B.06 - Amendment 0003 & Conformed Copy - W912HN22R3001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

See Summary of Changes

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 27

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 30-Jun-2022

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W912HN22R3001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

06-Jun-2022

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

30-Jun-2022

CODE

USACE - SAVANNAH DISTRICT

100 W. OGLETHORPE AVE

SAVANNAH GA 31401

W912HN 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912HN22R3001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SECTION 00 00 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 00 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

The following have been added by full text:

A. CONTRACT CHANGES:

• The proposal due date has been changed from 18 July 2022 to 8 August

2022.

• Projnet close date has been moved from 7 days prior to proposal due date, to 15 days prior to proposal due date.

• QUALITY CONTROL SYSTEM (QCS) statement on page 13 was a duplicate and has been deleted.

• A note has been added to Municipal Tax-Equipment Tax on page 83. This note states that “A WAIVER MAY BE” issued.

• The MFR site visit attendee roster is also attached to this amendment, along with a conformed copy of the solicitation.

• Municipality of Offeror in Puerto Rico is added below each bid Schedule.

B. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION:

• All Technical Specifications are posted in both PIEE and SAM.gov website.

C. CONTRACT DRAWINGS:

• All Contract Drawings are posted in both PIEE and SAM.gov website.

All changes with this amendment are highlighted in RED below.

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION, CONTRACT LINE ITEM NUMBER (CLIN) SCHEDULE

The required response date/time has changed from 18-Jul-2022 02:00 PM to 08-Aug-2022 02:00 PM.

CLIN 0001

The CLIN extended description has changed from:

Primary Facilities Construct New Ramey Unit School to 5-foot line as indicated in the plans and specifications.

Complete Facility. Proposal acceptance period 1: (90 days)

To:

Primary Facilities Construct New Ramey Unit School to 5-foot line as indicated in the plans and specifications.

Complete Facility. Proposal acceptance period 1: (90 days)

Municipality of Offeror in Puerto Rico ____________________

CLIN 0002

Preparation and Development outside the 5-foot line, Including all utilities and all site improvements (permanent and temporary) indicated in the plans and specifications. Complete Facility. Proposal acceptance period 1: (90 days)

Preparation and Development outside the 5-foot line, Including all utilities and all site improvements (permanent and temporary) indicated in the plans and specifications. Complete Facility. Proposal acceptance period 1: (90 days)

Municipality of Offeror in Puerto Rico_________________________

CLIN 0003

As indicated in the plans and specifications. Complete Facility. Proposal acceptance period 1: (90 days)

As indicated in the plans and specifications. Complete Facility. Proposal acceptance period 1: (90 days)

Municipality of Offeror in Puerto Rico__________________________

CLIN 0004

Existing School features: Complete Facility. Proposal acceptance period 1: (90 days)

Existing School features: Complete Facility. Proposal acceptance period 1: (90 days)

Municipality of Offeror in Puerto Rico_________________________

CLIN 0005

Provide and install system at area as indicated on the drawings and details. Provide all items and accessories as required for a complete installation in every aspect. Complete Facility. Proposal acceptance period 1: (90 days)

Provide and install system at area as indicated on the drawings and details. Provide all items and accessories as required for a complete installation in every aspect. Complete Facility. Proposal acceptance period 1: (90 days)

Municipality of Offeror in Puerto Rico____________________________

The following have been modified:

CLIN DESCRIPTIONS

EXPLANATION OF CLIN ITEMS

CLIN 0001 Base Bid- Construction New Ramey Unit School “Primary Facilities” Construct New Ramey Unit School to 5-foot line as indicated in the plans and specifications. To include all construction work for the primary facilities including but not limited to excavation of existing site, all underground foundations and support services, construction of the building pad, new building construction, and construction/installation of all building appurtenances as indicated on the Construction Documents. Complete.

CLIN 0002 Base Bid- Construction New Ramey Unit School “Supporting Facilities – Site Preparation and Development" Includes all preparation of site for new construction, including but not limited to clearing, grubbing, grading, all dirt work outside of the building pad, utility services to the facility, all communication utilities and appurtenances, storm drainage, site improvements, permanent and temporary access and facilities, parking lots, lighting, concrete, paving, landscaping, and striping as indicated on the Construction Documents. Complete.

CLIN 0003 Base Bid - “Provide and Install Emergency Generator” – Provide and install emergency generator as indicated in the plans and specifications. Complete.

CLIN 0004 Base Bid – “Demolition, Abatement, and Disposal of Existing School Features” includes all demolition and removal of existing school structures and site features. Demolition entails the removal of all above and below ground construction associated with the existing school facilities as well as final grading, infill, and compaction of disturbed areas (previously occupied by removed structures). Any existing construction to be abandoned in place must be documented and located for Government records. Site demolition includes, but is not limited to, the removal of all existing roadways, driveways, sidewalks, above ground utilities, fire hydrants, gate valves and abandoned utilities impacted by the new construction.

This CLIN also includes the required labor, supervision, materials, equipment and applicable safety precautions necessary to conduct asbestos and lead removal and abatement present at the existing school facilities. Refer to “Ramey School 2016 Asbestos Report” and “Ramey School 2016 Lead Report” for testing results. CLIN also includes required sampling/testing for Cadmium, Chromium and Chlordane prior to the demolition to assess the need for any remediation of these materials. Complete.

CLIN 0005 Option 1 – Roof mounted Photovoltaic Provide and install roof mounted photovoltaic system at area as indicated on the construction drawings. Provide all items and accessories as required for a complete installation in every aspect. Complete.

If exercised in 1-90 days.

END OF EXPLANATION OF CLIN’S

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS

Instructions to Offerors:

** Each Offeror is authorized to submit one (1) Electronic Proposal Package.

1. PRE-AWARD INFORMATION: This Acquisition will be solicited using FAR Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation procedures as Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) unrestricted. This Solicitation includes a Price Evaluation Preference for HUBZone Small Business Concerns, 52.219-4. This Acquisition will be Full and Open Competition. The resultant Contract will be a Single, Firm Fixed-Price Contract for Project Number: AM00049, Ramey Unit School Replacement Aguadilla, Puerto Rico

2. BASIS FOR AWARD - Required Documentation: Contract shall be awarded to the responsive and responsible, lowest priced prospective contractor determined technically acceptable based on the evaluation criteria. PRIOR TO AWARD, IN ORDER TO BE

DETERMINED RESPONSIVE AND RESPONSIBLE, A PROSPECTIVE OFFEROR

MUST FURNISH THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION WITHIN THE

ELECTRONICALLY SUBMITTED PROPOSAL per Section V Instructions, paragraph

3.2 Proposal Format:

a. Standard Form 1442, completed and signed by an authorized person, ensuring any/all amendments are acknowledged.

b. Pricing for all items in each acceptance periods, are required to be priced to be considered complete for this submittal. Failure to do so may result in rejection of an Offeror’s proposal.

c. Offerors are required to submit a proposal guarantee for this project in accordance with FAR Clause 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee. An electronic copy of the bid guarantee must be submittal with the electronic proposal submission.

d. Provide last 3 years Financial Statements/balance sheets are the only acceptable option for submittal for this element. Provide a list of all current contracts held, total dollar value, award date, anticipated completion, performance and payment bond amount. The financial statement information will be protected from disclosure by the Contracting Officer.

Please note that offerors shall submit a subcontracting plan pursuant to FAR 52.219-9 Alt II per instruction. Does not apply to small business offerors. See subcontracting Plan instructions at Section 00 73 00.

SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS: The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted electronically, as described below. 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 proposals 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.

W912HN22R3004_Company Name_Document Name.

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.

https://piee.eb.mil/ https://piee.eb.mil/

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

TECHNICAL MATTERS: Submit technical inquiries and questions relating to this solicitation via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at (https://www.projnet.org) at least 15 calendar days prior to the date established in the solicitation for receipt of proposals. If a Offeror believes that the requirements in this Request For Proposal 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 discussions. 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 beta.sam.gov 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: W912HN22R3001

PROJECT NUMBER: AM00049

TITLE OF PROJECT: Ramey Unit School Replacement Aguadilla, Puerto Rico

BIDDER INQUIRY KEY: V4QEXA-N74Q3G

Specific Instructions for Initial ProjNet Bidder 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 https://dodprocurementtoolbox.com/site-pages/solicitation-module https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf

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 Bidder 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.

NOTICE TO OFFERORS PART 2

SECTION V

SECTION 00 21 00

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS

1. OVERVIEW.

1.1 This Request for Proposal (RFP) solicits for offers to construct the Ramey

Unit School Replacement in Aguadilla, Puerto Rico. This will be a Firm- Fixed Price (FFP) contract.

2. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 Who May Submit a Proposal. The requirement will be advertised for full and open competition; any legally organized firm may submit a proposal. Offerors submitting as a joint venture must provide the agreement forming the joint venture.

2.2 Notwithstanding the specific requirements of any other area of the RFP, information submitted about any company other than the Offeror, whether a predecessor company, affiliated company, subsidiary (including wholly owned subsidiaries), or subcontractors WILL NOT be evaluated for any factor. Information about firms that are part of a joint venture will be considered when the joint venture is the Offeror.

2.3 Offerors shall submit their proposal to the address shown in Proposal and Bid Bond Submission Instructions in Section 00 21 00.

3. GENERAL PROPOSAL FORMAT

3.1 Submissions

Material shall be on 8 ½ x 11-inch paper size, using no smaller than a 10 pitch or 10 font.

Offerors shall submit an electronic version (PDF Format) of Volume I and Volume II. Offerors SHALL submit only two files in PDF format (i.e. Volume I and Volume II). These two files should be named in a specific format:

Solicitation Number, Offeror’s Company name and the volume (i.e.

W912HN22R3001 USACE_Volume_I.pdf).

Given the limited time and resources of the evaluation board, failure to provide proposal in the correct format may hinder the board's ability to evaluate the Offeror's proposal.

3.2 Proposal Format. The Proposal shall be organized and tabbed as follows:

VOLUME I Price/Representations/Certifications

Title Page. Include the title of the solicitation, solicitation number, Offeror name, and date of the submittal.

Table of Contents. Each volume of the proposal shall contain a detailed table of contents. Any materials submitted but not required by this solicitation (such as company brochures) shall be relegated to appendices.

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 evidence in the proposal.

TAB B – Section 00 10 00 – Proposal Pricing Schedule

TAB C - Section 00 45 00– Representations and Certifications

TAB D – Proposal Data Sheet – See Attachment 1 provided at the end of this section. Offerors should ensure telephone number; fax number, e-mail address and Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) number are all included. The UEI number provided will be used to access Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) data.

Offerors should also provide any other assigned number that identifies them in the CPARS database. If a separate UEI has been created for a joint venture, it must be submitted. The Offeror should also submit its Tax ID number on the proposal data sheet.

TAB E – Bid Bond – See FAR Clause 52.228-1, for required bond information. The Offeror is required to submit a bid bond. Photocopied or electronically scanned bid bonds are acceptable. Offerors shall use the most recent bond form SF24 (REV. 8/2016).

TAB F – Financial Information:

1. Provide last 3 years Financial Statements (balance sheets are the only acceptable option for submittal for this element).

2. Provide a list of all current contracts held, total dollar value, award date, anticipated completion, performance and payment bond amount.

3. The Offeror shall also provide a Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR Clause 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

** The financial statement information will be protected from disclosure by the Contracting Officer.

TAB G – Joint Venture Agreement, if applicable. See paragraph 2.1

VOLUME II Technical Submittal

Title Page. Include the title of the solicitation, solicitation number, Offeror name, and date of the submittal.

Table of Contents. Each volume of the proposal shall contain a detailed table of contents. Any materials submitted but not required by this solicitation (such as company brochures) shall be relegated to appendices.

TAB H – Past Performance Questionnaires Summary Sheet (Attachment

2) and Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)(CPARS) (Attachment 3).

These forms will be used to evaluate both FACTOR 1 Corporate Relevant Specialized Experience and FACTOR 2 Past Performance.

4. TAB H – FACTOR 1 – Corporate Relevant Specialized Experience

a. The SSEB will review the two Offerors with the lowest price for technical acceptability (for Factors 1 and 2) with the intent to identify at least two offerors who are technically acceptable for a price reasonableness determination. If the two offerors are not determined technically acceptable, the SSEB will continue to evaluate subsequent lowest priced offerors until at least two are determined technically acceptable. The Contracting Officer reserves the right to require evaluation of more than two offerors if there are other unknown situations that arise per Contracting Officer’s discretion. The Government will evaluate price reasonableness based on at minimum two technically acceptable offerors.

4.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

4.1.1. Using the Past Performance Questionnaires Summary Sheet

(Attachment 2) and the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)(CPARS) (Attachment 3), the Offeror shall demonstrate experience in performing projects meeting the requirements described in paragraphs below. Offerors shall submit projects wherein the Offeror, or proposed joint venture members, were the prime contractor and played a significant role and 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/CPARs and continuation sheet, if used, submitted for this Factor clearly describe the relevant characteristics of the project.

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. These projects could have been performed by either company in the joint venture.

4.1.3. The Government may contact sources other than those

provided by the Offeror for information. These other sources may include, but are not restricted to, CPARS (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System), and Government personnel with personal knowledge of the Offeror’s performance capability. Additional interviews with Government personnel will be documented.

4.1.4. The projects submitted for consideration in Factor 1 shall be the same projects submitted for evaluation in Factor 2. The total number of projects submitted must not exceed three (3).

If more than three (3) are submitted, only the first three (3) will be reviewed.

4.1.5. Basis for Evaluation. The Offeror is required to demonstrate their experience of recent and relevant projects are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP.

For the purposes of this evaluation, a recent and relevant project is further defined as follows:

1. Recent projects:

Projects submitted must have been successfully completed, or fully designed and at least 50% construction completed, within the last six

(6) years from effective date of this solicitation.

2. Relevant experience:

All projects submitted must be new construction, however, they may be either design-build or design-bid-build projects. The Government will not consider multiple projects, such as individual task orders, which have been combined to meet the minimum contract value.

• Offerors shall submit three (3) projects which demonstrate experience in construction of vertical construction facilities, excluding pre- engineered metal buildings, with characteristics described below.

Projects submitted shall collectively demonstrate experience with all three characteristics below.

Individual projects shall meet one, two, or all three characteristics below:

1. must have been built on a Department of Defense property/installation or other Federal Government location that required controlled access to the property or installation and at a minimum must include:

• vertical construction (excluding pre-engineered metal buildings);

• minimum of $20,000,000;

• site work, interior/exterior finishes (including but not limited to floors, ceilings, doors, windows, paint, siding), architectural, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, structural and fire suppression systems; and

• construction of a minimum of 2 of 4 requirements:

cafeteria, gym, auditorium, or sports fields

2. must demonstrate experience in the construction of an educational facility and at a minimum must include:

over 15,000 square feet;

minimum $20,000,000; and construction of a minimum of 2 of 4 requirements:

cafeteria, gym, auditorium, or sports fields

*** Note that for the requirement of “construction of a minimum of 2 of 4: cafeteria, gym, auditorium, or sports fields,” the offeror demonstrate all 4 four requirements between the submitted projects.

3. must demonstrate experience in the construction of a facility using Reinforced Cast-In-Place Concrete Structure System; and

• Must be multi-story

4.1.6 The project description shall clearly describe the project. The Government will not assume any project characteristics that are not specifically identified and described. The Offeror may attach a continuation sheet to the PPQ/CPARS if needed consisting of one (1) page to describe how the project contained the elements described above and meets the requirements of this factor. The submission must contain sufficient information for the government to determine whether the project meets the requirements of 4.1.5.

4.1.7 The PPQ must provide a Point of Contact for the Client. If the Government is unable to verify the information provided on the PPQs with the client Point of Contact, or by other sources available (e.g. CPARS), the Government reserves the right to disregard that project when evaluating the Offeror’s experience.

4.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

4.2.1 Corporate Relevant Specialized Experience. The SSEB will evaluate the experience by looking at the projects provided by the Offeror and determine if the projects meet the minimum criteria required for this solicitation.

4.2.2 Primary Elements for Evaluation. The rating methodology for Factor 1 is “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” as defined in Table 4. All three (3) projects must meet the requirements outlined in paragraph 4.1.4 and 4.1.5.

Table 4. Corporate Relevant Specialized Experience

RATINGS DEFINITION

ACCEPTABLE Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

UNACCEPTABLE Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

5. TAB H - FACTOR 2 - Past Performance who are technically acceptable for a price reasonableness determination. If the two offerors are not determined technically acceptable, the SSEB will continue to evaluate subsequent lowest priced offerors until at least two are determined technically acceptable. The Contracting Officer reserves the right to require evaluation of more than two offerors if there are other unknown situations that arise in order to make a fair and reasonable price determination. The Government will evaluate price reasonableness based on at minimum two technically acceptable offerors.

5.1. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.1.1. The Offeror shall demonstrate a record of performance on each project submitted for Factor 1. The information submitted through the Past Performance Questionnaire Summary Sheet (Attachment

2) and the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)/CPARS) (Attachment 3) for Factor 1 will be evaluated for this factor. The

PPQ is provided for the Offeror to submit to the client (Point of Contact) for each project the Offeror includes in its proposal. Offeror must ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client Point of Contact. Completed PPQs must be submitted with your proposal by the specified closing date and time. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. While it is important to submit a PPQ signed by the client 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 which will contain contract and client information and submit it with the proposal.

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.

If the Government is unable to verify the information in the PPQ, it may be disregarded.

Offerors are cautioned that the PPQ must contain sufficient information for the government to determine whether the project contains the elements of work similar to this requirement as described in Factor 1. One (1) additional page may be used for each PPQ if needed to include this information as stated in Factor 1.

Offerors may also submit a CPARS evaluation for each relevant project in lieu of a PPQ. Ensure that the PPQs or CPARS evaluations submitted for this Factor and Factor 1 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).

5.1.2. Basis of Evaluation. The evaluation of the Offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of assessing the Offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

Offeror, using the same three (3) projects and narrative from Factor 1 shall demonstrate the quality of performance information on projects determined by the Government to be recent and relevant as described in Factor 1 in paragraph 4.1.5.

To be determined “Acceptable” for Factor 2 Past Performance the Offeror must have Satisfactory or higher on their PPQs for the overall rating. Any ratings “Marginal” and below for a project will result in an “Unacceptable” rating for this Factor.

5.1.3. 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 Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all UEI/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. When reviewing other sources any ratings “Marginal” and below for a project will result in an “Unacceptable” rating for this Factor.

5.1.4. 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.

5.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.2.1 Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation is the reasonable expectation of the offeror to successfully meet the minimum past performance solicitation requirements. Past performance shall be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.305 and DFARS 215.305.

5.2.2 Recency and Relevancy Evaluation. Past performance will initially be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s present/past performance is recent and relevant to the effort required in the

RFP.

The minimum criteria in paragraph 5.1.2 must be met to be considered recent and relevant. Projects will be evaluated for recency based on when the project was completed, and projects will be evaluated for relevancy based on the description of the project and if it meets the minimum criteria in the solicitation.

Projects that are considered not recent will be considered as not relevant. The relevancy ratings for each project are shown below in Table 5.

Table 5. Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method:

RATINGS DESCRIPTION

RELEVANT

Present/past performance effort involved similar 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.

5.2.3 Performance Evaluation.

5.2.3.1. The Government will evaluate the quality of the Offeror’s past performance using the sources available to it including but not limited to the projects identified by the Offeror and submitted on the PPQs/CPARS and any additional information about those projects received from references, CPARs, etc. The Government will consider any available CPARs information on the relevant projects submitted by the Offeror under this factor. The Government reserves the right to determine an Offeror’s past performance to be Unacceptable if negative past performance information on relevant projects, as defined in 5.1.2, by the Offeror including information from other sources not submitted in response to this solicitation is discovered.

5.2.3.2. The Government will consider past performance of the offeror and if the offeror is a joint venture, the past performance information submitted for members of a joint venture.

5.2.3.3. Rating Methodology for Factor 2. To be rated “Acceptable” in this factor, Offerors must receive ratings of Satisfactory or better in each Section of PPQs submitted by the Offeror and in the Sections in CPARs evaluations reviewed by the government. Sections in a CPARS evaluation are Quality, Schedule, Cost Control (if applicable), Management, Utilization of Small Business, Regulatory Compliance, and Other Areas such as but not limited to Safety. The elements within each Section are not considered in determining whether an Offeror is Acceptable for this factor. Sections in a PPQ are the individual elements within each Section. For example, Quality Section is not rated however each question/statement such as a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts; b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance; c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance; d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance) is rated and will be considered individually in the evaluation of this factor.

When the SSEB is reviewing information provided by the Offeror or other sources any ratings “Marginal” and below for a project will result in an “Unacceptable” rating for this Factor.

The rating methodology for Factor 2 is “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” as defined in Table 6.

5.2.3.4. In case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “Acceptable.”

Table 6. Past Performance Ratings:

Ratings for Factor 2: Past Performance

RATINGS DESCRIPTION

ACCEPTABLE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown (5.2.3.4).

UNACCEPTABLE

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

6. PROPOSAL EVALUATION

6.1. The evaluation will be based on the content of the proposal, and any information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information. The SSEB will not consider any documents incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

6.2. 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. It is the responsibility of each member of the SSEB to provide and document whether the Offeror meets or does not meet the minimum requirements in order to support the assigned rating for each factor. Comments are required for all ratings.

6.3. The SSEB will review the two Offerors with the lowest price for technical who are technically acceptable for a price reasonableness determination. If the two offerors are not determined technically acceptable, the SSEB will continue to evaluate subsequent lowest priced offerors until at least two are determined technically acceptable. The Contracting Officer reserves the right to require evaluation of more than two offerors if there are other unknown situations that arise in order to make a fair and reasonable price determination. The Government will evaluate price reasonableness based on at minimum two technically acceptable offerors.

6.4. 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.)

6.5. 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.

7. BASIS FOR AWARD

7.1. Proposals must meet the criteria stated in the RFP in order to be eligible for award, to include responsiveness, responsibility and technical acceptability. A responsibility determination will be made in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 9.1.

7.2. In order to determine which proposal(s) represent the lowest price technically acceptable, proposals will be evaluated against all source selection criteria in this RFP.

7.3. Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors and receiving an “acceptable” rating in all non-price factors. The Government will make award to the lowest priced Offeror who is deemed responsive and responsible and whose price has been determined fair and reasonable.

Reasonableness will be established by using price analysis in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b), to determine fairness and reasonableness. Pricing tools such as historical price information, price competition information, or the Independent Government Estimate will be used to determine reasonableness.

7.4. The Government reserves the right to reject any and all offers.

7.5. Offerors are reminded to include their best technical and price terms in their initial offer.

ATTACHMENT 1 – PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

RFP NUMBER: W912HN22R3001

PROJECT TITLE: Ramey Unit School Replacement PROJECT LOCATION: Aguadilla, Puerto Rico

1. Name of Firm:

Address:

Phone:

Fax:

E-mail:

Unique Entity Identifier# (used for accessing CPARS)

If a joint venture, list the individual firms and briefly describe the nature of the association and provide a UEI number for each firm.

Firm 1:

Firm 2:

Firm 3:

Nature of Association:

2. AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATORS.

The Offeror represents that the following persons are authorized to negotiate on its behalf with the Government in connection with this Request for Proposals (RFP).

Name of Person Authorized to Negotiate:

Authorized Negotiators Title: ___________________________________ Negotiator’s Address:

Negotiator’s Telephone:

Negotiator’s E-mail:

ATTACHMENT 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE SUMMARY SHEET

Ramey Unit School Replacement, Aguadilla, Puerto Rico

The Offeror’s proposal shall include the Past Performance Summary Sheet to provide a summary of the projects included in this proposal. The summary sheet shall include information for all columns.

*** Note that for the requirement of “construction of a minimum of 2 of 4: cafeteria, gym, auditorium, or sports fields,” the offeror demonstrate all 4 four requirements between the submitted projects.

TECHNICAL FACTORS EXPERIENCE SUMMARY TABLE

Project 1 Project 2 Project 3 Project Name

Contract Number

Contractor

Year Completed

Contract Value

Completed on DoD property/installation

Vertical Construction

Over $20,000,000

Included site work, interior/exterior finishes (floors, ceilings, doors, windows, paint, siding, etc.), architectural, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, structural and fire suppression systems.

Includes min 2 of 4: Cafeteria, gym, auditorium, or sports fields

Educational Facility over 15,000 square feet

Over $20,000,000

Includes min 2 of 4: Cafeteria, gym, auditorium, or sports fields

Reinforced Cast-in-Place Concrete

ATTACHMENT 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE requests that the client completes this questionnaire and submits directly back to the offeror. The offeror will submit the completed questionnaire to USACE with their proposal, and may duplicate this questionnaire for future submission on USACE solicitations. Clients are highly encouraged to

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0) CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNS/UEI Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

submit questionnaires directly to the offeror. However, questionnaires may be submitted directly to USACE. Please contact the offeror for USACE POC information.

The Government reserves the right to verify any and all information on this form.

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not Applicable No information or did not apply to your contract Ra Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

Contractor Information (Firm Name: _________________________________________________

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST

REFLECT YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S

Client Information (Name): ________________________________________________________

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts E VG S M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E

VG

S

M

U

N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes;

responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in…