B.08 - Amendment 0006 W912HN20R4002 (Conform).pdf

This is a competitive acquisition for the aw ard of three (3) Indefinite Delivery Type Single Aw ard Task Order Contract (SATOC) w ith a total capacity value of $128M. The three (3) contract aw ards made from this solicitation w ill utilize the follow ing set-asides:

100% Small Business set-aside - Fort Bragg, NC $49M Capacity 100% HUBZone set-aside - Fort Gordon, GA $49M Capacity 100% HUBZone set-aside - Fort Stew art, GA $30M Capacity Task orders issued under these SATOCs are anticipated to require performance at their respective locations, how ever performance may be required across the three state region of GA/NC/SC.

The three Offerors (3) w hose proposals represent the best overall value for each SATOC location and is determined to provide the most benefit to the Government w ill be aw arded contracts. The three (3) aw arded contracts w ill be for a base period of tw o (2) years w ith three

(3) one-year options. Task orders issued under the SATOC w ill be f irm-f ixed price. The Government w ill evaulate Phase 1 proposals IAW the critera described herein and w ill select no more than f ive (5) of the most highly qualified Offerors per location to participate in Phase 2. The proposal of the successful Offeror for each location shall be incorporated by reference upon aw ard of the contract.

DERRICK B ZEIGLER 912-652-5001

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

09-Sep-2020

(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

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 _______ calendar days and complete it w ithin ________ calendar days af ter receiving aw ard, X 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 __________1 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________12 Apr 2022 (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 of fers are due.

B. An offer guarantee is, X 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 _______120 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

USACE - SAVANNAH DISTRICT

100 W. OGLETHORPE AVE

SAVANNAH GA 31401

W912HN

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:

W912HN20R4002 98

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

W912HN20R4002

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES MAX

QUANTITY

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0001 1 Job BASE PeriodFFP

COEFFICIENT ***SEE SCHEDULE A NOTES***

Location Coefficient Fort Bragg/Pope AF ______ Seymour Johnson ______ Camp MacKall ______

MOTSU ______

Fort Jackson _____ Fort Gordon _______ Fort Benning ______ Fort Stewart ______ Hunter AAF ______ Gillem Enclave ______ Warner Robins AFB _____ Moody AFB _______ Dobbins AFB ______ These coefficients are to be used on all task orders and modifications written during the life of the contract.

***Proposed Area Coefficient(s) shall be represented in decimal format (e.g. 4.0, 0.20, 8.0 or 0.08) Home Office Overhead (HOOH) – 2 Year Base Period: _______ FIELD OFFICE OVERHEAD will be settled on a task order basis.

PROFIT will be computed for non-priced items using the weighted guideline method and will be settled on a task order basis.

FOB: Destination

PSC CD: Y1JZ

MAX

NET AMT

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0002 1 Job OPTION Option Period 1FFP

COEFFICIENT: **Coefficients awarded in CLIN 0001 WILL NOT change and will remain in full effect during the life of this contract.** The period of performance for this Option Period, if exercised will be for 365 days, contingent upon the remaining capacity of the contract.

Home Office Overhead - Option Period 1: __

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0003 1 Job OPTION Option Period 2FFP

COEFFICIENT: **Coefficients awarded in CLIN 0001 WILL NOT change and will remain in full effect during the life of this contract.** The period of performance for this Option Period, if exercised will be for 365 days, contingent upon the remaining capacity of the contract.

Home Office Overhead - Option Period 2: __

UNIT UNIT PRICE MAX AMOUNT

0004 1 Job OPTION Option Period 3FFP

COEFFICIENT: **Coefficients awarded in CLIN 0001 WILL NOT change and will remain in full effect during the life of this contract.** The period of performance for this Option Period, if exercised will be for 365 days, contingent upon the remaining capacity of the contract.

Home Office Overhead - Option Period 3: __

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

0001 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0002 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0003 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0004 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

SECTION 00 21 00

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS

1. DESCRIPTION OF WORK.

1.1 This Request for Proposal (RFP) solicits for a Single Award Task Order Contract (SATOC) under which task orders for General Construction are expected to be issued for projects within the three state region of North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia with the primary focus area being at Ft. Bragg, Ft. Gordon and Ft. Stewart. Work contemplated on this SATOC may be conducted for Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, National Guard and Reserve Components, and other Department of Defense (DoD) and Federal Agencies located on DoD installations and those in support of other Federal and Department of Defense operations. Task Orders issued under any resultant contract(s) will be Firm-Fixed Price and may be either for Design-Build or Design-Bid-Build General Construction. A project requiring use of civil funds is not authorized under this contract. (See solicitation section 01 11 00 for the complete scope of the anticipated contract to be awarded under this RFP.)

1.2 For the purposes of this solicitation, the Government will utilize the Two-Phase Design-Build Selection Process. In Phase One of the Two-Phase Design-Build selection procedure, interested Offerors will submit specified performance capability proposals for review and consideration by the Government. The Government will evaluate these performance capability proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein.

1.3 Offerors will be required to provide the Government which locations they are submitting for in their proposal. The Government will evaluate the performance capability from the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein and will select up to five (5) contractors per SATOC location to proceed to Phase Two.

1.4 In Phase Two of this process, the Government will evaluate both technical capability and price.

1.5 Only those Offerors who receive a written notification from the Savannah District Contracting Officer that their firm has been selected to participate in Phase Two of this solicitation are invited to submit a Phase Two proposal. Those Offerors selected for Phase Two will be provided the technical requirements package for a Sample/Seed Task Order(s) that will be representative of the type work and task orders anticipated to be issued under any resultant contract(s). If an offeror, if selected to participate in Phase Two for multiple SATOCs, the Offeror will be required to prepare Phase Two proposals for each contract to which they intend to bid. The Sample/Seed Task Order(s) will be used for the purpose of ensuring potential contractors understand the task order preparation process and how to properly apply area coefficients and mark-ups. The Sample/Seed Task Order(s) will not be used to evaluate price reasonableness or price realism.

2. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 Who May Submit a Proposal. The requirement will be advertised as a set aside for Small Business (SB) and HubZone (HZ) businesses. Offerors submitting as a joint venture must provide the agreement forming the joint venture.

2.2 Information submitted about any company other than the Offeror, whether a predecessor company, affiliated company, subsidiary (including wholly owned subsidiaries), or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of this requirement, or other associated business, WILL NOT be evaluated for any factor. The only exceptions to this are that the Designer of Record will be evaluated in Factor 2 and information about members of a joint venture will be evaluated in Factor 1.

2.3 Offerors shall submit their proposal to the address shown in the schedule on the Notes section of Standard Form 1442.

2.4 Proposals are due no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

3. GENERAL PROPOSAL FORMAT FOR PHASE ONE:

3.1 Title Page. Offerors MUST clearly indicate the location in which they are submitting on the Title Page of their proposal. The title of the SATOCs are: SRM02, Ft. Bragg $49M SB SATOC; SRM05, Ft. Gordon $49M HZ SATOC; and SRM08, Ft. Stewart $30M HZ SATOC. Also, provide the Offeror’s name, and date of the submittal.

EXAMPLE -

FIRM INFO: OFFEROR XYZ, Date

AWARD DECISION CONSIDERATION IN ORDER: (1) SRM02, Ft. Bragg $49M SB SATOC; (2) SRM05, Ft. Gordon $49M HZ SATOC, AND (3) SRM08, Ft. Stewart $30M HZ

SATOC

3.2 Table of Contents. Each volume of the proposal shall contain a detailed table of contents.

3.3 Electronic Matter Submissions. The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted electronically through the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) site. The Offeror’s proposal shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in the proposals is prohibited. The offeror’s proposal is due in accordance with block 13 of the

SF1442.

NOTE: The only authorized transmission method for proposals in response to this solicitation is electronic via the PIEE Solicitation Module. NO OTHER TRANSMISSION METHODS

(EMAIL, FACSIMILE, REGULAR MAIL, HAND CARRIED, ETC.) WILL BE ACCEPTED.

The Offeror’s proposal must be received by the Government by the date/time specified in the solicitation. Offerors shall submit their proposal using the following link:

https://piee.eb.mil/

** The Government will not be responsible for submissions delivered to any location or to anyone other than those designated to receive proposals. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that proposal are submitted so as to reach the designated recipient. Offerors are responsible for allowing sufficient time for proposals to be received in accordance with the instructions provided.

FILE DESCRIPTION: 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.) Submission shall be in Adobe PDF format.

Title the file(s) in the following format:

W912HN20R4002_COMPANY NAME_VOLUME I

W912HN20R4002_COMPANY NAME_VOLUME II

In order to submit through the Solicitation Module in PIEE, you must have an active Proposal Manager role in PIEE at https://piee.eb.mil/.

To upload the proposal in Solicitation module in PIEE:

1. Ensure you have an active role as with the Proposal Manager in PIEE.

2. Log into PIEE at https://piee.eb.mil/ to access the Solicitation Module.

3. Select Solicitation icon.

4. At the Home screen of the Solicitation Module, select the Search link to find the solicitation you intend to post an offer against.

5. In the Solicitation Search Criteria filter by entering the complete solicitation number and for Status, select Open, then click Search.

6. When search results display, select the solicitation number link to open the solicitation.

7. The solicitation displays, with information as view only.

8. To post the offer, click the Offer tab.

9. Click the Add button to add an offer to the solicitation.

10. Select the applicable CAGE Code for which you are submitting the offer. The list is pre-filtered based on the CAGEs in the Proposal Manager’s profile.

11. Click on the Choose Files link to upload attachments that comprise your offer.

12. Enter Signature Date and click Signature button after entering all necessary information.

13. Sign Document pop-up will be displayed requiring the user to enter a Digital Pin and OTP.

Click the Sign and Submit button to continue.

14. After successfully adding the Offer a success message of the submission will be displayed providing confirmation of on-time/late proposal receipt.

Refer to Attachment 7 for additional guidance on the use of the PIEE Solicitation Module. For addition information on PIEE Vendor Access Instructions or PIEE Solicitation Module Frequently Asked Questions visit:

https://dodprocurementtoolbox.com/site-pages/solicitation-module

For additional instructions on how to post an offer, please refer to the Posting Offer demo:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf

For additional instructions on the Solicitation module and Proposal Manager roles, please refer to the following link:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/xhtml/wbt/sol/solicitation/proposals.xhtml

Proposal Due Date and Time

Request for Proposal No: W912HN20R4002 Due Date of Proposal: 12 April 2022 Time by which Proposals are Due: 2:00 P.M. (Eastern Time) Title of Project: Multi-Location SATOC

1. QUALITY CONTROL SYSTEM (QCS): Any contract award resulting from this solicitation will require the mandatory use of the automated Quality Control System. Please see Section 01 45 01 for additional information.

2. TECHNICAL MATTERS: Submit technical inquiries and questions relating to this solicitation via Bidder Inquiry in Projnet (https://www.projnet.org) at least 10 calendar days prior to the date established in the Request for Proposal for receipt of proposals. If an Offeror believes that the requirements in this Invitation for bid contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound;

immediately notify the Contract Specialist in writing with supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to award this Request for Proposal based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

To submit and review inquiry items, prospective vendors will need to use the Bidder Inquiry Key presented below and follow the instructions listed below the key for access. A prospective vendor who submits a comment or question will receive an acknowledgement via email, followed by an answer after it has been processed by our technical team. All timely questions and approved answers will be made available through ProjNet. Approved answers to all timely questions will also be posted on the FedBizOpps in the form of a report generated from ProjNet as soon as the comment/question entering period is over and answers are all finalized.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NO: W912HN20R4002

TITLE OF PROJECT: Multi-Location SATOC Bidder Inquiry Key: 98SV5N-YPNP5K ProjNet will close on 11 March 2022

Specific Instructions for Initial ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

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

2. Identify the Agency as USACE.

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

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

5. 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.

6. Enter your First Name, Last Name, Company, City, State, Phone, Email, Secret Question, Secret

Answer, and Time Zone. Remember your Secret Question and Answer as they will be used from this point on to access the ProjNet system.

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

Specific Instructions for Future ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

Steps 1 through 3: same as above.

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

5. Click Continue. A page will then open asking for the answer to your Secret Question.

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

3. Tabs. Proposal shall be organized and tabbed as follow:

VOLUME I

TAB A – Standard Form 1442, completed and signed by authorized individual(s) of the Offeror.

Offers submitted in the name of a Joint Venture must be signed in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the joint venture agreement as evidenced in the proposal.

TAB B – Section 00 45 00 – Representations and Certifications.

TAB C – Proposal Data Sheet – See Attachment 1 provided at the end of this section. Offerors should ensure telephone number, fax number, e-mail address and DUNS number are all included.

The DUNS number provided will be used to access Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) data. If a separate DUNS has been created for a joint venture, it must also be submitted. A DUNS number shall also be provided for the Designer of Record identified in Factor 2. The Offeror should also submit their Tax ID number on the proposal data sheet.

TAB D – Joint Venture Agreement, if applicable. See paragraph 2.1. Note: If the Offeror is not proposing as a Joint Venture please indicate such under this tab.

TAB E – Financial Information & Bonding Capability (e.g. past three years financial statements, annual reports, Dun & Bradstreet Ratings and/or number, etc) Provide a list of all current contracts held, total dollar value, award date, anticipated completion, performance and payment bond amount. The Offeror is not required to submit a bid bond for Phase I, but is required to submit a letter, stamped with an official seal and notarized, from the contractor’s surety validating the Offeror’s single and aggregate bonding capability and a power of attorney if applicable. Any letter found to be insufficient may affect an Offeror’s responsibility determination. Submit originals; photocopied or scanned copies are not acceptable. Surety Letter will only be accepted via United States Postal Service (USPS), Federal Express (FedEX) or United Parcel Service (UPS). Other Forms of delivery are not authorized.

ELECTRONIC SURETY LETTER SUBMISSION, TO INCLUDE EMAIL AND FACSIMILE

TRANSMISSIONS IS NOT AUTHORIZED.

HANDCARRIED SURETY LETTER SUBMISSIONS, except for delivery by Federal Express, United Parcel Service and U.S.P.S, IS NOT AUTHORIZED.

Surety Letters must be delivered by U.S. Mail, including U.S. Express Mail, Federal Express or United Parcel Service. All Surety Letters must be clearly identified with the contractor’s name and address. To ensure timely and properly handling, the lower left corner of the outermost wrapper should indicate the following:

Request for Proposal No: W912HN20R4002 Due Date of Proposal: 9 October 2020 Time by which Proposals are Due: 2:00 P.M. (Eastern Time) Title of Project: Multi-Location SATOC

Surety Letter must be addressed:

U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Savannah District ATTN: CECT-SAS-E (Greg Graham) 100 West Oglethorpe Avenue Savannah, Georgia 31401-3640

VOLUME II

TAB F –Joint Venture Agreement (Duplicate of Volume I) Note: If the Offeror is not proposing as a Joint Venture please indicate such under this tab.

TAB G – FACTOR 1 Past Performance

TAB H – FACTOR 2 Design Experience.

4. PHASE ONE – TAB G – FACTOR 1 – PAST PERFORMANCE

4.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS.

4.1.1 The Offeror shall demonstrate a record of construction performance and experience on recent and relevant projects. Offerors must submit a completed Past Performance Questionnaire Summary Sheet, Attachment 2. Offerors may use the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), Attachment 3 at the end of this section to submit to the client (Point of Contact) for each relevant project submitted. Offeror must ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client. Completed PPQs must be submitted with your proposal by the specified closing date and time. Offerors should follow-up with clients to ensure timely submittal of completed questionnaires. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a point of contact for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror shall complete blocks 1– 5 of the PPQ and submit it with the proposal. Please note that, at a minimum, this first page of the PPQ and an additional page if used, must contain sufficient information for the government to determine the relevancy of the project. Offerors may attach one additional single-sided page (per PPQ) to further describe how the project is similar to the RFP requirements.

Offerors may also submit a CPARS evaluation for each relevant project. Ensure that the PPQs or CPARS evaluations submitted for this Factor clearly describe the relevant characteristics of the project to include the client’s information (Name(s), Phone Number(s), Email Address), and for the respective project(s). The Government may call and confirm information provided by the Offeror on the PPQs with the points of contact to the extent necessary to verify the information in the PPQ or to obtain additional information. The Government reserves the right to interview other individuals if the point of contact is not available. By exception, the client may request submission of questionnaires directly to the Government’s point of contact (Contract Specialist), Greg Graham. Request may be made via email to gregory.m.graham@usace.army.mil. This request must be coordinated by the client in advance no later than five (5) business days before the proposal due date. PPQ’s submitted directly to the Contract Specialist shall be mailed via trackable means (certified US Mail, FedEx, or UPS). If the PPQ fails to arrive before the closing date and time, or if the information on the PPQ is insufficient to determine the Offeror’s name and appropriate solicitation number, it will not be considered.

Offerors are cautioned that the information submitted pertaining to a project shall be limited to the PPQ form or CPARS evaluation and an additional page and shall contain enough information to determine the similarity and relevancy of a project. Likewise, Project Information submitted in a format other than or in lieu of the PPQ format or CCASS/CPARS evaluation will not be considered. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other solicitations.

In addition to the PPQ, the Offeror’s proposal shall include the Past Performance Questionnaire Summary Sheet (Attachment 2) to provide a summary of the PPQs included and/or submitted to clients. The summary sheet shall include information for all columns. Offerors may identify state and local government and private contracts that are similar to the Government’s requirements described in 4.1.2.

If the Offeror is a joint venture, the projects do not have to have been performed by the joint venture submitting the offer. The projects could have been performed by either company in the joint venture.

Offerors are advised to submit projects wherein the Offeror, or proposed joint venture members, played a significant role and to clearly define those roles.

If any Offeror has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division or unit submitting the offer. Ensure that the PPQs submitted for this Factor clearly describe the relevant characteristics of the project.

4.1.2 Offeror shall submit no less than three (3), but no more than five (5), recent relevant projects that have a minimum value of no less than $2 million each. A higher confidence level could be achieved with the submission of 3 or more design-build projects. All projects must be successfully completed or fully designed and at least 50% construction progress completed within five (5) years preceding the date of this solicitation. Projects that meet these criteria will be evaluated to determine the level of relevancy. Projects with similar size, scope, and complexity of the following may be considered relevant projects:

Design-Bid-Build Construction or Design-Build Construction of new or renovated/repaired facilities involving architectural exteriors/interiors, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, fire suppression, communication, renewable energy, roofing, anti-terrorism and force protection, and/or structural systems, site work, airfield pavements, transportation systems (i.e. roads, highways, bridges, and/or parking), and/or storm water management systems.

No less than three (3) of the five (5) projects should be Design-Build construction.

Please note that projects submitted by design firms will not be evaluated in this factor.

Design firms shall submit projects in accordance with the requirements in Factor 2.

4.1.3 Offerors shall submit no more than five (5) PPQs (Attachment 3) in accordance with 4.1.2.

Project information shall be limited to the PPQ and one additional page. Where a project was awarded as a task order or delivery order under an IDIQ type contract, Offerors are cautioned to submit information specific to the task or delivery order considered relevant to the requirements of this RFP, rather than the umbrella contract. For purposes of this Request for Proposal, if the Offeror is submitting as a Joint Venture, no more than five (5) total project examples may be submitted for the JV and its members. If an Offeror submits more than five (5) total project examples, only the first five (5) will be evaluated. Offerors shall submit only projects wherein the Offeror or proposed joint venture members were the prime contractors. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division, unit or team member submitting the offer.

4.1.4 Other Sources. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources other than those provided by the Offeror for evaluating past performance and experience.

These other sources may include but are not limited to, past performance and experience information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers identified in the proposal on the Proposal Data Sheet, 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. If a CPARS evaluation exists for a submitted project, it will be considered.

4.1.5 While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the offeror must provide detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information for evaluation by the Government.

4.1.6 The experience and/or past performance of individuals will NOT be considered under this factor.

4.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA.

4.2.1 Past Performance Evaluation: The past performance and experience evaluation results in an assessment of the Government’s confidence in the ability of the Offeror to meet the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each Offeror’s demonstrated record of performance and experience on recent and relevant projects that involve a similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as this solicitation requires. One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each Offeror after evaluating the Offeror’s recent past performance and experience, focusing on performance and experience that is relevant to the contract requirements.

4.2.2 Recency and Relevancy Evaluation: Projects must meet the minimum criteria in paragraph 4.1.2 in order to be considered recent and relevant and will be evaluated against the requirements of the RFP. The Government will not consider multiple projects, such as individual task orders, combined to meet the minimum value. Projects will be evaluated for relevancy based on the description of the project. Past performance evaluations on projects that are not relevant will not be considered.

Table 1. Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method:

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.

4.2.3 Confidence Assessment:

4.2.3.1 Offerors may increase the SSEB’s level of confidence if they are able to demonstrate successful performance in a wide variety of work (size, scope, complexity & location) as described in paragraph 4.1.2. Conversely, the SSEB may have a decreased level of confidence in Offerors whose experience is limited amongst the variety of work described in paragraph 4.1.2. Offerors may increase the SSEB’s level of confidence if they submit more than three (3) Design-Build projects. Conversely, the SSEB may have a decreased level of confidence in Offerors that do not demonstrate experience with Design-Build projects or have limited experience. Offerors submitting as joint ventures may increase the SSEB's level of confidence if both joint venture partners submit work as described in paragraph 4.1.2. Conversely, the SSEB may have a decreased level of confidence for if an Offeror submits as a joint venture and both joint venture partners do not submit work as described in paragraph 4.1.2 Offerors may increase the Source Selection Evaluation Board’s (SSEB) level of confidence by demonstrating previous experience where the Offeror and the design firm(s) in Factor 2 worked together.

4.2.3.2 The Government will evaluate the Offeror's past performance and experience using the sources available to it including but not limited to the example projects identified by the Offeror and submitted on the PPQs and any additional information received from references and CPARS or other sources. Offerors may be provided an opportunity to address any negative past performance information about which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond if such information is determined to impact the rating to be assessed.

4.2.3.3 The Government will consider the recency of the performance, the relevancy including the context of the data, and the quality of the performance and general trends in performance and source of the information to reach a confidence assessment rating using Past Performance Confidence Ratings.

4.2.3.4 If no recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance record and experience is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned this factor will be assigned a rating of “Neutral Confidence” (Unknown).

4.2.4. Past Performance Confidence Ratings

Rating Definition 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.

5. PHASE ONE – TAB H – FACTOR 2 - DESIGN EXPERIENCE

5.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

5.1.1 Offeror shall submit a narrative not to exceed a total of five (5) pages describing its Design Experience or the intended Designer of Record’s (DOR) experience. In the narrative, clearly state the project construction cost, if design-build or design-bid-build, the role of the A-E, and date of design completion.

5.1.2 Provide no less than three (3), but no more than five (5) projects

5.1.3 Projects have a minimum construction value of no less than $2 million each.

5.1.4 Projects demonstrate Design Experience similar to the various requirements described in paragraph 4.1.2 and subparagraphs.

5.1.5 Three of the five projects MUST be Design-Build construction.

5.1.6 Projects must be fully designed within five (5) years preceding the date of this solicitation.

5.1.7 In addition to the five (5) page narrative, Offerors may submit an additional two (2) pages describing the relationship between the Prime and the Designer of Record for the performance of a subsequent contract (business agreement, formal arrangement, etc.).

5.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.2.1 The evaluation considers the demonstrated record of the experience of the Offeror’s DOR on recent and relevant projects that involve a similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as this solicitation requires.

5.2.2 Offerors may receive additional consideration in meeting the requirements of this Factor if they are able to demonstrate the successful design experience of the DOR in a wide variety of work as described in paragraph 4.1.2 and subparagraphs. Conversely, the DORs may receive less consideration from the SSEB if the experience is limited amongst the variety of work described in paragraph 4.1.2. DORs may receive additional consideration from the SSEB if it has performed more than three Design-Build projects. DORs may also receive additional consideration evidence is submitted concerning the level of commitment to the Prime Offeror.

5.2.3 Design Experience Ratings

Adjectival Rating

Description

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

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.

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

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

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.

Definition of Risk:

Description

Low Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Unacceptable Proposal contains a material failure or a combination of significant weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level.

6. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS

NON-COST FACTORS.

FACTOR 1: PAST PERFORMANCE. This factor is the most important factor.

FACTOR 2: DESIGN EXPERIENCE. This factor is less important than Factor 1.

7. PHASE ONE – PROPOSAL EVALUATION.

7.1 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, proposal corrections and any information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information. The SSEB will not consider any documents incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

7.2 Each member of the SSEB will independently consider all information provided in the proposal. Once these individual analyses are completed, the SSEB will assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor.

7.3 The final ratings on individual factors will be provided to the Source Selection Authority. The Source Selection Authority, independently and exercising prudent business judgment, will determine which Offerors, if any, will proceed to phase two.

8. PHASE TWO – The submission requirements relate to the Sample/Seed Task Order.

PROPOSAL TABBING REQUIREMENTS. Phase Two proposals shall be organized and tabbed as follows:

VOLUME I – CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS AND PRICE PROPOSAL

TAB A – Standard Form 1442, completed and signed by authorized individual(s) of the Offeror. Offers submitted in the name of a Joint Venture must be signed in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the joint venture.

TAB B – Proposal Pricing Schedule, Section 00 10 00 - Schedule A Base Contract Bid Schedule & Schedule B, Sample/Seed Task Order Pricing.

TAB C – Bid Bond – Solicitation Requirement: The Offeror is not required to submit a bid bond but is required to submit a letter, stamped with an official seal and notarized, from the contractor’s surety validating the Offeror’s single and aggregate bonding capability and a power of attorney if applicable. Any letter found to be insufficient may affect an Offeror’s responsibility determination. Submit originals; photocopied or scanned copies are not acceptable. FAR clause 52.228-1, “Bid Guarantee” will be included in the contract. At the discretion of the Contracting Officer, a Bid Bond will be required for each task order.

VOLUME II – TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS

PHASE TWO – TAB D – FACTOR 3 – TECHNICAL APPROACH

8.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS. The Offeror will submit a quantitative proposal for the sample/seed project utilizing R.S. Means Cost Works. Offerors final proposed price will be submitted on Bid Schedule B and offeror shall provide ALL supporting documents (to include but not limited to: R.S. Means cost breakout sheets (with appropriate Construction Specification Institute (CSI) Line Items), non-priced items (with 3 sub quotes), profit (quantitative risk-based approach to the proposed profit percentage i.e. DD Form 1547, Record of Weighted Guidelines Method Application or other quantifiable, risk-based analytical method for profit percentage proposed) and field office overhead (FOOH) break-out spreadsheet).

Offeror’s proposal shall be prepared and meet the requirements as stated in Schedule A: Notes to Offeror.

8.1.1. Offerors shall apply their proposed Area Coefficient for the SEED/SAMPLE project

(s) and their proposed Home Office Overhead (HOOH) for the base period to this/these project(s).

8.1.2. Offerors shall propose a Home Office Overhead (HOOH) rate for the base period and the option period(s). The proposed HOOH rate will remain constant and will apply to ALL task orders issued during the respective periods. Offerors shall also propose Area Coefficient(s). Such Area Coefficient(s) shall be binding for the life of the resulting contract

9.2. EVALUATION CRITERIA:

9.2.1. Offerors will be evaluated on the technical approach in determining a price proposal utilizing the applicable Construction Specification Institute (CSI) numbers and appropriate quantities from R.S. Means. Offerors will also be evaluated on how well they understand the required application of the proposed coefficient and mark-ups as they apply to the SEED/SAMPLE project(s).

9.2.2 The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the submission. Based on the submission provided, the Government will evaluate the Offeror's overall quantitative approach for logic and reasonability. The Offeror will also be evaluated on how well defined and clear their supported approach to the SEED/SAMPLE project(s) is conducted.

9.3. Technical Approach.

Description

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

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.

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

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

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.

Definition of Risk:

Adjectival Rating Description Low Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Unacceptable Proposal contains a material failure or a combination of significant weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level.

10. PHASE II – PROPOSAL EVALUATION.

10.1. 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, proposal corrections and any information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information. The SSEB will not consider any documents incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

10.2. Each member of the SSEB will independently consider all information provided in the proposal. Once these individual analyses are completed, the SSEB will assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor.

10.3.The final ratings on individual factors will be provided to the Source Selection Authority.

The Source Selection Authority, independently and exercising prudent business judgment, will determine which Offeror, if any, will receive the contract award.

11. EXCEPTIONS. Exceptions to the contractual terms and conditions of the solicitation (e.g., standard company terms and conditions) may result in a determination to reject a proposal.

12. RESTRICTIONS. Failure to submit all the data in the format indicated in this section may be cause for determining a proposal incomplete and, therefore, not considered for evaluation, and for subsequent award.

13. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS

FACTOR 1: PAST PERFORMANCE. This factor is the most important factor.

FACTOR 2: DESIGN EXPERIENCE. This factor is the least important factor.

FACTOR 3: TECHNICAL APPROACH. This factor is less important than Factor 1 but is more important than Factor 2.

Non-Priced Factors when combined are significantly more important than Price. Factor 1 Past Performance and Factor 2 Design Experience ratings are applicable to Phase II in addition to Phase I.

14. PRICE.

14.1. Price will not be rated but will be a factor in establishing the competitive range prior to discussions (if held) and in making the best value decision for award of any resultant contract.

Coefficients for firm-fixed price type task orders shall be proposed and submitted on the Task Order Pricing Schedule shown at Section 0010 - Schedule A of the solicitation. Offerors’ awarded contracts will be bound by the coefficients proposed for the seed/sample project(s) and all future task orders.

14.2. The Government will perform a price analysis on all proposals received. Price analysis will be performed on Schedule A in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, to determine fairness and reasonableness. Historical price information, competitive price information, the Independent Government Estimate (IGE), or any other pricing tool as necessary will be utilized in this analysis. The evaluation will determine the extent to which the price proposal is consistent with the requirements of the RFP. Offerors are advised that any offer wherein pricing is deemed unfair or unreasonable will be rendered ineligible for award.

14.3. The Government shall use the total evaluated price from Schedule A as the evaluated price for making the best value decision.

15. BASIS FOR AWARD

15.1. Proposals must meet the criteria stated in the RFP in order to be eligible for award, to include capability in accordance with the evaluation criteria and responsibility in accordance with FAR 9.104.

15.2. In order to determine which proposals that represent the best value, a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in this RFP will be conducted, and in turn, the Government will compare proposals to one another. The Government will award contracts to the responsible Offerors whose technical submittal and price proposal contain the combination of those criteria described in this document offering the best value to the Government.

15.3. The successful Offeror(s), if any, will be awarded SATOCs with a maximum capacity of $49M (SB), $49M (HZ) and $30M (HZ), respectively, and either a Seed Task Order or a $2,500.00 guaranteed minimum for the base ordering period.

15.3.1 No single Offeror shall receive more than one (1) base contract award from this solicitation. The Offerors will be required to state which location they are submitting their proposal for award of the SATOCs.