminary level schedule for the work associated with the base and all options that includes at least the major construction activity milestones listed below. The narrative should demonstrate the offeror’s understanding of the overall project scope and its approach to completing the work, including identification of anticipated challenges and its approach to successfully dealing with these challenges within the proposed schedule. The offeror should also identify and describe its approach to constraints on the schedule, such as if the offeror plans to utilize multiple crews, or more than one shift, or work an extended workweek to meet the required construction completion date, weather, material availability, etc. The narrative should include identification of the critical path, key construction milestones and features of work, concurrent activities, and key deliverables. The proposed schedule should consider a 445 calendar days or less period of performance, which starts at contract award. This includes no more than 30 calendar days to obtain bonds, DBA, and other requirements for issuance of NTP, and 415 calendar days or less for contract performance. The proposed schedule shall start no earlier than contract award date and include the following:

Estimated contract award on 29 May 2018 Requirements for Issuance of NTP

Obtaining bonds Proof of Defense Base Act (DBA) insurance Registration in Synchronized Pre-Deployment Operational Tracker (SPOT) System Base Access Plan

Procurement of Long Lead Items Quality Control Plan Accident Prevention Plan Pre-Construction Meeting

NTP

Mobilization Testing & Commissioning of Major Building Systems Project Completion Demobilization

E.1.2 Evaluation Criteria

E.1.2.1 The Management and Technical Approach submission will be evaluated for its adequacy of response and feasibility of approach, and the Government will identify strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies and risks based on the information provided by the offeror under this factor. The Government will specifically evaluate each component of an offeror’s management and technical approach as follows:

E.1.2.1.1 LICENSURE: The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the offeror’s proof of the required licensure.

E.1.2.1.2 PRIOR EXPERIENCE: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s prior experience on projects dealing with construction challenges to determine how these experiences will enable the offeror to successfully perform the requirements of this solicitation.

The following is more advantageous to the Government. Therefore, the Government may identify the following aspects of a proposal under this Prior Experience component as a strength, as that term is defined in paragraph E.4.3 of this section:

a) Demonstrated prior experience for work completed in Bahrain.

b) Demonstrated prior experience for new facility construction valued over $2,000,000.

The Government will consider the extent to which the contractor addressed any CPARS ratings of "Unsatisfactory."

Further, the Government reserves the right to investigate the CPARS ratings for any offeror, and to consider any "Unsatisfactory" ratings received which are not satisfactorily addressed by the offeror as a deficiency.

E.1.2.1.3 ORGANIZATION: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed project organization for well-defined roles, responsibilities, and authority delegated to its team. The offeror’s organization chart and narrative will be assessed to determine the effectiveness of the relationships and work flow between the offeror’s home office, field office, major subcontractors, personnel, and USACE.

The following is more advantageous to the Government. Therefore, the Government may identify the following aspects of a proposal under this Organization component as a strength, as that term is defined in paragraph E.4.3 of this section:

a) Demonstration of an organizational structure, processes, and procedures that minimize risk to the

Government (for example, a lower risk structure may show a majority of work self-performed by the

Prime Contractor vice a Prime Contractor managing multiple Subcontractors; or an existing/experienced JV vice a newly formed JV, etc.).

E.1.2.1.4 PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed preliminary schedule to determine whether the offeror identifies the critical path and milestones as detailed in the submission requirement, as well as the feasibility of the proposed activities and approach identified in the offeror’s narrative.

The following is more advantageous to the Government. Therefore, the Government may identify the following aspects of a proposal under this Preliminary Schedule component as a strength, as that term is defined in paragraph E.4.3 of this section:

a) Detailed narratives which clearly identify critical schedule related issues and potential problems and discuss meaningful mitigation strategies to avoid sources of potential delays.

b) Detailed narratives which demonstrate a clear and comprehensive understanding of the project scope of work and how the requirements can be met within the required schedule.

E.1.3 Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

The following combined technical/risk ratings will be utilized in the evaluation of Factor 1 - Management and Technical Approach, resulting in a single rating.

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

COLOR ADJECTIVE RATING DEFINITION AND CRITERIA

Blue

Outstanding

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

Purple

Good

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

Green

Acceptable

Acceptable

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow

Marginal

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

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies.

Proposal is unawardable.

E.2 FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

E.2.1 The Past Performance evaluation assesses an offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements and results in an assignment of a single past performance confidence assessment rating based on an offeror’s overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance.

E.2.2 For the purposes of this evaluation:

A “recently completed” project is defined as a construction project which (1) has been completed within five (5) years of the RFP issue date, or (2) is currently under construction and is at least 80% complete as of the RFP issue date.

A “relevant” project is defined as a recently completed project, with a similar scope and cost magnitude as the project that is the subject of this solicitation.

“Similar scope” is defined as the vertical construction of a new single story retail building with a size of at least 508m2 (5,470sf).

“Similar cost magnitude” is defined as a project with a total value of at least $4 million.

E.2.3 Past Performance Proposal Submission Requirements

E.2.3.1 The offeror shall submit its relevant project experience using the Experience Overview Sheet (Attachment

1) and Construction Experience Information Sheet (Attachment 2). The offeror should include a project description on the Experience Information Sheet that is detailed enough to permit an evaluation of project relevancy, and must state the specific type of work performed for each project listed. The offeror should also provide the name of an English-speaking reference and valid contact information on the Experience Information Sheet. If the offeror is not able to provide English-speaking references, the offeror must identify the language spoken for non-English-speaking references.

E.2.3.1.1 When submitting relevant project experience for consideration, the offeror is limited to at least one (1) but no more than five (5) relevant projects that have been performed by the offeror. Additional projects submitted that exceed these limits will not be considered for evaluation.

E.2.3.1.2 If the offeror is a JV, the offeror may submit relevant project information for projects performed by the JV and projects performed by any JV partner as the past performance of the offeror. The Government will consider the relevant past performance information submitted for one JV partner as the relevant past performance information for the JV-offeror, if: (a) for each project submitted for past performance consideration, the offeror’s proposal describes the role of each JV partner for that specific project; and (b) the offeror’s proposal clearly identifies the role of each JV partner on this project in such a way as to demonstrate that the partners’ previous experience is relevant to the role each partner will be performing on this project. The Government will not consider the past performance of any subcontractors as the relevant experience of the offeror, and will not evaluate it as such.

E.2.3.2 The offeror is responsible for obtaining a client-completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment 3) for each relevant project submitted under this factor. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client before the proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with its proposal the first page of the PPQ (including blocks 5 through 8), which will provide the contract and client information necessary to conduct an assessment.

E.2.3.2.1 The points of contact provided by the offeror on the PPQ may be asked to comment on items such as quality of construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management including timely payment to sub-contractors or suppliers, safety, correcting construction errors, warranty work, etc. The Government will not release the Interview Forms to the offeror at any time, as doing so may compromise the Government’s ability to solicit candid, unbiased interview comments.

E.2.3.2.2 The offeror should follow up with clients to ensure that PPQ submissions are in accordance with the proposal closing date. If the client requests, completed PPQs may be submitted directly to the Government’s point-of-contact, Ms. Andrea Greene at andrea.l.greene@usace.army.mil prior to the proposal closing date.

Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs.

However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating current and past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), [using the CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, JV, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal], inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. The Government reserves the right to contact government field representatives, or any sources deemed appropriate.

E.2.3.2.4 While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete current and past performance information rests with the offeror. Incomplete information may not be assessed and may result in an “Unknown Confidence” rating.

FALISIFIED PPQs MAY BE GROUNDS FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF OFFEROR’S PROPOSAL, REFERRAL OF THE OFFEROR FOR DEBARMENT, AND REFERRAL OF THE OFFEROR TO THE

APPROPRIATE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE ENTITY.

E.2.4 Past Performance Evaluation Criteria

E.2.4.1 A Past Performance evaluation of performance confidence assesses the probability an offeror will meet contract requirements should that offeror be awarded a contract. Evaluations under the Past Performance Factor will result in the assignment of a single Performance Confidence Rating for each offeror. This is the only formal "Rating" applied at the Past Performance Factor level.

E.2.4.2 There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality. The first aspect involves determining which projects submitted by the offeror meet the definition of “recently completed,” as that term is set forth herein.

E.2.4.3 The second aspect of the Past Performance evaluation involves determining how relevant each recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to this solicitation’s requirement. With respect to relevancy, more recent past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than older past performance.

The evaluation team shall use the following definitions and corresponding ratings to assess the relevancy of each of the offeror’s submitted project under this factor:

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition

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 complexities this solicitation 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.

E.2.4.4 The third aspect of the Past Performance evaluation involves a review the information submitted with regard to the offeror’s recent/relevant projects, and make a determination as to the quality of the offeror’s performance for those recent/relevant projects.

E.2.5 Confidence Assessment Ratings.

After the Government assesses the recency, relevancy, and quality of the projects submitted, the final step of the Past Performance evaluation requires a Performance Confidence assessment. The ultimate result of the Performance Confidence assessment is a single, final, Confidence rating, based on the offeror’s overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance. As indicated in the table below, the assigned Confidence ratings will be based on an assessment of the recent/relevant experience submitted by the offeror.

Performance Confidence Assessments

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.

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.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral) 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.

E.2.5.1 Unavailability of Past Performance Information. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv), in the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available; the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and shall receive an “Unknown Confidence (Neutral)” rating.

E.3 FACTOR 3: PRICE

E.3.1 Price Proposal Submission Requirements

This contract will be a Firm Fixed-Price (FFP) contract. The offeror should submit a complete price proposal, including Proposal Schedules and Cost Breakdown Sheets. The offeror should also ensure that its price proposal is balanced, meaning the prices of the contract line items are not significantly overstated or understated. Finally, the offeror should submit a reasonable price.

E.3.1.1 Additionally, the price proposal shall include the following:

1) Signed and dated Standard Form 1442 (Solicitation, Offer, and Award) with amendments acknowledged.

2) Section 00 11 00, Completed Bid Schedule (pricing information for all CLINs) with unit price, quantity, and extended price. All extensions of the unit prices shown will be subject to verification by the Government. In case of discrepancy between the unit price and the extended price, the unit price will govern.

3) Price Breakdown Sheet (Attachment 4). The offeror shall submit a price breakdown of the CLINs in Excel format along with the offeror’s price proposal. This supplemental information may be used to aid the Government in evaluating price proposals in determining the fairness and reasonableness of the proposed price. The total price reflected on the price breakdown sheet should correspond to the price submitted on the bid schedule. Any discrepancies could be considered a deficiency and may result in an incomplete proposal evaluation.

E.3.2 Price Proposal Evaluation Criteria

E.3.2.1 An offeror’s price proposal is evaluated through price analysis techniques as described in FAR Part 15. The Government will evaluate an offeror’s price proposal in order to identify risks to the Government based upon demonstration that:

a) The price proposal is complete: To be complete, the offeror shall provide all data that is requested to evaluate the price. The Government will assess the extent to which the proposed prices comply with the content and format requirements set forth in this solicitation.

b) The price proposal is balanced. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over or understated. An offeror’s proposal may be unacceptable if it is determined that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

c) The price proposal is reasonable. For a price to be reasonable, it shall represent a price that provides best value to the Government when consideration is given based upon comparison with the Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE) and to prices in the market (market conditions may be evidenced by other competitive proposals). Consideration is also taken to the technical and functional capabilities of the offeror as compared to its price.

E.3.2.2 Price evaluations will not result in an assigned adjectival rating. Contract line items will be analyzed to determine whether unit prices proposed for the work to be performed reflects an offeror’s understanding of the solicitation requirements and is consistent with the offeror’s technical proposal. Offerors are cautioned to distribute direct costs, such as, material, labor, equipment, etc. and indirect costs, such as, job overhead, home office overhead, bond, etc., to the appropriate contract line items. Both parties shall presume that field overhead costs through the proposed contract duration are inclusive in the offered price. Price proposals that are unreasonably high when compared to the Government estimate and market conditions evidenced by other competitive proposals received, may be indicative of an inherent lack of understanding of the solicitation requirements and may result in the proposal being rated lower or considered unacceptable.

E.3.2.3 If deemed necessary, the supplemental price breakdown information will be used to assist the Government in performing the price evaluations described above.

E.3.2.4 Price will also be a factor in establishing the competitive range prior to discussions (if held) and in making the final determination for award.

E.4 EVALUATION SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

E.4.1 There may be contained within the evaluation factors certain mandatory or minimum requirements to be met for evaluation. There are also contained within the described factors certain documents required for submission.

Failure to satisfy any mandatory or minimum requirement may result in a determination that an offer is unacceptable. A final determination that an offer is unacceptable means that an award to the offeror involved cannot be made. Use of the words “will,” “shall” or “must” indicates a mandatory requirement for which failure to comply, at the time and date for submission of proposals, shall result in the proposal being disqualified from consideration for award, unless the Government elects to initiate discussions with some or all of the offerors in accordance with appropriate provisions of the FAR thereby providing a means by which appropriate corrections by the offerors involved can be made. Failure to comply with non-pricing requirements that are annotated with the words such as “should” or “may” might result in a lowering of an offeror’s non-pricing ratings involved and may have significant effect upon an offeror being selected for the contract award.

E.4.2 The Technical Evaluation Team (TET) 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, proposal corrections and any information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information. The TET will not consider any documents incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

E.4.3 For Factor 1 – Management and Technical Approach, the TET shall identify significant strengths, strengths, significant weakness, weaknesses, and deficiencies. A significant strength is an aspect of an offerors proposal that, when judged against the evaluation criteria, appreciably enhances the merit of that offeror’s proposal or appreciably increases the probability of successful contract performance by that offeror. A strength is an aspect of the offeror’s proposal that, when judged against the evaluation criteria, has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance. A weakness in the proposal is a flaw that, when judged against the evaluation criteria, increases the risk of unsuccessful performance.

A significant weakness in the proposal is an aspect of an offeror’s proposal that, when judged against the evaluation criteria, appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. A 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.

F. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

F.1. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

F.1.1 Proposals are due no later than April 21, 2018 at 2:00 P.M. Eastern Standard time. Proposals received after this due date and time will not be considered for evaluation.

F.1.2 Time periods, if stated as a number of days, are calendar days unless otherwise specified.

F.1.3 The proposal shall include one (1) original and two (2) copies of both the Non-Price (Technical) proposal (Volume I) and Price proposal (Volume 2). The offeror shall also submit with its proposal one (1) CD which contains all files in an Adobe portable document format (pdf), with the exception of the Cost Breakdown spreadsheet which should be in an unlocked Excel format. The original and each copy must be individually bound, e.g., in a standard three-ring binder or similar book. Each section of the volume must be individually tabbed and labeled.

F.1.4 The proposal must be prepared on 8-1/2" x 11" paper (11”X17” for drawings), bond paper. Each volume must include a cover letter, which includes the information listed in paragraph B.4 of this section. Each volume must also include a table of contents. Margins should be no smaller than a half inch (1/2”). Offerors should use Times New Roman font, with font size no smaller than 10 point. Page is defined as a single sheet of paper with text on both sides. The Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds page limits specified herein.

F.1.5 Each volume of the proposal should contain a master "Table of Contents". This master index should identify major areas by title, as well as page numbers and volume location. A copy of this master "Table of Contents” should be placed in front of each volume making up the total proposal.

F.1.6 The offeror shall place the following notification on the bottom of each page of its proposal: “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104. Do not disclose any Source Selection Information to any unauthorized person.”

F.1.7 Proposal Submission. Electronic proposals (email, facsimile, etc.) are not authorized. All proposals must be sent via U.S. Mail, Commercial Carrier (FedEx, UPS, etc.) or hand delivered to:

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

MIDDLE EAST DISTRICT

ATTN: CETAM-CT, Ms. Andrea Greene Solicitation # W912ER18R0015

201 PRINCE FREDERICK DR.

WINCHESTER, VA 22602

F.1.7.1 Hand Delivery. Before hand delivery of its proposal, the offeror must notify the Government’s point-of-contact, Ms. Andrea Greene at andrea.l.greene@usace.army.mil. Specifically, the offeror must provide the name of the person delivering the proposal, the name of the offeror, and the approximate time of delivery, so that TAM security may be notified. Offerors must provide 24 hours’ notice of its planned hand delivery. Hand deliveries may only occur Monday through Friday, from 8:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M., Eastern Standard Time, excluding Federal holidays. Note: If the person delivering the package is not a U.S. citizen they will not be permitted to access the site for proposal delivery.

F.1.8 Inquiries. Inquiries regarding this solicitation shall be submitted as follows:

All inquiries regarding this solicitation are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry. Telephone and email inquiries will not be accepted. Bidder Inquiry is a web-based program that allows offerors to post questions regarding the solicitation and view all questions by other offerors and responses by USACE. Bidder Inquiry can be accessed through ProjNet® at https://www.projnet.org/projnet/.

The solicitation number is: W912ER18R0015 The Bidder Inquiry Key is: Y7GDS2-5QRK3H

1. To access the ProjNet website for the first time:

a. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

b. Identify the Agency. This should be marked as USACE.

c. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

d. Email. Enter the email address you would like to use for communication.

e. Click Continue. A page will then open saying that a user account was not found and will ask you to create one using the provided form.

f. Enter your First Name, Last Name, Company, City, State, Phone, Email, Secret Question, Secret Answer, and Time Zone. Make sure to remember your Secret Question and Answer as they will be used from this point on to access the ProjNet system.

g. Click Add User. Once this is completed you are now registered within ProjNet and are currently logged into the system.

2. To access ProjNet for future ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

a. For future access to ProjNet, you will not be emailed any type of password. You will utilize your Secret Question and Secret Answer to log in.

b. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

c. Identify the Agency. This should be marked as USACE.

d. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

e. Email. Enter the email address you used to register previously in ProjNet.

f. Click Continue. A page will then open asking you to enter the answer to your Secret

Question.

g. Enter your Secret Answer and click Login. Once this is completed you are now logged into the system.

Note, offerors shall only submit one question per inquiry. All inquiries containing multiple questions shall be rejected.

3. The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquiries seven (7) days prior to the proposal due date in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response to inquiries and amend the solicitation if necessary.

4. Offerors are requested to review the specifications in their entirety, and review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry. An offeror that submits a question will receive an acknowledgement via email, followed by an answer after it has been processed by our technical and contracting team.

5. The ProjNet call center operates weekdays from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. U.S. Central Time Zone

(Chicago) or by appointment for OCONUS. The telephone number for the Call Center is 1-800-428- HELP. ProjNet questions can also be emailed to the helpdesk at staff@projnet.info.

F.1.9 System for Award Management (SAM). Offerors (including Joint Venture entities) must have an active SAM registration by the date this RFP is issued to be eligible for award. For more information, see the SAM website at https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/. Ensure that NAICS code 236220, Commercial and Institutional Building Construction, is listed on your SAM registration.

F.1.10 Expenses Incurred. The Government will not reimburse any costs incurred or associated with preparation and submission of any response(s) to this solicitation

G. DISCUSSIONS

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions, if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.204-7 System for Award Management OCT 2016 52.204-16 Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting JUL 2016 52.204-22 Alternative Line Item Proposal JAN 2017 52.214-34 Submission Of Offers In The English Language APR 1991 52.214-35 Submission Of Offers In U.S. Currency APR 1991 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition JAN 2017

52.217-5 Evaluation Of Options JUL 1990 52.222-38 Compliance With Veterans' Employment Reporting

Requirements

FEB 2016

52.236-28 Preparation of Proposals--Construction OCT 1997

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

The Government contemplates award of a firm fixed-price contract resulting from this solicitation.

(End of provision)

52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST (SEP 2006)

(a) Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from

Peter J. Han

MAJ, AC

201 Prince Frederick Dr.

Winchester, VA 22602

(b) The copy of any protest shall be received in the office designated above within one day of filing a protest with the GAO.

52.236-27 SITE VISIT (CONSTRUCTION) (FEB 1995) – ALTERNATE I (FEB 1995)

(a) The clauses at 52.236-2, Differing Site Conditions, and 52.236-3, Site Investigations and Conditions Affecting the Work, will be included in any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation. Accordingly, offerors or quoters are urged and expected to inspect the site where the work will be performed.

(b) An organized site visit has been scheduled for-- TBD:…