Am_0001 W912P823R0075.pdf

W912P823R0075

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 above numbered solicitation is hereby amended to (1) answ er contractor questions; (2) incorporate a revised Section 00 21 00, Instructions; and (3) provide MS Word documents for Attachments A and B.

The Phase 1 proposal due date is extended to Tuesday, 18 July 2023, 2:00pm CT. Any questions on this solicitation must be received by Thursday, 6 July 2023, 12:00pm CT.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 25

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 29-Jun-2023

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 W912P823R0075

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

09-Jun-2023

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

29-Jun-2023

CODE

USACE, CONTRACTING DIVISION

ATTN: CEMVN-CT, ROOM 172

7400 LEAKE AVE.

NEW ORLEANS LA 70118-3651

W912P8 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS- W912P823R0075

1. Page 16 of 61 limits Factor 2 Technical Approach to 15 pages.

Page 24 of 61 limits Factor 3 Past Performance to 15 pages plus 5 pages for each major subcontractor.

Are there any page limits to Factor 1 Experience?

No. Factor 1 is limited by the number of projects for Prime Contractor, Design Firm and Major Subcontractors.

2. Please consider extending the due date for offers.

The Phase 1 proposal due date is changed per this amendment – see block 14 of the SF 30.

3. Attachment B looks to be part of the Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaire Form. Can the USCE provide the correct Attachment A, B and C forms? Attachments A and B titles need to be changed to what is in the RFP.

Attachment B and C will be combined into Attachment B. Attachment Forms are included in this Amendment.

4. Can the USACE provide Attachment A, B and C as word documents?

The word documents are provided per this amendment.

5. To confirm the requirements for Phase One. We are to submit no more than 5 past projects as the prime contract along with 5 past projects from our DOR?

Refer to Section C, Phase I Submission Requirements (i). Subparagraphs a, b and c clearly identify the submission requirements for Prime Contractor, Design Firm and Major Subcontractors.

6. Please clarify if a signed and completed SF1442 and acknowledgement of addendums is required as part of the Phase 1 proposal.

Yes, a signed 1442 and acknowledgement of addendums is required as part of Phase 1 proposal.

7. Please clarify if representations and certifications are required as part of the Phase 1 proposal.

Yes, representations and certifications are required.

8. Section 00 22 00 Instructions vary considerably between the proposal requirements and the evaluation criteria. Please clarify.

Revisions to Section 00 21 00 – “Instructions” are included with this amendment.

9. Could the government provide a tabulation table outlining the requirements of Phase 1 proposal similar to the following:

File Name Description Pages Factor Relative

Importance

Vol. 1, TAB A Cover Letter, SF 1442, Acknowledgement Sheet, Representations and Certifications, N/A N/A

Vol. 1, TAB B FACTOR 1:

EXPERIENCE

xx Equal to Factor’s 2 and 3

Vol. 1, TAB C FACTOR 2:

TECHNICAL

APPROACH

15 Equal to Factor’s 1 and 3

Vol. 1, TAB D FACTOR 3: PAST

PERFORMANCE

15 Equal to Factor’s 1 and 2

This information is included as narrative in the RFP.

10. Page 14, the requested projects are to be completed in the last 10 years or at least 50% complete at the time of the proposal due date. For Design-Build projects, does the 50% complete apply to the design phase, construction phase or overall?

Overall

11. Page 15, the solicitation reads as follows: “The Government will evaluate a minimum of three projects but no more than five projects for each prime contractor and designer and a minimum of two but no more than three projects for each major subcontractor (Mechanical, Structural, Electrical, Civil) as listed by the offeror on Attachment A, Experience Overview Sheet and as further described on Attachment B, Experience Information Form.”

a. Attachment A is the Offeror Experience Form and does not describe or reference subcontractors. Please clarify.

Subcontractors can utilize the same form and indicate their role for this solicitation on the form.

b. Attachment B is the Evaluation Form that is typically part of the USACE’s standard PPQ Form. Please clarify.

Attachment B and C will be combined into Attachment B. This requirement has been removed from Factor 1 per this amendment.

12. The solicitation requirements for project examples are a little unclear overall. Can you please clarify if the following interpretation is correct?

a. Prime Contractor – Provide 3-5 project examples that meet the recency and relevancy requirements. Example projects can be either Design-Build Design-Bid-Build.

Please see Section C – Factor 1, first sentence.

b. Proposed Design Firm – Provide 3-5 project examples that meet the recency and relevancy requirements. Example projects can be either Design-Build Design-Bid-Build.

See response above.

13. Page 23 under paragraph (i) Evaluation factor 1 – experience submission requirements:

a. Midway through the first paragraph there is a reference to Experience Information Form (EIF) and Attachment B. As noted in question 2 above, please clarify.

Experience Information Form (EIF) has been revised to Offeror Experience Form (OEF) as part of this amendment.

14. Page 24 under “c. MAJOR SUBCONTRACTORS:” we are required to provide subcontractors commitment letters and example projects for Mechanical, Structural, and Electrical. This is a Phase 1 Proposal for a MATOC that covers a very broad scope of work across the Mississippi Valley Division (MVD). Without having more specifics as to the scope of work of the task orders and seed project, we are unable to make a determination to select the best subcontractors. The Mississippi Valley Division (MVD) of the USACE covers a vast area of the Midwestern US and it would not be feasible for the prime contractor to name a specific subcontractor that would be able to cover the entirety of the MVD.

MVD districts included under this MATOC are New Orleans District (MVN), Memphis District (MVM), and Vicksburg District (MVK).

a. We request that the requirement to name/utilize a specific subcontractor for this MATOC be moved to Phase 2 of this

Solicitation so that specific subcontractors can be named for the Seed Project of Phase 2.

Subcontractors are part of Phase 1 as outlined in the RFP.

15. Page 16 requires the organizational chart to be provided in the narrative for this section. Page 23 requires the organizational chart to be provided in an appendix. Please clarify.

Yes, page 16 requires the organizational chart as part of the Factor. However, page 23 simply provides guidance on where it should be located within Volume 1.

16. Is the “Lead Designer” and the “Designer of Record” considered the same position? There is a reference to both positions in the solicitation requirements for the proposal.

Yes, they are the same position.

17. Page 23, there are references to Letters of Commitment of Key Personnel, but page 16 requires us to only identify the position without name. Please clarify if resumes for key positions are required.

Resumes have been removed per this amendment.

a. Please also clarify if Letters of Commitment are required for Key Personnel for the Offeror.

Letters of commitment are only required as part of Factor 3 (iii) Section 4.0.

b. Please clarify if Letters of Commitment are required for Key Personnel from the Designer in addition to the Letter of Commitment from the Design Firm.

Letters of commitment are only required as part of Factor 3 (iii) Section 4.0.

18. Page 24 under section (iii), the solicitation reads as: “This section shall contain current and past performance information regarding similar contracts. It shall not exceed 15 pages plus five pages for each major subcontractor, including Past Performance Questionnaire Forms (Attachment C).”

These sentences have been revised per this amendment.

a. This section states that PPQ forms are counted towards page limitations. On page 23, just above section (i), PPQ forms are listed as “Items not included in the page count for Phase I proposals”. Please clarify.

See above response.

b. This section does not indicate if the Design Firm is to provide past performance information pertaining to Sections 1 through 6. Please clarify if the design firm is to provide past performance information under Factor 3.

See above response.

19. Page 26 under section 5 its states, “For all contracts identified in Section 1 - Contract Descriptions, complete a Past Performance Questionnaire for any project that has not received a formal Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation.”

a. Please clarify if an interim CPAR evaluation will be considered as a formal CPAR evaluation.

Interim evaluations will be considered for on-going projects.

b. Please clarify if the formal CPAR evaluation is required to be submitted under this section.

Formal CPAR evaluations will be pulled by the Government. If there is no formal CPAR available, the offeror must follow guidance as stated in Section 5.

20. Page 27 under Section 6 – Submissions, please clarify what information the offeror is to provide here.

This is section has been revised to be included under Section 5.

21. Section 00 21 00 are the instructions for offerors to put their proposal responses together based on what you or the technical evaluation board is interested in seeing. The phase 1 proposal responses are generally described under paragraph C. PHASE ONE FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED and paragraph D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS. The Table below will breakdown my interpretation of what is presented for each Factor based on these 2 paragraphs.

Paragraph C. Paragraph D. Apparent Discrepancy(ies) Factor 1: Experience

Project experience is to be provided in this Factor using Attachments A and B.

Project experience is to be provided in this Factor using Attachments A and B.

Experience Information form, Attachment A is to be used by the Government for evaluating Past Performance in Factor 3.

“Information provided on the EIF will be evaluated for this Factor 1 and will also be used to support the evaluation of Factor 3, Past Performance.” Page 23 of solicitation.

Attachment B is not an Experience Information Form. Revised to remove Attachment B.

Factor 3 requirements under Paragraph C and D have no reference to any project information provided in Factor 1. The requirements for Factor 3 appear to request PPQ’s and project information from projects that may or may not be completed. Revised first paragraph of section (iii) of this amendment.

“Offerors shall submit Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major contract currently in performance or awarded during the past ten (10) years, from the issue date of this solicitation, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation.” page 24 of the solicitation

Factor 2: Technical Approach Technical approach requirements are reasonably described. There are references to anticipated Key Positions and are described to be un-named.

Organizational Chart required in the narrative.

No resumes required.

Technical approach requirements are reasonably described. There are references to anticipated Key Positions and are described to be un-named.

Organizational Chart required in the narrative.

No resumes required.

Page 23 of the Solicitation:

Organizational Chart required to be in an Appendix.

This is correct.

Letters of Commitment for Key Personnel positions required.

This has been clarified in this amendment.

Resumes of Key Personnel required.

This has been removed.

Factor 3: Past Performance No specific requirements for submittal information. Only general definitions of evaluation process, assessment and specific definitions of Recency and Relevancy.

PPQ forms listed as items not counted towards page limitations – Page 23

Offerors are to provide past performance contract information formatted to follow Sections 1-6.

Offerors are to provide past performance for Major Subcontractors

PPQ forms now count towards page limitations –

PPQ forms not required to be provided in proposal response

– Page 26

Factor 1 evaluation language under paragraph D listed above states that project info provided in factor 1 will be evaluated in Factor 3. There is no reference to Factor 1 described in Paragraph D. for Factor 3. See above, the requirements appear to request additional projects that may or may be provided in Factor 1.

This has been clarified in this amendment.

There is no requirement for Design Firm to provide any Past Performance under Factor

3. Only the reference in Factor 1 that Design Firms EIF’s will be utilized for Past Performance under Factor 3.

This has been clarified in this amendment.

Page 26 of Solicitation, Section 5 – Past

Performance Questionnaire we are required to submit PPQ’s for all projects described in Section 1 of Factor 3 and no reference to any PPQ information for projects provided by the Offeror, Design Firm or Subcontractors in Factor 1.

This has been clarified in this amendment.

PPQ forms:

PPQ Forms not required to be provided in proposal, only submitted to Contract specialist.

Table/Tabulation of all PPQ’s sent to POC’s to be provided with no reference to if this table page of PPQ contacts is counted towards page limitations.

PPQ forms, including tables, do not count towards page limitations.

22. Page 24 of the solicitation in the first paragraph under section (iii) Evaluation Factor 3 – Past Performance “Offerors shall submit Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major contract currently in performance or awarded during the past ten (10) years, from the issue date of this solicitation, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation.”

This statement reads as though you want us to provide a list of current active/complete contracts that are relevant and are within the described time line. The solicitation then defines that these projects are to generally be described per Sections 1-6 on pages 25 through 27 of the solicitation. Can you please clarify if this is an accurate interpretation? Also, if this accurate, is this section limited to the same total of “up to 5” projects as defined in Factor 1 or do you want to see All relative projects AND receive PPQ’s for them?

If the latter is your requirement, then Factor 3 will be considerably lengthy for Offerors responding to this RFP.

Also, the PPQ portion of Factor 3 (Section 5) is in relation to the projects listed in Section 1 of Factor 3. Would it not be more beneficial to the government to utilize the PPQ’s for the projects described in Factor 1?

This has been clarified in this amendment.

23. In regards to the subject solicitation, can you advise if PPQs (attachments B & C) will still be required for past projects if a CPARS is included in our response for those projects?

Formal CPAR evaluations will be pulled by the Government. If there is no formal CPAR available, the offeror must follow guidance as stated in Section 5.

24. In regards to the subject solicitation, please advise what information is required on Attachment A, Offer Experience Form, in the "Technical Subfactor" and "Subfactor Title" blanks. We are unable to find any subfactors in the RFP.

Attachment A requirements are included in the RFP and outlined in Factor 1: Experience and (i) EVALUATION FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE Submission Requirements. There are no subfactors under the Technical Approach. “Technical Subfactor” and “Subfactor Title” have been removed from the MS Word version of Attachment A included in this amendment.

EVALUATION AND SUBMISSION

PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND CONTRACT AWARD

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The MATOC award will be made based on the best value to the Government by using the Best Value trade-off source selection process in FAR Part 15 and two-phase design-build procedures in FAR Part 36.3. The MATOCs will be awarded for five-year period of performance. This procurement is 100% set-aside for Small Business. The total contract dollar capacity shared among firms will not exceed $98,000,000.00. The minimum guarantee amount for the entire life of the contract for each IDIQ awardee is $2,500. The minimum Task Order value is $250,000.00 and the maximum Task Order value is $25,000,000.00. The Government intends to award a target of four (4) (maximum five (5) awardees sharing a total capacity of $98M whose proposal, conforming to the RFP, will be most advantageous to the Government resulting in the Best Value. Task Orders will be competed amount the pool of contracts and primarily awarded on a firm-fixed price basis.

The requirement is for various types of repairs and maintenance of real property and construction services to include new construction and renovation to large civil works projects including flood control, river navigation facilities, maintenance and office facilities, roadways and recreational facilities, and river levees. Specific work may include a combination of design, construction and/or repair within the New Orleans District (MVN) and Mississippi Valley Division (MVD) to include Vicksburg District (MVK) and Memphis District (MVM).

The government will initially evaluate offerors’ proposals submitted in response to Phase One

(1) of this solicitation.

Phase One (1) evaluation factors are as follows:

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE

FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL APPROACH

FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE

All three Phase One evaluation factors are of approximately equal importance. After evaluation of Phase One, the government will select up to seven (7) of the most highly qualified firms to submit Phase Two (2) proposals. Upon the conclusion of Phase One (1), the solicitation will be amended to include the Phase Two (2) evaluation factors including price and the scope of work for the first Task Order that will be awarded along with the MATOC IDIQ contracts. Phase One (1) submissions and evaluations will not be carried over into Phase Two (2). All offerors selected to propose for Phase Two (2) will be evaluated only on the Evaluation Factors outlined in the Phase Two RFP.

PHASE ONE (1) DOES NOT INVOLVE ANY SUBMISSION OF PRICING

INFORMATION.

B. SCOPE OF WORK

Work on civil systems may include: waterstop installation, potable & wastewater systems, underground utilities, drainage culverts, geotechnical investigations, explorations, and testing, river bank stabilization, irrigation systems, paving, striping, site fencing, site grading, stormwater pollution prevention, and river levee rehabilitation.

Work on structural/architectural systems may include: structural concrete, mass concrete, structural frames (including steel, aluminum, FRP), machinery supports and seismic bracing, hydraulic steel structures (primarily metal fabrication and machining), Corps of Engineers paint systems (including vinyl), fall protection systems, pre-engineered buildings, manufactured buildings, building interior renovation, elevators, roofing, waterproofing, firestop systems, and building exterior envelope renovation, and installation or removal of piles (concrete, steel, or timber) and sheet-piling accessed from land or using a work barge; installation, repair, retrofit or removal of existing buildings, bulkheads, docks, dolphins, guidewalls (pile-founded and floating), steel gates, and gate anchorages; buildings may be either at grade or elevated; gates may be barge, miter, sector, sluice, tainter, or other types.

Work on electrical systems may include: Information & Communication Technology (ICT), fiber optic, motor control, instrumentation & controls (e.g. PLC, SCADA), commercial/industrial lighting, fire & security systems, shore power (dockside) systems, cathodic protection systems, solar photovoltaic systems, low and medium voltage distribution (at most 15KV), lightning protection, and diesel generators.

Work on mechanical systems may include: construction or repair of the following systems: fire protection, HVAC, pumping (less than 500 HP), compressed air, hydraulic power systems (less than 50 HP), pneumatic systems, mechanical/linkage systems, cranes and hoists (less than 10 tons), and general/industrial plumbing.

C. PHASE ONE FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal. All three Phase One evaluation factors are of approximately equal importance.

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE

FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL APPROACH

FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE

The Government will evaluate and assess the extent of an offeror’s relevant Construction and Design-Build experience and proposed team’s experience (design firm and major subcontractors) on projects completed in the last ten (10) years or at least 50% complete at the time proposals are due. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s depth and breadth of experience on different types of relevant design capability and construction types. The Government will evaluate a minimum of three projects but no more than five projects for each prime contractor and designer and a minimum of two but no more than three projects for each major subcontractor (Mechanical, Structural, Electrical, Civil) as listed by the offeror on Attachment A, Offer Experience Form Overview Sheet and as further described on Attachment B, Experience Information Form. Projects described in 1) – 3) below will be considered more relevant and rated more favorably if:

1) projects wherein the design was facilitated for the end user/customer from design concept through 100% design completion including construction of the design;

2) projects that demonstrate experience with multiple civil works type construction trade categories; and

3) Projects with previous teaming experience between the offeror and proposed team.

The combined experience demonstrated by the submitted projects must address the following (A- C):

A. “Design-Build” construction is defined as a civil-works type project in which the contractor is provided less than a full design and is required to: complete the design with a state licensed Architect Engineer (A-E); participate in design review; and accomplish full construction of the designed project.

B. Projects will be considered relevant if they:

1. Are valued at $250,000 or larger; and

2. Collectively the projects submitted must include general construction and/or design service requirements similar to the following construction or repair on:

a.) Work on civil systems may include: waterstop installation, potable & wastewater systems, underground utilities, drainage culverts, geotechnical exploration and testing, riverbank stabilization, irrigation systems, paving, striping, site fencing, site grading, stormwater pollution prevention, and river levee rehabilitation.

b.) Work on structural/architectural systems may include: structural concrete, mass concrete, structural frames (including steel, aluminum, FRP), machinery supports and seismic bracing, hydraulic steel structures (primarily metal fabrication and machining), Corps of Engineers paint systems (including vinyl), fall protection systems, pre-engineered buildings, manufactured buildings, building interior renovation, elevators, roofing, waterproofing, firestop systems, and building exterior envelope renovation, and installation or removal of piles (concrete, steel, or timber) or sheet piles accessed from land or using a work barge; installation, repair, retrofit or removal of existing buildings, bulkheads, docks, dolphins, guidewalls (pile founded and floating), gates, and gate anchorages; buildings may be either at grade or elevated; gates may be barge, miter, sector, sluice, tainter, or other types.

c.) Work on electrical systems may include: Information & Communication Technology (ICT), fiber optic, motor control, instrumentation & controls (e.g. PLC, SCADA), commercial/industrial lighting, fire & security systems, low and medium voltage distribution (at most 15KV), lightning protection, and diesel generators.

d.) Work on mechanical systems may include: construction or repair of the following systems: fire protection, HVAC, pumping (less than 600 HP), compressed air, hydraulic power systems (less than 50 HP), cranes and hoists (less than 10 tons), general/industrial plumbing, shore power (dockside) systems, cathodic protection systems, and solar photovoltaic systems.

C. Experience provided for proposed design firm and major subcontractors will only be evaluated if a letter of commitment is signed by each proposed firm and submitted with the proposal. A letter of commitment is not required if the offeror is a joint-venture, and the firm is part of the joint-venture agreement.

FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL APPROACH

The government will evaluate and assess the offeror’s understanding of the requirements, feasibility of the proposed technical approach, and risks and mitigation in the execution of task order projects wherein the Government provides minimal or limited design consisting of informational drawings and functional/performance specifications. The purpose of this factor is to determine whether the offeror has appropriate understanding of the design-build process and is not intended to limit an offeror to any proposed technical solution or to allow an offeror to provide less than the minimum requirements for Phases One and Two of the solicitation.

Based on your understanding of the MATOC scope of work, describe your technical approach for design- build task order projects wherein the Government provides minimal or limited design consisting of informational drawings and functional/performance specifications. This narrative shall not exceed fifteen (15) pages. Pages in excess of this limitation will be removed and not evaluated by the Source Selection Evaluation Board.

Offerors shall address the following areas in your technical approach to include any risks and the proposed approach for risk mitigation:

Organization. Provide an organizational chart showing the reporting structure and lines of authority for the proposed team key functions such as project manager, superintendent, lead designer, safety manager, Design Quality Control Manger, Contractor Quality Control Manager, and others. Without identifying by name, describe the role of the key functional members during design and construction.

Cost effectiveness and expedited completion. Describe your process for providing a task order proposal that is cost-effective and will allow you to expedite completion of the project. Describe your approach to streamlining design and construction resulting in reduced costs and achievement of aggressive schedules with consideration to operational or environmental restraints.

Communication and coordination. Describe your communication and coordination approach within the design-build team, and with the government during the design and construction phases. Describe your approach to facilitate design and construction submittal reviews. Describe in detail the Designer of Record’s involvement throughout the entire project period.

Quality control. Describe your approach for quality control for both design and construction. Include: quality control organization; review of design; verification of construction materials; construction inspection; permit compliance; project documentation; and change request process.

The ratings and descriptions provided in the table that follows will be utilized by the government in the evaluation of Phase One, Factor 1. Experience and Factor 2. Technical Approach. The ratings and descriptions will also be used in the evaluation of all Phase Two factors except for price. Phase One, Factor 3, Past Performance is evaluated based on a performance assessment confidence rating and is described in detail within the Past Performance Factor.

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings Adjectival Definition

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

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

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

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

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is not awardable.

FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE

The government will evaluate and assess the offeror’s (and proposed team’s) record of performance on relevant projects to ascertain the offeror’s ability to meet the solicitation requirements of the MATOC scope of work. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered. These shall be combined to establish a performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror.

In the event an offeror lacks any record of relevant past performance, the offeror’s past performance will be evaluated neither favorably nor unfavorably and will receive an Unknown Confidence (neutral) rating.

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: Recency, Relevancy (including context of data) and Quality (including general trends in Contractor performance and source of information) assessment and performance confidence assessment. All three aspects must be considered for each of the contracts or requirements evaluated.

a.) Recency: The first aspect is to evaluate the recency of the offeror’s past performance. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. For the purposes of this solicitation, data submitted for evaluation of past performance shall not extend past ten years prior to the issue date of the solicitation but may include performance data generated during the past six years without regard to the contract award date. The government will consider Past Performance Questionnaires, interviews, CPARS, and any other sources available to it regarding past performance for this factor.

b.) Relevancy: The second aspect is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. For this procurement, relevancy is defined as projects that are valued at $250,000 or larger; and included general construction and/or design service requirements similar to the listing of relevant jobs under Factor 1, section B, item 2 of this solicitation. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration will be given to those aspects of an offeror’s history of contract (or subcontract) performance that would provide the most context and give the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will successfully satisfy the current requirement.

Common aspects of relevancy include but are not limited to: similarity of product/service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of key personnel (for services), and extent of subcontracting/teaming.

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY ASSESSMENT. The government will utilize the four levels of relevancy identified in the table below to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the scope of anticipated work under this MATOC. For this procurement, relevancy is defined as projects that are valued at $250,000 or larger; and included general construction and/or design service requirements similar to the listing of relevant jobs under Factor 1, section B, item 2 of this solicitation.

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.

c. Quality: The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. The quality past performance evaluation conducted gathers information from the offeror’s customers to determine how well the offeror performed those past contracts. This quality assessment will be reflected in the overall confidence assessment described above.

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT. The government will assess the quality of the offeror’s past performance by determining how well the contractor performed on the contracts evaluated as relevant. Based on this assessed quality, the government will arrive at a performance confidence assessment for the offeror, selecting the most appropriate rating from the chart below.

Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Description

Substantial Confidence

Based on the offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence

Based on the offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence

No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the offerors performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence

Based on the offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

THE ONLY AUTHORIZED TRANSMISSION METHOD FOR PROPOSALS IN RESPONSE

TO THIS SOLICITATION IS THROUGH THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, NEW

ORLEANS DISTRICT AND THE DoD SAFE (Secure Access File Exchange) website at:

https://safe.apps.mil

NO OTHER TRANSMISSION METHODS (EMAIL, FACSIMILE, REGULAR MAIL, HAND

CARRIED, ETC.) WILL BE ACCEPTED. INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMITTING

ELECTRONIC PROPOSALS:

The New Orleans District will utilize the DoD Safe website for receipt of electronic bids under this RFP Solicitation. In order to submit an electronic bid please follow these steps:

1. Send an email containing your name, and email address to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist associated with the RFP:

NAKIEA.B.BUTLER@USACE.ARMY.MIL – Contract Specialist MICHELLE.DALMADO@USACE.ARMY.MIL – Contracting Officer

2. The Contracting Officer or Contract Specialist will go to the DoD Safe site, input your name and email address, and then will request the file from you. You will then receive an automated email from the site with a unique link in the email.

3. Once the email with the link is received, please click on the link in the email, which will take you to the DoD Safe site.

4. This will be a unique webpage where you can upload your file. The default page will load with the box checked off next to, “Send me an email when each recipient picks up the files”. Please leave this box checked in order to receive a notification when the file is received from the Contracting Officer or Contract Specialist. Please leave unchecked, “Encrypt every file”. The site itself contains a high level of security in which additional encryption is not required.

5. When you are ready to upload your proposal file (please use pdf format for submission), you can either click the blue button which says, “Click to Add Files or Drag Them Here” to locate the file on your computer, or simply drag the file onto the screen.

6. In the Description box that appears after uploading your file, please type your Company Name.

7. Click the button that appears at the bottom of the page, “Drop-off Files”. A banner will pop-up asking for confirmation that your upload does not contain Classified Information.

Click ok on the banner.

8. You will be taken to a confirmation page that should say, “Drop-Off Completed” at the top. This is your confirmation that your file was successfully uploaded to the site.

9. The Contracting Officer or Contract Specialist will receive an automated email stating that the file has been submitted. They will then send an email back to the company, confirming that they received the notice from the DoD Safe site. If a reply acknowledging receipt electronically from the New Orleans District, is not received, it is incumbent upon the Contractor to seek confirmation from the issuing Contracting office by phone.

PROPOSAL FORMAT:

The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each file shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. All pages of each file shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and Request for Proposal (RFP) number in the header and/or footer. A Table of Contents should be created using the Table of Content feature in MS Word. MS Word (doc) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

Margins -Top, Bottom, Left, Right -l" Gutter-0" From Edge - Header, Footer 0.5'' Page Size, Width -8.5" Page Size, Height -11"

The term "offeror" is defined as a single offeror, joint venture, or team of offerors and major sub-contractors. Proposals submitted under a formal partnering agreement or joint-venture must be accompanied by a copy of the legal document establishing the agreement or joint venture.

Offeror's Responsibility. It is the offeror's responsibility to ensure the completeness and accuracy of his or her proposal. Corrections will not be made by the Government. Errors in the proposal will be considered, among other factors, as a reflection of the offeror's technical/management capability.

The written proposal will be the basis on which the Government will determine the capability of the Offeror to perform this work. The proposal shall be clear, specific, detailed, and demonstrate that the Offeror has a thorough understanding of the solicitation requirements and capability to execute. All documents must be single spaced. Each paragraph must be separated by at least one

(1) blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are the required fonts and either one may be used. Page size shall be 8.5 x l1 inches for text pages, and a maximum of 1lx17 inches for spreadsheets, charts, tables or diagrams. An 1l x 17 is a two sheet equivalent (with regards to page count limitations). Pages larger than 8.5 x 11 inches shall count as two pages for determining page limits. Page margins must be a minimum of one inch at the top, bottom and each side. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscape orientation.

Proprietary information shall be clearly marked. Files shall not contain classified information.

The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited and will be a basis for being declared non-responsive. The Offeror shall adhere to the proposal pages limitation.

In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR 52.204-7(b)), prospective contractors are required to be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database at the time an offer is submitted. Prospective contractors may register at the SAM website, https://www.sam.gov.

The proposal shall not merely offer to comply with the Government's requirements by simply restating them but shall specifically describe that the Offeror has a thorough understanding of the solicitation requirements. Statements such as "Offeror understands, can, or will comply the requirement listed in the Description of Work", statements that paraphrase the Description of Work, or ambiguous phrases such as "standard procedures will be employed", or "well known techniques will be used" will be considered unacceptable.

The following additional restrictions apply:

1.) File Packaging. Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. *Please note-Self extracting exe files are not acceptable.

2.) Content Requirement. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion.

The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

PHASE I SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

PHASE I SUBMISSION SHALL INCLUDE SEPARATE SECTIONS FOR EACH OF

THE THREE EVALUATION FACTORS (EXPERIENCE, TECHNICAL APPROACH

AND PAST PERFOMANCE)

Items not included in the page count for Phase I proposals:

- Title page, table of contents, list of tables and glossary of abbreviations & acronym

- The Organization Chart (each flow chart must not exceed three (3) 11 x 17-inch pages). The Organization Chart will not count towards the overall Volume I page count and must be added as an Appendix,

- Letters of Intent provided by Subcontractors

- Letters of Commitment, as required in (iii) 4 Section 4. of Key Personnel - Superintendent, Quality Control Manager and Safety Manager

- Resumes of Key Personnel

- Past Performance Questionnaires.

(i) EVALUATION FACTOR 1 –EXPERIENCE Submission Requirements:

Offerors shall submit a completed Attachment A, Experience Overview SheetOfferor Experience Form listing Construction and Design-Build project type work that best represents the offeror’s experience. Project experience shall be identified for the offeror, design firm, and major subcontractors. The listing shall include relevant experience for projects completed in the last ten

(10) years or at least 50% complete at the time proposals are due. If a project is currently under construction, annotate percent of completion on the form. In selecting projects to submit, offerors should pay attention to the evaluation parameters identified for this Factor 1 in Section II.

For each project listed on Attachment A, the offeror shall provide an Experience InformationOfferor Experience Form (OEFEIF) found at Attachment B. Additional lines may be added as necessary not to exceed one additional page total per EIFOEF. Offerors are responsible for providing project descriptions in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of project relevancy and may provide additional descriptive information on each form beyond what is required in the attachment. One page of photographs per project may be provided in order to provide clarity to the project description and do not count against the page limit per OEFEIF. Information provided on the EIF OEF will be evaluated for this Factor 1 and will also be used to support the evaluation of Factor 3, Past Performance. EIFs OEFs shall be provided for the categories that follow. Note that it is not necessary to submit more than one EIF OEF for projects that are the same for two or more of the following categories:

a. OFFEROR (PRIME CONTRACTOR): Provide no more than five (5) examples of Construction and Design-Build projects within the last ten (10) years that are relevant to the requirements identified in the MATOC scope of work. Provide an explanation of how these projects are similar in scope and magnitude to the work required in this solicitation. If the offeror is a joint venture, the offeror shall submit the Design-Build construction experience of each of the joint venture partners, providing no more than five (5) projects in total.

b. DESIGN FIRM: Provide no more than five (5) examples of Design and Design-Build projects within the last ten (10) years that are relevant to the requirements identified in the MATOC scope of work. Provide an explanation of how these projects are similar in scope and magnitude to the work required in this solicitation. Provide a letter of commitment signed by the design firm.

c. MAJOR SUBCONTRACTORS: Major subcontractors are defined as members of an offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform Mechanical, Structural, Civil, and Electrical work. Identify by name your major (one each) Mechanical, Structural, Civil, and Electrical subcontractors that you intend to utilize under this MATOC. If work will be self-performed inhouse, rather than subcontracted out, provide a statement to that effect. Provide no more than three (3) examples total of projects within the last ten (10) years for which you, if performed in-house self-performed, or any of these subcontractors played a significant role on work that is relevant to the requirements identified in the MATOC scope of work. Provide an explanation of how these projects are similar in scope and magnitude to the work required in this solicitation.

Provide a signed letter of commitment for each proposed major subcontractor.

(ii) EVALUATION FACTOR 2 – TECHNICAL APPROACH Submission Requirements

Based on your understanding of the MATOC scope of work, describe your technical approach for design-build task order projects wherein the Government provides minimal or limited design consisting of informational drawings and functional/performance specifications. Address the following areas in your technical approach to include any risks and the proposed approach for risk mitigation:

a. Organization. Provide an organizational chart showing the reporting structure and lines of authority for the proposed team key functions such as project manager, superintendent, lead designer, safety manager, Design Quality Control Manager, Construction Quality Control Manager, and others. Without identifying by name, describe the role of the key functional members during design and construction.

b. Cost effectiveness and expedited completion. Describe your process for providing a task order proposal that is cost-effective and will allow you to expedite completion of the project.

Describe your approach to streamlining design and construction resulting in reduced costs and achievement of aggressive schedules with consideration to operational or environmental restraints.

c. Communication and coordination. Describe your communication and coordination approach within the design-build team, and with the government during the design and construction phases.

d. Quality Control. Describe your approach for quality control for both design and construction. Include: quality control organization; review of design; verification of construction materials; construction inspection; permit compliance; project documentation; and change request process.

(iii) EVALUATION FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE Submission Requirements:

This…