Am1.pdf

PDF 236 KB Posted Jun 8, 2010

Attached to: INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) MULTIPLE AWARD TASK ORDER CONTRACT (MATOC) FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SOUTH PACIFIC DIVISION (SPD).
Solicitation number: W912PL-09-R-0056
Issued by: Department of the Army Corps of Engineers Engineering District Los Angeles

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
RFP_W912PL-09-R-0056_Phase01.pdf	PDF	May 26, 2010

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICAITON NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicble)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICIATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offers 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 your 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 APPROPIRATION DATA (If required)

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

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

CHECK ONE 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.

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.

15C. DATE SIGNED

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

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

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

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

1 1

0001 8 JUN 10

W912PL

USACE, Los Angeles District CONTRACTING DIVISION, East Region Branch

P.O. BOX 532711

LOS ANGELES, CA 90053-2325

SEE ITEM #6

W912PL-09-R-0056

20 MAY 10

INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) MULTIPLE AWARD TASK ORDER CONTRACT (MATOC) FOR CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SOUTH PACIFIC DIVISION (SPD).

Remove and Replace Section 00 01 10 with attached Remove and Replace Section 00 01 20 with attached

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

W912PL-09-R-0056

SECTION 00 01 10 - 1

AMEND 0001

SECTION 00 01 10

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS

I. GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT

II. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

III. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATION

AND BONDING CAPACITY LETTER

IV. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

V. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

SECTION 00 01 10 - 2

I. GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT

(a) In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all offers, the Contracting Officer must receive sufficient detailed information that clearly responds to the technical proposal (technical evaluation factors) listed in Section 00 01 20.

(b) Offers must include Representation and Certifications required by the Solicitation.

(c) Each Offeror must submit their responses to the technical evaluation factors (Original Plus 2 copies). The Technical Proposal must be received by the closing date and time set for receipt of proposals.

(d) Do not include any price information in the technical proposal.

II. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS:

(a) Three-ring binders are preferred. Do not use spring clamps or exceed the recommended capacity of the fastener or binder. Do not use plastic multi-hole/spiral binding systems, heat binding systems, or other systems which do not facilitate the ready insertion of additional pages.

(b) “Confidential” projects cannot be submitted to demonstrate capability unless all of the information required for evaluation as specified herein can nonetheless be provided to the Government as part of the Offeror’s technical proposal. Offeror’s that include in their proposal information that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, must be clearly marked in accordance with the instructions at FAR 52.215-1, “Instructions to Offeror—Competitive Acquisition”, paragraph (3), “Restriction on disclosure and use of data”.

(c) The Corps of Engineers recognizes that submittals by the Offeror may contain confidential or proprietary information; however, the Government reserves the right to make inquiries into the information disclosed. The submission of false or misleading information may be grounds for disqualification of the proposal.

(d) Offeror(s) shall submit their proposal packages to the Los Angeles District Corps of Engineers (COE) in accordance with Section 00100 of the solicitation.

III. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE REPRESENTATIONS AND

CERTIFICATION AND BONDING CAPACITY LETTER:

(a) Number of Sets: Submit One (1) original only.

(b) This section does not count in the page count of the technical proposal.

SECTION 00 01 10 - 3

TAB # A

SF 1442 “ SIGNED SOLICITATION, OFFER AND

AWARD”

TAB #B

COMPLETED CORPORATE PRINCIPAL

(SEE SECTION 00010)

TAB # C

REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATION

(SEE SECTION 00600 OF THE SOLICITATION)

TAB # D BONDING CAPACITY LETTER

IV. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL:

(a) Number of Sets and Pages of the Technical Proposal: Submit original and two

(2) additional sets of the written Technical Proposal, with each set separately packaged. In addition, submit two complete copies of the technical proposal on Compact Disk (CD) using a searchable “.pdf” file format. The Technical Proposals shall be in 8-1/2" x 11" format, bound as a single document, with single-sided pages. This includes any examples of sketches, drawings, pictures, schedules, and organizational chart. Do not use a font size smaller than 10, an unusual font style such as script, or condensed print. The Technical Proposals shall have a cover sheet that shall conform to the requirements of paragraph V of this section. The Technical Proposals shall be separated with section tabs, and the tabs shall clearly identify the contents of each section. Maximum number of pages for Technical Proposal is thirty (30) pages single sided or fifteen (15) pages double sided. Resumes up to 5 pages single sided will not be included in the above page count. Material contents of Technical Proposals that exceed thirty (30) pages will not be evaluated after page thirty (30).

The thirty (30) page count of the Technical Proposal does not include the cover sheet described above. The thirty (30) page count of the Technical Proposal does not include the section tabs between each factor, if any section tab is provided. Each page shall be sequentially Each page shall be sequentially numbered for that section. The cover and the section tabs will not be evaluated and are considered as helping to organize the material contents of the proposal, such as the binder and/or staple will similarly organize the material contents of the proposal, and hence the binder and/or staple are not evaluated.

(b) Format and Contents of the Technical Proposal/List of Tabs: The original and all copies of the technical proposal will be appropriately labeled as such. Each set shall be organized using the tabs specified in the chart below. The tabs below directly correlate to the evaluation factors identified in Section 00 01 20.

SECTION 00 01 10 - 4

TAB

CONTENTS OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

TAB #1

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE ON SIMILAR DESIGN BUILD

AND DESIGN-BID-BUILD CONTRACTS, SPECIFICALLY

CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO

OFFICE BUILDINGS, HANGERS, FACILITIES,

UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS, FLIGHT SIMULATORS,

WING HEADQUARTERS, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION

SUBFACTOR NO. 1a: Design and Construction Processes SUBFACTOR NO. 1b: Construction Safety Methods

TAB #2 FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL APPROACH, METHODS AND

PROCEDURES

TAB #3

FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE ON SIMILAR

CONTRACTS, SPECIFICALLY CONSTRUCTION

INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO OFFICE BUILDINGS,

HANGERS, FACILITIES, UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS,

FLIGHT SIMULATORS, WING HEADQUARTERS, AND

OTHER CONSTRUCTION

TAB #4

FACTOR 4: CORPORATE/MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE

SUBFACTOR NO. 4a: Capability to Manage & Control Project SUBFACTOR NO. 4b: Key Personnel SUBFACTOR NO. 4c: Offeror’s Workload SUBFACTOR NO. 4d: Offeror’s succession plan

(c) Detailed Submission Requirements for the Technical Proposal: Submit detailed response to the evaluation factors under each of the tabs as follows:

TAB #1 FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE ON SIMILAR DESIGN BUILD AND DESIGN-BID-

BUILD CONTRACTS, SPECIFICALLY CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING BUT NOT

LIMITED TO OFFICE BUILDINGS, HANGERS, FACILITIES, UNMANNED AERIAL

SYSTEMS, FLIGHT SIMULATORS, WING HEADQUARTERS, AND OTHER

CONSTRUCTION

Offeror shall identify a minimum of two or more (2) Design Build and one or more (1) Design- Bid-Build projects of a similar scope, dollar minimum magnitude of $10,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 and complexity it has successfully completed within the past five years. Provide a description of the project, total dollar value of the contract at the time of award and at the time of completion, the completion date of the award and the name, address and telephone number of the client. In the case of a federal, state or local government project, provide the name, address, and telephone number of the contracting officer. Offeror may include projects completed by predecessor companies.

SECTION 00 01 10 - 5

SUB-FACTOR NO. 1a, DESIGN and CONSTRUCTION PROCESSES. This sub-factor will be evaluated on the basis of demonstrated knowledge and experience performing Design Build and Design-Bid-Build projects requiring design and construction requirements.

SUB-FACTOR NO. 1b, CONSTRUCTION SAFETY METHODS. This sub-factor will be evaluated on the basis of demonstrated successful performance of Design Build and Design-Bid-Build projects while employing safety protocols.

TAB # 2 TECHNICAL APPROACH, METHODS AND PROCEDURES

Proposals will be evaluated as to the Offeror’s ability to perform and to satisfy all contract requirements. See Section 01 10 10 for sample project for Technical Proposal. Response to this factor must discuss the Offeror’s technical understanding of the Design Build and design bid build work requirements, and the commitment to accomplish all the work in accordance with the solicitation requirements and schedule; the quality of the Offeror’s approach, methodology, plan for customer service and quality control procedures, and the workability of the approach as well as the technical feasibility to perform successfully.

TAB #3 FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE ON SIMILAR CONTRACTS,

SPECIFICALLY CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO OFFICE

BUILDINGS, HANGERS, FACILITIES, UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS, FLIGHT

SIMULATORS, WING HEADQUARTERS, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION

For each project identified in Tab #1, describe the project cost growth during contract performance. Describe the contract performance period set forth in the contract, time growth during contract performance, if any, and the number of days from the start of the project to acceptance by the client/government agency. Identify and describe any warranty issues raised by the client, and how the problems were resolved; if no warranty issues were raised, Offerors should so state. Offerors may provide information on problems encountered on the projects and the Offeror’s corrective action. Identify and include results, if any, of litigation regarding the project.

The Government may consider any and all sources of information about the projects, including, but not limited to, contacting the client or contracting officer of the project, and the CCASS or other rating system. Firms who have a less than satisfactory performance evaluation should explain from its perspective what happened, and lessons learned from the experience.

TAB #4 FACTOR 4: CORPORATE/MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE

Proposals will be evaluated as to the Offeror’s ability to perform and satisfy all contract requirements (including task order requirements) within its Corporate/Management Structure.

The Government will review the corporate decision-maker’s support for the Design Build and design bid build contract execution team. In addition, the corporate structure should enhance

SECTION 00 01 10 - 6

communication flow within the corporation as well as with the customer. Sub-factors include the following:

SUBFACTOR NO. 4a: Capability to Manage and Control design build and Design- Bid-Build Projects: The Offeror shall demonstrate its capability to manage and control the project. Among other things, Offeror shall show the corporate organization and reporting chain for key personnel. An organizational chart for the Team is required.

SUBFACTOR NO. 4b: Key Personnel: Government will evaluate key personnel directly responsible for carrying out the day-to-day operations of this Design Build and Design-Bid-Build contract. Professional qualifications and years of experience will both be assessed. Specifically, the Offeror must demonstrate relevant experience of key projects personnel by providing the following information:

Name of individual and company, position/title.

Number of years with the company.

Description of work experience with the projects of similar scope and complexity, specifying project experience at specific facility, if any.

Position the individual will hold in regard to this contract/project team, description of duties, and what percentage of the individual’s time would be committed to this project.

Describe job related educational experience, including degrees, certificates, etc., and granting institutions.

SUBFACTOR NO. 4c: Offeror’s Workload: The Offeror shall state current workload to include project title, key personnel, project workload, dollar amount, anticipated completion date and the availability of a team to execute the contract task order(s).

SUBFACTOR NO. 4d: Offeror’s succession plan: The offeror’s ability to perform in the event it needs to replace key personnel, including positions for project management, site superintendence, construction quality control manager, and safety.

V. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL COVER SHEET:

(a) Format for the Technical Proposal Cover Sheet: The proposal cover sheet is required by FAR 52.215-1(c)(i)-(v). This provision, titled “Instructions to Offerors— Competitive Acquisition,” has been provided in full text in Section 00100 of the solicitation.

(b) The format is as follows:

SECTION 00 01 10 - 7

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

1. Solicitation Number: W912PL-09-R-0056

2. The name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the Offeror and electronic address (if available):

3. A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items as required:

4. Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation:

5. Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

END OF SECTION

SECTION 00 01 20 - 1

SECTION 00 01 20

PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND CONTRACT AWARD

I. ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD

II. SOURCE SELECTION USING BEST VALUE TRADEOFF

III. GENERAL TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

IV. LIST OF EVALUATION FACTORS, SUB-FACTORS AND SPECIFIC TECHNICAL

EVALUATION CRITERIA

V. EVALUATION OF PRICE PROPOSAL – Not Applicable to Phase I

VI. INTENT TO AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

VII. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL

VIII. PROPOSAL EXPENSE AND PREAWARD COSTS

IX. ATTACHEMENT

SECTION 00 01 20 - 2

I. ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD

In accordance with the FAR, no contract shall be entered into unless the contracting officer ensures that all requirements of law, executive orders, regulations, and all other applicable procedures, including clearances and approvals, have been met. This includes the FAR requirement that no award shall be made unless the contracting officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must meet the general standards in Part FAR 9 and any special standards set forth in the solicitation.

II. SOURCE SELECTION USING BEST VALUE TRADEOFF

(a) In Phase One of this solicitation, the Government will first review unpriced technical proposals to determine a competitive range for those Contractors that will proceed to Phase Two of this solicitation. Each non-price evaluation technical factor and/or subfactor will receive an adjectival rating. After evaluating Phase One proposals, the approximate number of offerors that will be selected to submit Phase Two -proposals will be approximately ten (10) of the most highly qualified offerors.

(b) The offerors who fall within the competitive range will be requested to submit proposals using Phase Two evaluation factors which will be provided by amendment to this solicitation. In Phase Two, the Government will select the offeror’s that represents the best value to the Government by using the trade-off process described in FAR PART 15. This process permits trade-offs between price and technical (“non-cost”) factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced offer. The award decision will be based on a comparative assessment in proposal against all source selection criteria in the solicitation.

(c) Proposals shall not use broad statements such as: “Offeror understands”, or “will comply with the specifications”, or statements paraphrasing the specifications, and general or overly broad statements such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used”. Proposals with these type of statements will be rated non-acceptable.

(d) RELATIVE WEIGHTING OF THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS AND

SUB-FACTORS

All non-price (i.e., technical) evaluation factors and sub-factors are in order or of descending order of precedence.

III. GENERAL TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

(a) The offerors conformance with the specified format and submission requirements will be considered during the technical evaluation. Failure to comply with the format and/or the submission requirements may be seen as indicative of the type of problems that could be expected during contract performance. Lack of conformance could therefore result in a

SECTION 00 01 20 - 3

higher risk assessment in addition to any other impacts on the evaluation.

Material omission(s) may cause the technical proposal to be rejected as unacceptable.

(b) The adjectival rating, of the Technical Proposal may be negatively affected if the specified information is not provided in the specified location in accordance with the submission instructions in Section 00 01 10.

(c) The adjectival rating of the Technical Proposal may be negatively affected if the proposals are generic, vague, or lacking in detail.

(d) The degree of risk to the Government inherent in the offerors technical proposal will be a consideration under this factor.

(e) The Government may consider a proposal based on a deficient offer if the Government elects to enter into discussions with offerors and all deficiencies are remedied in revised proposals.

IV. LIST OF EVALUATION FACTORS, SUB-FACTORS AND SPECIFIC TECHNICAL

EVALUATION CRITERIA

In order to be considered technically acceptable, technical proposals must meet the following minimum requirements:

TAB #1 FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE ON SIMILAR DESIGN BUILD AND DESIGN-BID-

BUILD CONTRACTS, SPECIFICALLY CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING BUT NOT

LIMITED TO OFFICE BUILDINGS, HANGERS, FACILITIES, UNMANNED AERIAL

SYSTEMS, FLIGHT SIMULATORS, WING HEADQUARTERS, AND OTHER

CONSTRUCTION

Offeror shall identify a minimum of two (2) or more Design Build and one or more (1) Design- Bid-Build projects of a similar scope, dollar minimum magnitude of $10,000,000.00 $5,000,000.00 and complexity it has successfully completed within the past five years. Provide a description of the project, total dollar value of the contract at the time of award and at the time of completion, the completion date of the award and the name, address and telephone number of the client. In the case of a federal, state or local government project, provide the name, address, and telephone number of the contracting officer. Offeror may include projects completed by predecessor companies.

SECTION 00 01 20 - 4

Standard for Acceptability: This standard is met when the Offeror can identify two (2) or more completed Design Build and one (1) or more completed Design-Bid-Build projects meeting the criteria noted above, similar in scope, magnitude and complexity. Such Design Build and Design-Bid-Build projects must have been completed in the past five years.

TAB #2 FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL APPROACH, METHODS AND PROCEDURES

Proposals will be evaluated as to the Offeror’s ability to perform and to satisfy all Design Build and design-bid-build contract requirements. See Section 01 10 10 for sample project for Technical Proposal. Response to this factor must discuss the Offeror’s technical understanding of the work requirements, and the commitment to accomplish all the work in accordance with the solicitation requirements and schedule; the quality of the Offeror’s approach, methodology, plan for customer service and quality control procedures, and the workability of the approach as well as the technical feasibility to perform successfully.

Standard of Acceptability: This standard is met when the Offeror: demonstrates a commitment to accomplish all the work in accordance with the Design Build and Design-Bid-Build technical solicitation requirements (list of major schedule features); provides a plan for customer service;

provides a Quality Control approach that is adequate for the work to be performed.

TAB #3 FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE ON SIMILAR CONTRACTS,

SPECIFICALLY CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO OFFICE

BUILDINGS, HANGERS, FACILITIES, UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS, FLIGHT

SIMULATORS, WING HEADQUARTERS, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION

For each design build and design-bid-build project identified in Tab #1, describe the project cost growth during contract performance. Describe the contract performance period set forth in the contract, time growth during contract performance, if any, and the number of days from the start of the project to acceptance by the client/government agency. Identify and describe any warranty issues raised by the client, and how the problems were resolved; if no warranty issues were raised, Offerors should so state. Offerors may provide information on problems encountered on the projects and the Offeror’s corrective action. Identify and include results, if any, of litigation regarding the projects.

The Government may consider any and all sources of information about the design build and design-bidbuild projects, including, but not limited to, contacting the client or contracting officer of the design build project, and the CCASS or other rating system. Firms who have a less than satisfactory performance evaluation should explain from its perspective what happened, and lessons learned from the experience.

Standard of Acceptability: This standard is met when the Offeror has an overall satisfactory performance evaluation or higher, on similar contracts/completed within the past five years has been demonstrated. This standard is met when the Offerors’s performance is consistently satisfactory. In the event that the Offeror does not provide a record of relevant past performance, the Offeror will receive a neutral rating on this factor.

SECTION 00 01 20 - 5

TAB #4 FACTOR 4: CORPORATE/MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE

Proposals will be evaluated as to the Offeror’s ability to satisfy all Design Build and Design-Bid- Build contract requirements (including task order requirements) within its Corporate/Management Structure. The Government will review the corporate decision-maker’s support for the contract execution team. In addition, the corporate structure should enhance communication flow within the corporation as well as with the customer. Sub-factors include the following:

SUBFACTOR NO. 4a: Capability to Manage and Control design build and design-bid-build Project: The Offeror shall demonstrate its capability to manage and control the design build and design-bid-build projects. Among other things, Offeror shall show the corporate organization and reporting chain for key personnel. An organizational chart for the team is required.

SUBFACTOR NO. 4b: Key Personnel: Government will evaluate key personnel directly responsible for carrying out the day-to-day operations of this Design Build and design-bid-build contracts. Professional qualifications and years of experience will both be assessed. Specifically, the Offeror must demonstrate relevant experience of key project personnel by providing the following information:

Name of individual and company, position/title.

Number of years with the company.

Description of work experience with the projects of similar scope and complexity, specifying project experience at specific facility, if any.

Position the individual will hold in regard to the contract/project team, description of duties, and what percentage of the individual’s time would be committed to this project.

Describe job related educational experience, including degrees, certificates, etc., and granting institutions.

SUBFACTOR NO. 4c: Offeror’s Workload: The Offeror shall state current workload to include project title, key personnel, dollar amount, anticipated completion date and the availability of a team to execute the contract task order(s).

Standard for Acceptability: The standard is met when the Offeror has demonstrated the capability to successfully staff, manage, and control the project.

SECTION 00 01 20 - 6

V. EVALUATION OF PRICE PROPOSAL – Not Applicable to Phase I

VI. INTENT TO AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

The Government intends to evaluate technical proposals without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions and receive revised proposals if later determined to be necessary.

VII. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL.

The Offeror’s conformance with the specified format and submission requirements will be considered during the technical evaluation. Material omission(s) may cause the technical proposal to be rejected as unacceptable.

The Offeror’s adherence to page and formatting limitations prescribed will be strictly adhered to and enforced. Information submitted which exceeds the specified page limit will NOT be evaluated. For example, if 31 pages or greater are submitted in response to this solicitation, the excess information after page 30 will not be evaluated.

The technical proposals will be reviewed for compliance with the solicitation requirements.

Non-compliance with the technical evaluation factors will be considered a deficiency and an unsatisfactory rating may be assigned.

VIII. PROPOSAL EXPENSE AND PREAWARD COSTS.

The Request for Proposal does not commit the Government to pay any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of the initial and/or any subsequent proposals or for any other costs incurred prior to execution of the Contract.

END OF SECTION

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Owner/Client Past Performance Survey.

Please have Past Performance contractors submit the information required on attachments 1-3 below directly to me One (1) Week prior to Proposal Due Date at the fax number or email address provided in the sample cover letter.

SECTION 00 01 20 - 7

ATTACHMENT 1 (SECTION 00 01 20)

MULTIPLE AWARD TASK ORDER CONTRACT (MATOC) IN SUPPORT OF

DESIGN-BUILD AND DESIGN-BID-BUILD PROJECTS PRIMARILY IN THE LOS

ANGELES DISTRICT AND THE SOUTH PACIFIC DIVISION, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF

ENGINEERS

OWNER/CLIENT PAST PERFORMANCE SURVEY

(Fill out all applicable parts)

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District, is interested in your assessment of the named company's “past performance." Past performance refers to the company's record of conforming to contract requirements and to standards of good workmanship; the company's record of forecasting and controlling costs; the company's adherence to contract schedules including the administrative aspects of performance; the company's history of reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction; and the company’s general business-like concern for the interest of the customer.

These questions relate to the work performed by_____________________________________________________________________

(Name of Offeror)

(Name and Location of Project)

1. Where the Key Personnel responsive and timely to your needs for the project listed above?

Yes No Why Not?

2. Did Key Personnel have the authority to meet the project objectives listed above? Yes No Why Not?

3. Were you satisfied with the technical knowledge of Key Personnel?

Yes No Why Not?

4. Would you use this company again?

Yes No Why Not?

5. Was the staffing level consistent with the project size and

SECTION 00 01 20 - 8

Complexity? Yes No Why Not?

6. Rate the performance of this Contractor on the subject project:

a. Conformance to contract requirements and standards of good workmanship