W912P522R0006-0004_2Aug2022.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

Solicitation W912P522R0006 for the IIJA Construction MATOC D/B & D/B/B Land Based Civil Works Construction is hereby amended as follow s:

SEE SUMMARY OF CHANGES

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 15

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 02-Aug-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 W912P522R0006

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

06-May-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

02-Aug-2022

CODE

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS-NASHVILLE

CELRN-RC-N,

110 NINTH AVE. SOUTH

NASHVILLE TN 37203

W912P5 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912P522R0006

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE (SF 30)

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0004

A. The due date for proposals is hereby extended from 18 August 2022 to 25 August 2022 at 1:00 PM Central Time.

B. Section 00 21 00 is hereby amended:

a. Note under Paragraph 5.1.4 is hereby amended.

b. Note under Paragraph 6.1 is hereby amended.

c. Section 6.0- Volume II is hereby amended to correct improper numbering.

C. Offerors must acknowledge ALL Amendments.

D. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 18-Aug-2022 01:00 PM to 25-Aug-2022 01:00 PM.

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team.

PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL OF OFFERS AND PROPOSAL EVALUATION

CRITERIA FOR PHASE II

1. Overview.

Those Offerors selected in Phase I are invited to submit a Phase II proposal, as indicated below. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria described herein, using the evaluation rating system outlined in the Phase II D/B selection procedures. Price information will be evaluated for fairness, reasonableness, and for material unbalancing, as described herein. Phase II evaluations will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.

1.1 The intent of this solicitation is to select a target of seven (7) contractors for FFP MATOCs for primarily D/B land-based civil works construction projects within LRD’s AOR. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein, and award multiple FFP contracts to the responsible Offerors, whose proposals conform with all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and whose proposals are determined to represent the overall best value to the Government. Projects will be competitively solicited among the contracts via RFP using individual task orders under the MATOC contract. Generally, each project award will be made to the Contractor that provides either the lowest price or the best value to the Government; each RFP will specify the method of selection. Source selection project award decisions will not be subject to the Disputes Clause of the MATOC.

1.2 This is a two-phase procurement, and the basis of award is the Best Value Tradeoff (BVTO) Process. Potential offerors are invited to submit the information described in this Section for review and evaluation by the Government. Following completion of the evaluation of Phase I, up to a maximum of ten (10) most highly qualified offerors will be selected to participate in Phase II. The selected offerors for Phase II will be invited to submit the information in the Phase II Section described below, Procedures for Submittal of Offerors for Phase II using a sample project and binding contract rates. These binding rates include hourly rates for the key project members, including Project Manager, Superintendent, CQC Manager, Site Safety Health Officer (SSHO), Design Project Manager, Architect, Civil Engineer, Structural Engineer, Mechanical Engineer, Electrical Engineer, Fire Protection Engineer, and Landscape Architect. No seed task order will be awarded from this solicitation. Only the base MATOCs will be awarded. Following completion of the Phase II evaluation, the Contracting Officer will award a target of seven (7) contracts to responsible offerors whom the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines conforms to the solicitation, are fair and reasonable, and offer the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offers or to reject all offers.

1.3 Individual task orders are anticipated to provide land-based civil works D/B, which could include but is not limited to site survey, Work Plan(s) and/or specifications, design and construction, maintenance, repair, renovation, and/or rehabilitation services. These services are expected to be needed in/on Government installations and other sites located within LRD’s AOR. Work under this contract may include D/B and/or D/B/B Construction projects such as: civil works related projects on land and along waterways, working on/around locks and dams, bridge construction/repair, demolition of small and large structures, etc.

1.4 The sample project has an estimated cost range between $5,000,000 and $10,000,000.

2.0 Submittal of offers.

2.1 Offerors submitting proposals for this solicitation should limit submissions to include only the data that is essential for evaluation of proposals so that a minimum of time and money will have been expended in preparing information required herein. However, to be effectively and equitably evaluated, the proposals must include information sufficiently detailed to clearly describe the Offeror's past performance, technical approach, small business participation plan, and other required information necessary for successful completion of the project.

Requirements stated in this RFP are minimums. Innovative, creative, or cost-saving proposals that meet or exceed the requirements are encouraged and will be rated accordingly.

2.1.2 This solicitation does NOT commit the Government to pay, as a direct charge, any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of a proposal. This solicitation also does not guarantee an award or multiple award contracts will result if the submissions do not completely satisfy the requirements stated herein.

2.1.3 Proposals must set forth full, accurate and complete information as required by this solicitation, including attachments and addenda/amendments. Offerors must ensure there are no false claims or statements included that may result in disqualification or retraction of review considerations.

2.1.4 When proposing as a joint venture, all members of the joint venture shall sign the SF1442 and the bid bond unless a written agreement by the joint venture is furnished with the proposal designating one firm with the overall authority to bind the other member(s) of the joint venture. In addition, a copy of the joint venture agreement shall be submitted with the proposal.

2.1.5 Deviations and exceptions to the terms and conditions of this solicitation are neither encouraged nor desired. Should the offer include any standard company terms and conditions that conflict with those herein, the offer may be determined to be “unacceptable” and thus be ineligible for award. Should the Offeror have any questions related to the terms and conditions herein, these must be resolved with the Contracting Officer prior to submission of the offer.

2.2 The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted electronically, as described below. The RFP will provide proposal submission instructions and receipt date for proposal submittal. The Offeror’s proposal shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

NOTE: The only authorized transmission method for proposals in response to this solicitation is electronically via PIEE online submission. 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 post their electronic proposal file(s) using the following link:

https://PIEE.apps.mil/

Please post proposals using the link above to Contract Specialist Ray Kendrick at Ray.Kendrick@usace.army.mil AND to Contracting Officer Stephen Hutchens at Stephen.P.Hutchens@usace.army.mil. Proposals for this procurement shall be submitted via the above link.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMITTING ELECTRONIC PROPOSALS:

All proposals shall be submitted electronically through the PIEE site. Submission shall be in Adobe PDF format. You are limited to twenty-five (25) maximum files per upload (total size cannot exceed 8GB). If you have multiple files, recommend that you combine or ZIP your files before uploading to the PIEE site. Offerors may use compression utility software such as WinZip or PKZip to reduce file size and facilitate transmission. Do NOT scan documents to create a PDF as they must be able to be searched using the “FIND” function and may not be legible enough for proper search and review.

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.

RECEIPT OF SUBMISSIONS:

For the purposes of establishing whether a proposal submission is considered timely, the Government considers the date and time the submission is completely uploaded into the PIEE website. For proposals larger than the 8GB capacity of the PIEE website and require multiple submissions, the Government will consider the date and time the last submission is completely uploaded into the PIEE website. Do not assume that electronic communication is instantaneous. It can take several minutes or, in some cases, hours.

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 to https://safe.apps.mil/ mailto:Ray.Kendrick@usace.army.mil mailto:Stephen.P.Hutchens@usace.army.mil reach the designated recipient. Offerors are responsible for allowing sufficient time for the proposal to be received in accordance with the instructions provided. It is highly recommended for each offeror to contact the respective Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer to ensure receipt of their proposal after submission to ensure the Government has received the offeror’s proposal.

2.3 For Phase II, offerors are required to submit a proposal made up of Design/Technical, Management Approach, Small Business Participation Proposal and Price as outlined below. All proposal materials shall be submitted via the PIEE website with a bookmarked table of contents and/or a standard electronic Tab Index. The sections should parallel the submission requirements identified below. Volume I shall be submitted in Portable Document Format (PDF) and shall be either tabbed or bookmarked to reflect the division of Factors in accordance with Paragraph 2.4 below.

*NOTE: Provide the complete Volume I proposal submittal including text, renderings, drawings, photographs, etc. on PIEE site. Offeror shall ensure the proposal is consistent with the submission requirements. Failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate tab (Factor or Sub-factor) may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information. Any specified page limits will be strictly adhered to and enforced.

Information submitted that exceeds the specified limit(s) will not be evaluated.

Proposals shall have a cover page identifying the Offeror (name, address, point-of-contact), solicitation name and number. Provide a separate page following the cover page with a bookmarked Table of Contents for ease of navigation within the electronic file(s).

“Confidential” projects and information can be submitted only if all required information from this solicitation is completely provided to permit thorough evaluation. If any submitted information cannot be disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government outside this solicitation, clear and conspicuous markings must be included wherever this limitation applies.

2.4 Volume 1 for Phase II shall be submitted via the PIEE website and include the following information:

• Volume I – Factor I: Design/Technical o Sub-factor 1: Design Drawings o Sub-factor 2: Design Narrative

• Volume I – Factor II: Management Approach

• Volume I – Factor III: Small Business Participation Proposal

2.5 Volume II for Phase II shall be submitted via the PIEE website and shall include the following information:

• Volume II – Tab A: Proposal Detail Sheet

• Volume II – Tab B: Standard Form 1442 and Price Breakout Schedule

• Volume II – Tab C: Joint Venture Agreements

• Volume II – Tab D: Evidence and Ability to Obtain Bonding and Proof of Financial

Ability

• Volume II – Tab E: Pre-Award Information

3.0 Proposal Evaluation Process.

3.1. A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of USACE employees will evaluate the proposals. Offerors are advised that the technical evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence. The number and identities of Offerors are not revealed to anyone who is not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other Offerors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is the BVTO process, as stated above.

Evaluations will be based on the content of the information contained in the submitted proposal, corrections provided within the time frame of the solicitation, information obtained from other sources (i.e., past performance reviews, references), and responses to addenda/amendments to this solicitation only. The SSEB will not consider any information or data incorporated by reference. Identities and other information about SSEB members are confidential and members will not be available for contact or discussion at any time.

The SSEB will evaluate proposals and assign a consensus rating for each proposal factor and sub-factor.

Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts for the Phase II submission and to furnish all information clearly and completely to allow the Government to determine their performance capabilities. Offerors should not assume they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in their proposal after the Phase II deadline and any extensions expire.

3.2 The evaluation process for Phase II essentially consists of four (4) parts: proposal compliance review and responsibility determination, technical evaluation, price evaluation, and price/technical trade-off analysis.

3.2.1 Proposal Compliance Review: This is an initial review to ensure that all required forms and certifications are complete and that the offeror is financially capable of sustaining performance under the contract and can obtain the required level of performance and payment bonds from an acceptable surety.

3.2.2 Technical Evaluation: The SSEB will evaluate and rate the Volume I proposals against the RFP requirements. Factor I and Factor II will be rated using Table 4 below. The SSEB will assign an adjectival rating to the Technical Factors and corresponding Sub-factors (if any). The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

Combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings (see Table 3). Factor III – Small Business Participation will be rated using Table 5 below. This factor shall be rated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable scale.

3.2.3 Price Evaluation: The SSEB, Cost Engineering, and Contracting Officer/SSA will evaluate price proposals independent of the technical evaluation. The SSEB will not have access to price information until completion of the technical/quality evaluation.

3.2.4 Price/Technical Trade-Off Analysis: After all the above evaluations are complete, the Contracting Officer/SSA will compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of technical proposals and compare prices. The SSA will then consider all factors to select the proposals offering the best value to the Government.

4.0 Proposal Information and Related Evaluation Factors.

4.1 Phase II proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the Factors and Sub-factors below, listed in descending order of importance and shall be based upon the Sample Project. All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined are considered approximately equal to price. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting

Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. A “Competitive Range” is a subjective determination of the most highly rated Phase II proposals if the Contracting Officer determines discussions with Offerors are required. If discussions are held, they will be in accordance with the “Basis of Award” criteria established in this section. Upon conclusion of discussions, those Offerors still considered the most highly rated, will be afforded an opportunity to submit their Phase II proposal revisions for final evaluation and selection.

4.2 Volume I – Technical Proposal

4.2.1 Volume I – Factor I – Design/Technical 1st

Sub-Factor 1: Design Drawings Equal to Sub-factor 2

Sub-Factor 2: Design Narrative Equal to Sub-factor 1

4.2.2 Volume I – Factor II – Management Approach 2nd

4.2.3 Volume I – Factor III – Small Business Participation Plan 3rd

4.2.4Volume II - Price and Pro Forma Information

Tab A Proposal Data Sheet Not Rated

Tab B Standard Form 1442 Not Rated

Tab C Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable) Not Rated

Tab D Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding and Proof Not Rated of Financial Ability

Tab E Pre-Award Information Not Rated

NOTE: Offeror is responsible for ensuring the PIEE site documents submitted are consistent throughout the proposal.

4.2.5 Ratings

Evaluators will apply the adjectival rating for the definition that most closely matches the evaluation.

Table 4 - Technical Proposal Ratings Adjectival Rating Definition

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 contract performance is high.

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

Table 5 - Small Business Participation

Plan Ratings Rating Definition

Acceptable

Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable

Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

4.2.6 Definitions

1. Clarification. Limited exchanges between the Government and Offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. See FAR 15.306(a)(1).

2. Communications. Exchanges, between the Government and Offerors, after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range.

3. Competitive Range. Based on the ratings of each proposal against all evaluation criteria, the contracting officer shall establish a competitive range comprised of all of the most highly rated proposals, unless the range is reduced for purposes of efficiency. See FAR 15.306(c)

4. Deficiency. A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

5. Deviations: Proposal implies or specifically offers a deviation below the content contained within this solicitation. The Offeror may or may not have called the deviation to the Government’s attention. A deviation is considered a deficiency. The proposal must conform to the solicitation requirements for consideration of an award.

6. Discussions. Negotiations conducted in a competitive acquisition. Discussions take place after establishment of the competitive range.

7. Evaluation Notice (EN). A written notification to the Offeror for purposes of clarifications, communications, or in support of discussions.

8. Risk. As it pertains to source selection, is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an Offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor or subfactor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost of degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

9. Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

10. Strength. An aspect of an Offerors’ proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

11. Uncertainty. Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the Offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission or mistake).

12. Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

5.0 Volume I – Factor I – Design/Technical

5.1 Submission Requirements:

5.1.1 Sub-Factor 1 – Design Drawings

Provide conceptual design drawings of the project. Conceptual drawings shall depict the overall architectural, mechanical, structural, civil, and electrical features of the project as described in more detail below. Fully developed drawings, details or specifications are not desired or required. Drawings should be at least 11” x 17” to show a detailed perspective view of the project. Submit design presentation-type drawings in ANSI D half-size scalable to fix 11” x 17” sheets.

a. Schematic site plans for the project area and scope.

b. Cross sectional diagrams showing major design features such as cut/fill, foundations, underground structures, retaining walls, utilities, materials and depths, etc.

At least one (1) site plan depicting larger-scaled site elements (i.e., orientation of the work within the project site boundary). Include the following site aspects to convey an understanding of the terrain, access, relationship to existing elements and orientation to optimal use available areas: access drives, loading/delivery service, parking, internal site circulation (vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle, etc.), significant retaining wall structures, stormwater control, LEED-related elements (if applicable), major areas of vegetation, areas available for future development (if applicable), anti-terrorism elements (standoff distances, passive barriers, traffic controls, vehicular barriers, and gates).

5.1.2 Evaluation Criteria:

Design Drawings will be reviewed for thoroughness, functionality, quality of materials, an understanding of the project requirements and compliance with the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Drawings must be able to clearly delineate the following:

• Overall site plans for demolition and construction

• The current existing topography of the project location

• A clear understanding and depiction of the proposed new topography

• Cross sections both longitudinal and lateral

• Profiles of stormwater to include the lift station

• Typical cross-section of the roadway and details of pavements, pedestrian walks, and guard rails

• Cross sections for the proposed embankment including rip-rap, sheet piling, geotextile reinforcement and vegetation plantings

• Major features, to include electrical, plumbing, mechanical systems (street/pedestrian walk lighting, lift station power, gas line, water line, stormwater lines, lift station pump and ventilation)

Drawings that exceed the minimum requirements or offer building system preferences listed in Section 01 02 00.00 48, Statement of Work, may receive additional consideration. Additionally, offerors whose drawings can clearly and thoroughly demonstrate an understanding of the project requirement, to include vegetation, site improvements, pavements, sheet-piles, rip rap, retaining walls, and other major features of work may also receive additional consideration. Drawings that realistically depict the proposed sample project may be rated more favorably.

NOTE: The Design Drawings sub-factor shall be limited to no more than fifteen (15) drawings using 11” x 17” sheets. The cover sheet will not be included in this page count. All information must be clearly legible. Any information that is not clearly legible may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information. Pages exceeding the page limit will be removed and not evaluated.

5.1.3 Sub-Factor 2 – Design Narrative:

Provide a clear and concise narrative describing the project, while specifically addressing the following site and building features:

a. Structural

b. Mechanical

c. Architectural features (if applicable)

d. Site Work/Utility Connections & Routing, Access & Circulation

e. LEED Considerations (if applicable)

f. Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection (AT/FP) (if applicable)

g. Life Safety Systems

Include the technical approach and any information necessary to describe materials and systems regarding types, quality, performance, and other attributes. An offeror must clearly define the proposed scope and quality levels the design-build team is offering to the Government. in enough detail for the Government and the Offeror to mutually understand whether the Offeror’s proposal meets or exceeds the solicitation requirements.

5.1.4 Evaluation Criteria:

The Design Narrative will be evaluated based on the ability of the offeror to clearly demonstrate each of the project features above on the solicited Sample Project as well as for completeness and thoroughness by including the features of the RFP as outlined in the Statement of Work. A Design Narrative that can provide a working understanding of the preparation and completion of specifications for the US Army Corps of Engineers may receive additional consideration. A proposed narrative that can clearly and logically describe construction team support during design and design support during construction may receive additional consideration.

NOTE: The Design Narrative sub-factor shall be limited to no more than ten (10) pages, 8-1/2” x11”. Pages should have a one-inch margin on all sides. Text should be 12-point, Times New Roman. (Captions for tables may be 10-point.) Pages exceeding the page limit will be removed and not evaluated.

6.0 Volume I – Factor II – Management Approach

6.1 Submission Requirements:

The offeror shall provide a management plan narrative for the project that describes how your labor, resources, designers, subcontractors, and material suppliers will be managed, supervised, coordinated, and used to ensure successful completion of the project.

Additionally, the Management Plan shall include the following information:

a. Describe the duties of the key project delivery staff and how this team will work together to deliver the project, both during the design and construction phases.

b. A commissioning plan to include an outline of systems to be commissioned, commissioning timeline and documents to be provided.

c. Key Subcontractors: Identify firms proposed for the major components of the construction project (i.e. mechanical, electrical, structural, etc.) Describe the extent of their involvement in work contained within the solicitation.

d. Provide an organizational chart for this project showing home office support, on-site management, and the responsible chain of command. JV offerors must show the respective areas of responsibility for each partner. Clearly delineate on-site from off-site personnel on the organizational chart.

NOTE: The Management Approach Proposal shall be limited to no more than ten (10) pages, 8- 1/2” x11”. One (1) single sided 11” x 17” page shall be used for the organizational chart. The Organizational Chart shall not count towards the 10 page limit. Pages (excluding the organizational chart) should have a one-inch margin on all sides. Text should be 12-point, Times New Roman. (Captions for tables may be 10-point.) Pages exceeding the page limit will be removed and not evaluated.

6.2 Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate the Management Plan Narratives based on the level of understanding of the work and the involvement the contractor will have in the management, oversight, control and coordination of the work performed during the construction of the project. Narratives that demonstrate a clear understanding of the project requirements and provide a thorough approach for successfully managing the solicited project may be rated more favorably by the SSEB. The offeror’s organizational chart will be evaluated based on the clarity, adequacy, capabilities, and strengths for successfully managing the solicited project.

7.0 Volume 1 – Factor III – Small Business Participation

7.1 Submission Requirements:

All Offerors shall submit a Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP) in accordance with Defense Federal Acquisition Supplement (DFARS) 215.304. The SBPP will be incorporated into any resultant prime contract as the basis for a formal Small Business Subcontracting Plan. The successful Offeror (if a large business) will be required to submit the Small Business Subcontracting Plan upon contract award. The Small Business Participation Plan shall be based on the Offeror’s best effort;

however, it must meet the minimum total Small Business Participation goal of 20% of the total contract value. Offerors unable to meet the minimum overall small business goal of 20% shall provide an explanation of why this target cannot be met with their proposal.

Address each of the following areas individually:

• The extent in which the small business programs listed in FAR 19 (Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Woman-Owned Small Business, HubZone, Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business, etc.) are specifically identified in the Small Business Participation Plan;

• The extent of participation of such firms in terms of the value of the total acquisition in percentages; the extent of commitment to use such firms;

• The complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform on this acquisition;

• The realism of the Small Business Participation Plan, i.e., aggressive goals.

The intent of the Offerors Small Business Participation Plan is for the Offeror to articulate how small businesses will participate in this award performance through small business subcontracting. The SBPP shall be organized as follows:

(1) Prime Contractor type of business (check all that apply): ( ) Large

( ) Small (also check type of small business) ( ) Small Non-Disadvantaged Business ( ) Small Disadvantaged Business ( ) Woman-Owned Small Business ( ) HUBZone Small Business ( ) Veteran Owned Small Business ( ) Service Disabled, Veteran Owned Small Business

(2) Percentage of your participation as a prime contractor: _______%

(3) Percentage of total contract value of subcontracts planned for:

% of Total Contract Value Large % Total Small % Small Non-Disadvantaged % Small Disadvantaged % Small Woman Owned % Small HUB Zone % Small Veteran Owned % Small Service Disabled Veteran Owned %

Each percentage above shall be accompanied by detailed supporting documentation regarding individual commitments.

NOTE: The sum of the percentages of Small Non-Disadvantaged and Small Disadvantaged should equal the entries for the Total Small; however, the sum of the percentages need not equal 100% since the prime is not included and individual subcontractors may be counted towards more than one category.

(4) List principal supplies/services (be specific) to be subcontracted to:

Company Name Type of Service/Supply

Large Small Non-Disadvantaged Small Disadvantaged Small Woman Owned

Small HUB Zone Small Veteran Owned Small Service Disabled Veteran Owned

(5) Prior Performance Information: Provide any information substantiating the Offeror’s track record of utilizing small business on past contracts.

(6) For Large and Small Businesses provide descriptive information for all small business categories. Any information concerning long-term relationships with Small Business subcontractors, such as mentor-protégé relationships, should be provided.

(7) Extent of Commitment: Provide documentation regarding enforceable commitments to utilize any small business category as defined in FAR Part 19 as subcontractors.

(8) Small Business Subcontracting Plan: If the intended awardee is a Large

Business Offeror, they shall provide a Small Business Subcontracting Plan that contains all the elements required by FAR 52.219-9 Alt II, Small Business Subcontracting Plan. This Plan shall be submitted separately from the Small Business Participation information required above which applies to both Large and Small Businesses. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan is not a requirement for evaluation in source selection but, rather a requirement for award to a Large Business. The approved Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be incorporated into any resultant contract(s).

7.2 Evaluation Criteria:

The Small Business Participation Proposal will be evaluated on the Offeror’s best efforts and the level of small business commitment that is being demonstrated for the proposed acquisition and the prior level of commitment to utilizing small businesses in performance of prior contracts. The Small Business Participation Proposal must meet the minimum Total Small Business Participation goal of 20% of the total contract value (through collective small business participation from any type of small business or sub-category small business) or provide additional justification as to why the stated goal is unattainable to be considered “Acceptable.”

Pursuant to DFARS PGI 215.304(c) the following elements will be considered in evaluating an Offeror’s Participation Proposal:

• The extent to which such firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in proposals;

• The extent of commitment to use such firms;

• The complexity and variety of the work such firms are to perform;

• The realism of the proposal;

• Past performance of Offerors in complying with the requirements of the

Subcontracting Plan Goals for such firms and monetary targets for participation;

• The extent of participation of such firms in terms of the proposed subcontracted value; and

• The extent to which the Offeror provides detailed explanations/documentation supporting the proposed participations percentages, or lack thereof. The Department of Defense (DOD) has established small business goals as an assistance to assure small business receives a fair proportion of DOD awards.

NOTE: Small Business Participation Plan Proposal shall be limited to no more than twenty-five

(25) pages, 8-1/2” x11”. Charts, tables, and illustrations should be limited to no larger than 11” x17” and shall be counted toward the 25-page limit. Pages should have a one-inch margin on all sides. Text should be 12-point, Times New Roman. (Captions for tables may be 10-point.) Pages exceeding the page limit will be removed and not evaluated.

8.0 Volume II –Pro-Forma Information (Submit as a separate document).

8.1 Tab A – Proposal Data Sheet (Form Enclosed).

8.1.1 Submission Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit a completed Offeror’s Proposal Data Sheet in the format provided at the end of this section.

8.2 Tab B – SF1442 and Acknowledged Amendments (if any) and Proposal Price Breakout

Schedule

8.2.1 Submission Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the SF1442. If any amendments are issued against this Solicitation, the Offeror shall include its acknowledgement of those Amendments by returning the signed amendments with its proposal and/or filling in Block 14 of the SF1442 and submitting the signed document with its proposal. The SF1442, block numbers 16, 17, and 18 must be completed by an authorized person from the company.

8.3 Tab C- Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable)

8.3.1 Submission Requirements:

If the company is a joint venture (JV), then all members of the JV must sign, including all amendments. Also, the Offeror shall submit a copy of the signed JV agreement.

8.4 Tab D – Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding and Proof of Financial Ability

This item is not rated. The Government will review the Bid Bond for legal sufficiency. The Bond must be legally sufficient.

8.4.1 Submission Requirements:

A. Financial Capability: Submit Proof of Financial Ability (Most recent financial statement covering assets and liabilities). Include the name, address, and telephone number of offeror’s banking institution. If the offeror is a joint venture, submit this information for all joint venture members.

B. Bonding Capability: Submit information showing the offeror’s ability to be bonded for this project. Include the name, address, and telephone number of the offeror’s bonding company.

8.5 Tab E – Pre-Award Information

8.5.1 Submission Requirements:

Unless available at SAM.gov, the Offeror shall submit all representations and certifications at Section K, including those incorporated by reference, See FAR 52.252-1, Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference, for instructions on how to obtain the full-text provisions.

The offeror shall submit the following information:

a. Number of years the firm has been in business

b. Name, address, and telephone numbers of two (2) credit/trade references

c. A list of present commitments, including the dollar value, and name(s) of the organization(s) under which the work is being performed. Include names and telephone numbers of personnel within each organization who are familiar with the prospective contractor’s performance.

d. Certified listing of (1) each contract awarded within the preceding three-month period exceeding $1 Million in value with a brief description of the contract, and (2) each contact awarded within the preceding three-year period not already physically completed and exceeding $5 Million in value with a brief description of the contract. If the prospective contractor is a JV, each JV member will be required to submit this information completely.

8.6 Evaluation Criteria:

The Proposal Data Sheet, the SF1442 and acknowledged amendments, JV Agreements, and Evidence to Obtain Bonding and Proof of Financial Capability will be used for the initial source selection review and will not be rated.

The Price Proposals will not be rated or scored but will be evaluated by a cost engineer (separate from the SSEB) for fairness, reasonableness, and for material unbalancing per line-item pricing using price analysis in accordance with FAR 15.404-1. Should certified cost and pricing data be required, then cost analysis may be performed to determine realism and reasonableness. The total evaluated price will be determined by adding the Grand Total price (base and all options [if applicable]) for the Sample Project. Offerors are cautioned to distribute direct costs, such as material, labor, equipment, subcontracts, etc., and to evenly distribute indirect costs, such as job overhead, home office overhead, bond, etc., to the appropriate contract line items. Both parties shall presume that field overhead costs through contract duration are inclusive in the price offered for the contract. Award will not be made to offerors who do not provide reasonable and realistic prices for all disciplines listed in the Contract Rate Pricing proposal, and for all line items in the Sample Project Breakout Schedule. Further, proposals that do not utilize the binding rates proposed in the Contract Rate Pricing proposal to calculate the price for the sample project will not be considered for award.

The Pre-Award information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre- Award Survey and will not be rated.

(End of Summary of Changes)