W912HP-14-R-0015_Amendment_2_dated_4-23-14.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

The purpose of this Amendment is to correct and clarify Sections 00010, 00100, 00600, 00700. Please see summary of changes.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 31

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 23-Apr-2014

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 W912HP-14-R-0015

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

12-Mar-2014

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 1 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

23-Apr-2014

CODE

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, CHARLESTON

DISTRICT, CONTRACTING DIVISION

69-A HAGOOD AVENUE

CHARLESTON SC 29403

W912HP 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912HP-14-R-0015

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 10-Apr-2014 02:00 PM to 08-May-2014 02:00 PM.

The following have been modified:

NOTICE TO OFFERORS

NOTICE TO OFFERORS

SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL SUBMISSION, TO INCLUDE E-MAIL AND FACSIMILE

TRANSMISSIONS, IS NOT AUTHORIZED.

HAND CARRIED PROPOSAL SUBMISSION, BY THE OFFEROR, IS NOT AUTHORIZED.

Proposals must be delivered by U.S. Mail, including U.S. Express Mail, Federal Express or United Parcel Service.

All proposals must be clearly identified with the contractor’s name and address. To ensure timely and proper handling, the lower left corner of the outermost wrapper should indicate the following:

Request for Proposal No: W912HP-14-R-0015 Due Date of Proposal: 8 May 2014 10 April 2014 Time by which Proposals are due: 2:00 pm (Local Time) Title of Project: W912HP-14-R-0015 81st RSC SATOC Region West

Proposals must be addressed as indicated below:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Charleston District Contracting Division (CESAC-CT) ATTN: Melisa L. Childs 69A Hagood Ave Charleston, SC 29403-5107

The date and time of delivery established by commercial carriers is not the official time of receipt by the Government. Offerors are responsible for allowing sufficient time for the proposal to be processed for receipt and are cautioned that sufficient time may be as much as 24 hours prior to the date and time designated for receipt of proposals.

The Government will not be responsible for proposals delivered to any location or to anyone other than those designated to receive proposals on its behalf. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that proposals are submitted so as to reach the office designated for receipt of proposals. Offerors are responsible for allowing sufficient time for the proposal to be physically received and processed by the government.

TECHNICAL MATTERS: Technical inquiries are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at www.projnet.org\projnet

All questions regarding this Request for Proposal (RFP) must be submitted in writing via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet within no less than 10 calendar days prior to the date established in the RFP for receipt of proposals. The Government reserves the right to decline addressing questions received less than 10 calendar days prior to receipt of proposals.

If an Offeror believes that the requirements in this Request for Proposal contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound; the offeror shall immediately notify the Contract Specialist in writing with supporting rationale. The Offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this Request for Proposal based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

To submit and review bid inquiry items, bidders will need to be a current registered user or self-register into system.

To self-register go to web page, click BID tab select Bidder Inquiry, select agency USACE, enter Key for this solicitation listed below, and your e-mail address, click login. Fill in all required information and click create user.

Verify that information on next screen is correct and click continue.

From this page you may view all bidder inquiries or add inquiry.

Bidders will receive an acknowledgement of their question via email, followed by an answer to their question after it has been processed by our technical team.

W912HP-14-R-0015

81st RSC SATOC Region West Bidder Inquiry Key: 7C5X7J-8NR9WC

NOTICE TO OFFERORS

NOTICE TO OFFERORS

1. DESCRIPTION OF WORK:

1.1 Single Award Task Order Contract (SATOC) for General Construction and Design/Build Construction is intended to provide rapid response for General Construction: new construction, rehabilitation, renovation, maintenance or repair of facilitiessituations relating, but not limited to, site work, mechanical systems, plumbing, utility systems, architectural, structural, electrical, HVAC, instrumentation, security and safety areas of Government facilities in a cost effective manner. In general, most Task Orders will consist of rehabilitation/renovation/repair of existing facilities, but new construction may also be required. Facilities will typically be occupied during project design and construction. Accurate As-built drawings may not exist for many existing facilities. Task Orders may range in size from approximately $25,000 to a maximum of $3,000,000, with the majority of the Task Orders ranging between $100,000 and $1,000,000. Work may include, but not be limited to:

1.2. Vertical Construction:

1.2.1. Buildings: Rehabilitation, renovation and repair of buildings, building additions, pre-engineered buildings and other structures (e.g. open bay pre-engineered, storage facilities, training ranges, etc.) and new construction.

Building renovations to include: floors, ceilings, walls, windows, doors, painting, electrical & mechanical upgrades, etc…, furniture incidental to construction (e.g. workstations), lead, asbestos and mold remediation, interior and/or exterior painting of new and existing facilities, and work incidental to surface deterioration (e.g. patching drywall, replacing siding, trim work, etc). Building repairs and rehabilitation to include: Gas, Water / Sewer, Roof, Electrical, or HVAC systems and components.

1.2.2. Roofs: Replacement and repair of roof and roofing systems. Work will include gutters, downspouts, flashing, fascia and soffits. Incidental damage (e.g. ceiling replacement, painting and carpet cleaning) as a result of roof leaks.

1.2.3. Anti-Terrorism Force Protection of new and existing facilities: Building and site security for both new and retrofit construction (e.g. site layout, security design, building construction, security equipment, threat development, level of protection, and design constraints and communications).

1.3. Horizontal Construction:

1.3.1. New construction, rehabilitation and repairs of highways, roads, streets, airport runways, concrete aprons, sidewalks, storm drainage, landscaping, sodding, detection loops, pedestrian bridges, highway bridges (Bridges that do not span over major waterways), parking lots, traffic lines and traffic markings. Work can also include the following, but not be limited to: Site preparation, clearing & grubbing, surveying, fencing, drainage systems, traffic & signalization and traffic studies. Storm water management and erosion control.

1.3.2. New construction, rehabilitation, maintenance or repair of HVAC systems, plumbing systems, waste water drainage systems, fire alarm, fire protection sprinkler systems, fire suppression systems, back flow preventers, all devices, equipment and components associated with constructing and installing these systems. Work can also include, but not be limited to the following: Installation of and experience with fire detection systems, DDC Controls systems, underground high temperature lines, medium temperature lines, chill water distribution systems, variable frequency controls on HVAC systems, testing, adjusting, and balancing of HVAC systems, design and installation of computer room HVAC systems, commissioning of building systems and pumping systems.

1.3.3. New construction, rehabilitation, maintenance or repair of interior and exterior utility systems and lines. Work may include but not be limited to the following: New construction, rehabilitation or repair services including electrical work. Interior and exterior high and low voltage electrical lines, communication lines, (telephone & data lines), communication systems, security & security camera systems and cabling. Natural gas, water, storm sewer, sanitary sewer and propane gas lines. Design, installation, and testing of new and existing emergency generator systems, automatic transfer switches, and emergency power connections into existing electrical systems.

1.4. Incidental Work:

1.4.1. New construction, renovation, rehabilitation repair or demolition services incidental to the tasks performed in any of the above paragraphs. This work shall include, but is not be limited to, carpentry, painting, lighting, and similar minor electrical work that may be required to provide a complete, safe and usable facility during and after the course of roofing, mechanical, plumbing or painting services.

1.4.2. Testing, reports and surveys associated with new construction, renovation, rehabilitation of, repairs and additions to, buildings (including lead and asbestos), structures, roads (including traffic/pedestrian patterns), drainage systems, mechanical systems and utility systems.

1.5. Restrictions: Task orders for design only or demolition only shall not be placed against the contract.

1.6 Price Proposals: Offeror shall use Means Cost Works Estimator to prepare, submit and negotiate price proposals.

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

SECTION 100

Section 0100

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICE TO OFFERORS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD PHASE I

The Government will utilize a Two-Phase Design- Build, Best Value Tradeoff for the Source Selection Process in accordance with FAR Part 15.101-1 and FAR Part 36.3 that will result in awards based on Best Value to the Government. In Phase I of this process, interested Offerors submit certain specified performance and capability proposals for review and consideration by the Government. Phase I of this procurement will result in a narrowing of offerors’, up to seven (7) firms that will be selected to submit Technical and Price proposals in Phase II.

In Phase II, a seed project (or sample project) will be issued by amendment that will be used in determining the award of the SATOC contract and the first task order. For evaluation purposes only in determining the competitive range, the Government will calculate the total evaluated price proposal, utilizing the sum of the seed or sample project

All Factors and associated Ratings from Phase I will be carried over to Phase II.

The Government will evaluate proposals for Phase I in accordance with the criteria described herein.

In Phase I, all factors are considered equal.

B. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION PHASE I

1. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.1 Any legally organized Offeror qualified and eligible to receive an award under applicable laws and regulations and which meets the SBA Standard size, may submit a proposal.

1.2 Where to Submit: Submit proposal packages to the Charleston District at the address shown in Block 7 of Standard Form 1442.

1.3 Submission Deadline: Proposals must be received by the Charleston District no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

1.4 General Requirements:

1.4.1 In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive sufficiently detailed information to allow review and evaluation by the Government.

1.4.2 Tabs. Organized and tab the proposal as shown below.

1.4.3 Size of Printed Matter Submissions.

1.4.3.1 Written materials will be on 8-1/2" x 11" paper and 10 or 12 size font format. The government may not review any written material not on 8-1/2" x 11" paper and 10 or 12 size font format. .

1.4.3.2 Include a detailed table of contents. If more than one binder is used, include the complete table of contents in each. Place any materials submitted but not required by this solicitation, such as company brochures or other information, in appendices following the tabbed sections.

1.4.4 Number of Copies. Submit original and five (5) four (4) hard copies of the proposal.

1.4.5 Electronic Copy of Submissions. In addition to the hard copies of the proposal, submit the Proposal on a CD ROM disk. The proposal should be in MS Word or Adobe Acrobat PDF file. The electronic version should either be a single file tabbed in the same order as the hard copy or multiple files hyperlinked to a single table of contents.

2. CONTRACTOR TEAM ARRANGEMENTS:

a. Recognition of Contractor Teams. In accordance with FAR Subpart 9.6, it is Government policy to recognize the integrity and validity of contractor team arrangements. For a teaming arrangement to be recognized for purposes of source selection evaluation and the application of non-price factors and sub-factors, there must be full disclosure of the teaming arrangement and company relationships in the team's proposal. The proposal must include a narrative that explains the major or critical aspects of the work to be performed by each team member. The proposal must also include an agreement that has been or will be executed prior to award between/among all team members. The proposal and agreement must be consistent; substantive inconsistencies between the proposal and agreement may be construed against the offeror. In the case of prime-sub teams, the prime contractor remains fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any team arrangement between the prime contractor and its subcontractors. However, consistent with FAR 9.104, the Government may consider the responsibility of subcontractor team members when it may adversely affect the prospective prime contractor’s responsibility or when it is in the Government’s interest to do so. At a minimum, the Prime Contractor has an in-house design staff or must have an AE teaming agreement for this contract.

b. Team Agreement. The team agreement submitted with the proposal will govern the performance of the work by the team. The agreement must address the following items: identification of team members, a full delineation of roles and responsibilities of team members, and the duration of the agreement. In the case of Joint Ventures or other partnerships seeking award to the team as a prime contractor, the agreement must indicate the percentages of the participants, in particular the percent of the controlling party. In the case of a prime-sub team, the agreement must reflect that the prime contractor is vested with control and responsibility for the daily management of the work, and that it remains responsible for contract performance, including those items allocated to a subcontractor on the team. Contractor teams should not submit an agreement in their proposal that is subject to substantive revision because the agreement will be part of the evaluation process. The timely submission of teaming agreements must be prior to completion of Phase One for a contractor to be considered for Phase Two. In the case of prime-sub teams, any resulting subcontract(s) may not deviate from the substantive provisions of the teaming agreement.

c. Restriction on Substitution. Regardless of any provision to the contrary in a team or subcontract agreement, all members of a recognized team arrangement are bound to perform any resulting contract and options by means of the same team. There can be no substitution of subcontractor team members except that, in the case of a prime-sub team arrangement, the Government may (in its sole discretion and without any obligation whatsoever), at the request of the prime, permit the substitution of a subcontractor with equivalent or greater capability for a subcontractor on the identified team. The failure of the Offeror to perform with one or more subcontractors on a recognized team may be grounds for termination for default.

3. GENERAL PROPOSAL FORMAT – PHASE I:

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

b. Table of Contents. Each volume of the proposal shall contain a detailed table of contents. If more than one binder is used, the complete table of contents shall be included in each. Any materials submitted but not required by this solicitation (such as company brochures) shall be relegated to appendices.

c. Binders. Proposals shall be submitted in tabbed, three ring binders.

d. Offerors SHALL submit a hard copy of the original Volume I and a hard copy of the original Volume II.

Offerors SHALL also submit five (5) four (4) additional hard copies of Volume II with one (1) electronic copy of Volume II on a CD. Given the limited time and resources of the evaluation board, failure to provide the requisite number of copies may hinder the board's ability to evaluate the Offeror's proposal. Failure to provide an original hard copy of Volume I and Volume II may result in the Offeror’s proposal being eliminated.

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 00600 – Representations and Certifications.

� TAB C – Proposal Data Sheet – See Appendix A provided.

Section. Offerors should ensure telephone number, fax number, e-mail address and DUNS number is 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 (J-V) it must be submitted. A DUNS number shall also be provided for each company identified in any other proposed association of firms or Contractor Team Arrangement. The Offeror should also submit their Tax ID number on the proposal data sheet.

� TAB D – Teaming Agreement and Narratives, if applicable.

� 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 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. At the discretion of the Contracting Officer, a Bid Bond will be required for each task order. FAR clause 52.228-1, “Bid Guarantee” will be included in the contract; $3 million for single task orders and $10 million for aggregate

VOLUME 2

� TAB F- FACTOR 1 CORPORATE SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

� TAB G- FACTOR 2 PAST PERFORMANCE –DATA SHEET (Appendix B) � TAB G- FACTOR 2 PAST PERFORMANCE- EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE (Appendix

C)

� TAB H- FACTOR 3 ORGANIZATION APPROACH

C. EVALUATION APPROACH - PHASE I

a. Phase I of the procurement process will result in up to a maximum of seven (7) offerors being selected to proceed to Phase II. Phase I includes the following evaluation factors: Corporate Specialized Experience (including Construction and Design Firm and proposed major subcontractors), Past Performance, (including Construction and Design Firm) and Organization Approach. Only those offerors selected in Phase I will be allowed to proceed into Phase II.

b. In order to be eligible for Phase II proposals must meet the minimum criteria stated in the Phase I RFP, offerors must be responsible and a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for each of the Technical Factors.

c. If the Offeror consists of a design-build team or other team as described in FAR 9.601, the Offeror must meet the requirements for CONTRACTOR TEAM ARRANGEMENTS, above, for all team members

D. PHASE I FACTORS AND RATINGS

1. PHASE 1 - FACTOR 1 CORPORATE SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE:

a. The Government will evaluate the extent of recent similar corporate experience of the prime contractor and its team members including the design firm, if any, in construction and design-build. Projects procured under indefinite or definite delivery or requirements type contracts will be evaluated on an individual task/delivery order basis. The Government will evaluate the depth and breadth of the Offeror’s corporate specialized experience on projects that meet the minimum criteria and are similar in nature, size, scope, and complexity to the work required by this solicitation.

b. CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE: The Offeror shall demonstrate representative corporate construction experience on projects using Appendix D, Tab F; Corporate Specialized Experience Data Sheet. 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 similar to the requirements of this RFP rather than the umbrella contract.

b.1 Minimum Criteria: Projects submitted by the Offeror must meet the following, as a minimum:

Number of Projects: Offerors must submit three (3) construction projects meeting the criteria below. For Offerors submitting as a Teaming Arrangement, each construction contractor in the Teaming Arrangement shall submit three (3) projects. Submitted projects performed jointly by the proposed team members will be credited as one project for each team member. Each member of a Joint Venture must submit three (3) projects.

Value of Projects: Projects submitted must have a minimum construction value of no less than $3 million dollars on at least one of the projects and $1.5 million dollars on at least two of the projects submitted.

The Government will not allow multiple projects, such as individual task orders, to be combined to meet the minimum value.

Recency of Projects: All projects shall be successfully completed, or substantially completed (at least 90% construction progress completed) within five (5) years preceding the date of this Solicitation.

Similarity of Projects: The projects should demonstrate examples of the scope of work described in Section 00010.

The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), other DOD or Government appraisal systems or by contacting owners or references. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

c. DESIGN EXPERIENCE: The Offeror’s Design Team shall demonstrate its capability to perform design work as might be required under this contract using the Standard Form 330 (SF 330). The Offeror is required to complete ALL sections of Part I and Part II of the SF330. The Government will evaluate the completed SF330.

C.1 Minimum Criteria: Projects submitted by the Offeror must meet the following, as a minimum:

Number of Projects: Offerors must submit three (3) projects meeting the criteria below, even if the proposed Architect-Engineer Firm represents the combining of two or more companies. If an Offeror submits more than three (3) total project examples, only the first three (3) projects will be evaluated. For Offerors submitting as a Teaming Arrangement, each design firm in the Teaming Arrangement shall submit three (3) projects, Submitted projects performed jointly by the proposed team members will be credited as one project for each team member. Each member of a Joint Venture must submit three (3) projects.

Value of Projects: The projects submitted for the AE Team Member must have a minimum design value of $150,000, or a construction value as addressed in CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE above. The Government will not allow multiple projects, such as individual task orders, to be combined to meet the minimum value.

Recency of Projects: All projects shall be successfully design completed within five (5) years preceding the date of this Solicitation.

Similarity of Projects:. The projects should demonstrate examples of the scope of work described in

Section 00010.

Staffing and Professional Qualifications: In Section E of the SF330, provide professional qualifications

(appropriate education, experience and professional registration). At a minimum, Offerors must provide:

a. Architect

b. Civil Engineer

c. Mechanical Engineer

d. Electrical Engineer

e. Fire Protection Engineer

f. Structural Engineer

Design Standards and Practices. The Architect-Engineer Firm must submit a narrative, using Section H of the SF330. Section H of the SF330 shall not exceed two (2) pages. The Offeror shall use this two (2) page narrative to explain the firm’s capability to perform the following:

a. Rehabilitation/Renovation/Repair/Minor Construction of facilities as described in Section 00010;

b. Complying with the state building codes and the military base installation design guides;

c. Sealing designs in North Carolina, South Carolina, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Georgia, and Puerto Rico;

d. Preparing design files in (*.dgn) formats

The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), other DOD or Government appraisal systems or by contacting owners or references. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

c. Minimum Criteria: Projects submitted by the Offeror must meet the following, as a minimum:

Number of Projects: Offerors must submit three (3) projects but no more than five (5) projects meeting the criteria, below. For Offerors submitting as a Teaming Arrangement, each firm/contractor in the Teaming Arrangement shall submit three (3) projects each, Submitted projects performed jointly by the proposed team members will be credited as one project for each team member.

Value of Projects: Projects submitted must have a minimum value of no less than $3 million dollars on at least one of the projects and $1.5 million dollars on at least two of the projects submitted. In the case of recognized teaming arrangements including an A/E team member, the three projects submitted for the AE Team Member must have a minimum value of $500,000 thousand dollars. The Government will not allow multiple projects, such as individual task orders, to be combined to meet the minimum value.

Recency of Projects: All projects shall be successfully completed, or substantially completed (fully designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) within five (5) years preceding the date of this Solicitation.

Similarity of Projects: Collectively, the projects submitted must include design-build, new construction, whole building rehabilitation, and facilities maintenance or repair. The projects should demonstrate examples of the following types of work: site work, road work, mechanical systems, utility systems, plumbing, electrical, HVAC, structural systems including but not limited to seismic and progressive collapse, instrumentation, security and safety areas of Government facilities.

As a minimum, the Corporate Specialized Experience Data Sheets shall provide; the Project Point of Contact with telephone number, role and function performed on project, significance of role to overall project, project description (title), scope, location, cost (of specific contract action), and date of completion or anticipated completion date and percent constructed as of the date of the solicitation.

Where performance of an individual task/delivery order is relied upon to meet any criterion, the individual task/ delivery order must meet all of the value, recency, or relevancy criteria of the Specialized Corporate Experience requirements.

d. The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), other DOD or Government appraisal systems or by contacting owners or references. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

The relevant experience of key personnel will not be evaluated or considered under this factor.

e. The Technical/Risk Ratings to be used for this Factor, listed below, focus on the strengths, deficiencies, weaknesses, risks and uncertainties of the offeror’s proposal.

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Rating Description

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

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

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

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

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

Proposal is unawardable.

2. PHASE I - FACTOR 2 PAST PERFORMANCE

a. The past performance evaluation will result in an assessment of the Government’s confidence in the ability of the Offeror to meet the solicitation requirements. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation.

The first is to evaluate the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant it is, resulting in a Relevancy Rating. The second is to determine how well a contractor performed on the projects, which results in a performance confidence assessment rating.

b. Offerors shall provide past performance information for each project submitted for Factor One –Corporate Specialized Experience. However, the Government is not limited to this information but may also consider an Offeror’s or subcontractor’s past performance on other projects based on information from any source available to it.

c. If the offeror is employing a recognized team arrangement, submitting as a Teaming Arrangement, each firm/contractor in the Teaming Arrangement shall submit three (3) projects each. Submitted projects performed jointly by the proposed team members will be credited as one project for each team member. For reference and evaluation purposes the Offeror shall identify who will perform the major or critical aspects of the project. The consideration and weight given to past performance information concerning other than the prime contractor will take into account the extent of involvement of the team member in the project and the adequacy of the proposal in identifying and addressing such arrangements and roles. At a minimum, the Offeror shall provide past performance information for the Prime Construction Contractor and the Prime AE.

d. Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). The PPQ included in the solicitation (Appendix C, Tab G) is provided for the offeror and its team members to submit to the client for each project submitted under Factor 1.

Submit completed PPQs with the proposal. If the offeror cannot obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the proposal due date, then complete and submit the first page of the PPQ showing all contact and client info with the proposal. The Offeror shall provide detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information in a timely manner. If the client requests, PPQs may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, via email at melisa.l.childs@usace.army.mil NO LATER THAN 3 days prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs by reference.

Late submissions of the PPQ, may result in result in the Offeror’s proposal being eliminated.

e. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, PPQs submitted on prior RFPs, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror's proposal, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

f. Relevancy Evaluation: Projects will be evaluated to determine how relevant the projects are compared to the effort required in this solicitation. Aspects of projects to be evaluated for relevance include, without limitation, similarity of scope, size type of work, complexity, and contract type. , and the degree of subcontracting or teaming proposed by the Offeror. The project description in section 4 of the PPQ shall include the characteristics of the projects.

g. Performance Confidence Evaluation: Offerors shall provide for each submitted project for Factor One, – Corporate Specialized Experience a copy of any interim and the final performance evaluations for the project.

Offerors may also include performance recognition documents received within the last 3 years such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation or appreciation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

1. For any projects that did not/do not meet original schedule or technical performance requirements, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence. The offerors shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary. All Requests for Deviation and Requests for Waiver shall be addressed with respect to causes and corrective actions. Offerors shall provide a copy of any Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters received by the offeror for each submitted project and a description of any corrective action implemented by the offeror. The offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination.

21.. Regardless of the rating or evaluation terminology used in any past performance information, the Government will make an independent determination of the acceptability or non-acceptability of an offeror’s past performance based on the totality of information considered. Offerors shall 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.

32. The Government will consider the relevant past performance information, source of this information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor performance on recent projects to reach a performance confidence assessment using the ratings below.

4.3. If 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 this factor will be assigned a rating of “Unknown Confidence (Neutral).”

h. The following Past Performance Relevancy Ratings and Performance Confidence Assessments will be used:

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition

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

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

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

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

Performance Confidence Assessments

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.

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 successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown 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.

3. PHASE I – FACTOR 3 ORGANIZATIONAL APPROACH

a. Provide information that describes the offeror’s organization approach to executing the contract per the detailed requirements herein. Limit the information to eight (8) pages or less. excluding resumes. The government may not review any pages above eight (8) pages. Clearly but concisely describe the organizational project management and execution.

b.a. Offeror Understanding: Describe the Offeror’s understanding of the design challenges and risks with respect to the scope of this contract. Specifically address the topics identified below:

1. Organization: Describe team members (Recognized Team Arrangements or otherwise), their resources and how their resources will be utilized. Identify the roles, responsibilities and qualifications of team members that will perform major or critical aspects of both the design and construction phases.

Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing how the design and construction process will be managed and the authorities and the delegations of authority within the team.

2. Approach for Design and Construction: Describe your approach to performing design and construction for the scope of this contract. Include any considerations of fast-tracking design and construction. Discuss how design and construction is completed on short time-lined renovation projects typical to government operation and maintenance (O&M) requirements

3. Collaborative Approach for Design and Construction: Describe interactions within the team and with the Corps of Engineers during design and construction. Discuss how the configuration management system will track and control design evolution and changes during design for quality control and to facilitate quicker Government reviews. Describe the role of the construction team members during design. Describe the role and interaction of the design team with the construction team during construction, addressing, as a minimum, maintaining configuration management of the design during construction, including control and approval of revisions to the accepted design;

requests for information; shop drawing and submittal reviews and approvals; progress meetings; site visits, if any; contract completion, closeout, as-built and completion documentation.

4. Subcontractor Approach and Management: Describe how subcontractors are managed by the contractor. Discuss how subcontract relationships are structured to assure proper balance and flow-down of contract requirements, duties, responsibilities, and properly balanced and proportioned risk management. Discuss how non-performance by subcontractors is handled by the general contractor.

5. Planning and Scheduling: Describe the time control capabilities and systems to be used to plan design and construction and how the schedule will be used to manage design and construction.

Discuss internal procedures for handling delays to minimize time growth or ‘schedule creep”.

Discuss experience with interfacing scheduling software with Resident Management System (RMS) if applicable.

6. Quality Control: Describe the team’s quality control management approach. Describe the proposed quality control organization, including the proposed staffing plan. Provide specific information on how you will manage design quality, track design evolution and changes, and coordinate schedules to facilitate more efficient Government reviews. Provide information on how you will handle internal and external requests for information, shop drawings, submittal reviews, progress meetings, site visits, contract completion, closeout, as-built, and completion documentation

c. The Technical/Risk Ratings to be used for this Factor, listed below, focus on the strengths, deficiencies, weaknesses, risks and uncertainties of the offeror’s proposal.

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

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

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

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

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

Proposal is unawardable.

E. EVALUATION OF INDIVIDUAL FACTORS

1. PHASE I - FACTOR 1 - CORPORATE SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

a. The proposal will be evaluated to ensure that the Offeror meets the minimum criteria for this factor. An Offeror who does not meet the minimum criteria will be eliminated from further evaluation, with the possible exception where discussions are held and include this factor. If projects submitted are of a larger value the offeror could be rated more favorably. The Government may place greater importance on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor, depending upon the overall role performed and similarity of the project. Offerors may identify federal, state and local government, or private contracts that are similar to the Government’s requirements.

If projects were design-build, so identify them.

b. Additional Criteria:

Projects which meet some or all of the additional criteria specified below may be given more weight by the Government in determining the appropriate rating.

� The extent of Design Build experience � Previous Team Experience w/ proposed team member(s) � Qualifications and experience in sustainable development and design of the Design Firms based on the US Green Building Council’s LEED Green Build Reference Guide � The abili ty to manage several task orders at once located in multiple states.

� Phased construction, rehabilitation, maintenance or repair. Projects, which required phasing among multiple buildings in a single complex or a single structure that required a portion of the building or complex to remain occupied and/or in operation while work in progress.

� DOD and/or Army Corps of Engineers Construction Experience.

� Teams who have previously worked together under a teaming agreement.

2. PHASE I - FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

a. Relevancy.

The relevance of past performance will also be assessed against the additional criteria, below:

Past performance that is more relevant will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. In addition to the similarity of scope, complexity, contract type, and the degree of subcontracting or teaming proposed by an Offeror, the relevance of past performance will be assessed based on the following: similarity of the types of work to the following: design build, new construction, whole building rehabilitation, and maintenance or repair of situations relating, but not limited to, site work, road work, mechanical systems, utility systems, plumbing, electrical, HVAC, structural systems, instrumentation, security and safety areas of Government facilities.

� The extent of Design Build experience � Previous Team Experience w/ proposed team member(s) � Qualifications and experience in sustainable development and design of the Design Firms based on the US Green Building Council’s LEED Green Build Reference Guide � The abili ty to manage several task orders at once located in multiple states.

� Phased construction, rehabilitation, maintenance or repair. Projects, which required phasing among multiple buildings in a single complex or a single structure that required a portion of the building or complex to remain occupied and/or in operation while work in progress.

� DOD and/or Army Corps of Engineers Construction Experience.

� Teams who have previously worked together under a teaming agreement.

b. Performance Confidence.

1. The Government will evaluate and review the completed PPQs and other available past performance data for each of the submitted projects, and may also evaluate additional past performance information available to it. The purpose is to determine how well the contractor performed on past contracts of similar size, scope, complexity and contract type.. Negative past performance history may include, without limitation:

negative ratings (marginal or unsatisfactory) in a Government database that is less than five three years old;

unresolved show cause or cure letters, terminations for default, or other documentary evidence within the last five three years that the Offeror cannot justify; or, if the project experienced a delay greater than 50% without justification, or there were any fatalities on the job site.

2. Contractor Team Arrangements Evaluation. There will be a single overall past performance rating for each team/offeror. Poor past performance by a member of a contractor team will be reflected in the Performance Confidence Assessment.

3. The Government will evaluate past performance in terms of the elements listed below:

• Quality of Construction. Based on information provided in the questionnaire and other information, the Government will assess the quality of the actual construction undertaken and the standards of workmanship exhibited by the Offeror’s team.

• Schedule/Timeliness of Performance. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror completing past projects within the scheduled completion times.

•…