Am3_W912PL-16-R-0025.pdf

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

03 11 Mar 2016

W912PL

U.S Army Corps of Engineers,Los Angeles Dist CESPL-CT-E, East Region Branch 915 Wilshire Blvd.

Los Angeles, CA 90017

U.S Army Corps of Engineers,Los Angeles Dist CESPL-CT-E, East Region Branch 915 Wilshire Blvd.

Los Angeles, CA 90017

W912PL-16-R-0025

25 Feb 2016

FY16 F35 Aircraft Maintenance Hanger (Squadron 3), Luke Air Force Base, Arizona The following documents have been revised:

* Table of Contents

* 00 22 16 SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS-Construction Cost Limitation;

* 00 73 00 SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS-Special Construction Requirements;

* 01 00 00 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS;

* 01 33 29 LEED Documentation Add 01 33 00a Submittal Register / Delete: 01 82 01 Enhanced Commissioning Requirements

Design-Build F-35 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar Squadron W912PL-16-R-0025 Luke Air Force Base, AZ

TOC - i Amendment 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

VOLUME 1

DIVISION 00 – PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

00 10 00 CONTRACT LINE ITEM (CLIN) SCHEDULE Am2

00 20 00 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROCUREMENT

00 21 16 INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS Am1 Am2

00 22 00 SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

00 22 16 SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS Am3

00 45 00 REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS

00 70 00 CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT

00 73 00 SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS Am2 Am3

00 73 46 WAGE RATES

DIVISION 01 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 00 00 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Am2 Am3

01 02 00 SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION

01 04 00 MECHANICAL ROOM LAYOUT AND COORDINATION

01 08 00 PERMITS

01 10 10 DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

01 10 12 DESIGN AFTER AWARD

01 20 00 INTERFACE WITH OTHER WORK

01 31 00 PROJECT MEETINGS

01 32 01 PROJECT SCHEDULE

01 33 00 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES

01 33 00a Submittal Register Am3

01 33 29 LEED™ DOCUMENTATION Am3

01 34 10 COLOR/FINISH SAMPLE BOARDS

01 35 26 GOVERNMENTAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS

01 42 00 SOURCES FOR REFERENCE PUBLICATIONS

Design-Build F-35 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar Squadron W912PL-16-R-0025

TOC - ii Amendment 3

VOLUME 1 (Cont’d)

01 43 00 AIRFIELD SAFETY (SPECIAL CONDIDERATIONS)

01 45 01 QUALITY CONTROL

01 45 02 QUALITY CONTROL SYSTEM (QCS)

01 51 00 UTILITIES

01 53 00 TEMPORARY FENCING

01 54 00 SECURITY

01 57 00 TRAFFIC CONTROL

01 57 20 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

01 58 00 PROJECT IDENTIFICATION

01 58 50 STAGING AREAS

01 62 35 RECYCLED / RECOVERED MATERIALS

01 72 00 AS-BUILT DRAWINGS

01 72 80 TRANSFER AND ACCEPTANCE OF MILITARY REAL PROPERTY

01 73 00 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS

01 74 19 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE MANAGEMENT

01 78 00 CLOSEOUT SUBMITTALS

01 78 23 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE DATA

01 82 00 FUNDAMENTAL COMMISSIONING REQUIREMENTS

01 82 01 ENHANCED COMMISSIONING REQUIREMENTS (Deleted) Am3

DIVISION 31 – EARTHWORK

31 00 00 EARTHWORK

DIVISION 32 – EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS

32 11 23 AGGREGATE BASE COURSE

32 13 11 CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR AIRFIELDS AND OTHER HEAVY-DUTY

PAVEMENTS

32 13 73 COMPRESSION JOINT SEALS FOR CONCRETE PAVEMENTS

Design-Build F-35 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar Squadron W912PL-16-R-0025

TOC - iii Amendment 3

VOLUME 2

APPENDIX A LUKE ARCHITECTURAL COMPATIBILITY GUIDE

APPENDIX B SELECTED CHAPTERS FROM THE SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION

ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING INSTRUCTIONS MANUAL

(AEIM):

CHAPTER II CIVIL

CHAPTER III ARCHITECTURAL

CHAPTER IV STRUCTURAL

CHAPTER V MECHANICAL

CHAPTER VI ELECTRICAL

CHAPTER VIII DRAWINGS

CHAPTER XII ENVIRONMENTAL

CHAPTER XIII GEOTECHNICAL

APPENDIX C SPECIFICATION GUIDANCE

APPENDIX D ATTACHMENT F, BUILDING INFORMATION MODELING (BIM)

REQUIREMENTS

APPENDIX E DESIGN ANALYSIS GUIDANCE

APPENDIX F AIRFIELD PAVEMENT DESIGN ANALYSIS

VOLUME 3

APPENDIX G STORMWATER PERMITTING GUIDANCE & LUKE BMPS

APPENDIX H GIS DATA & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY (electronic only)

APPENDIX I GEOPHYSICAL INFORMATION (electronic only)

APPENDIX J GEOTECHNICAL INFORMATION

APPENDIX K STRUCTURAL DRAFTING STANDARDS

APPENDIX L FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS PRELIMINARY ACCEPTANCE TEST

(PAT) AND FINAL ACCEPTANCE TEST (FAT) CHECK LIST

APPENDIX M UTILITY COST INFORMATION

VOLUME 4

APPENDIX N LUKE AFB EMCS DOCUMENT

APPENDIX O LUKE COMMUNICATIONS 400’ GUIDELINES

APPENDIX P LUKE AFB COMMUNICATIONS DESIGN STANDARDS

Design-Build F-35 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar Squadron W912PL-16-R-0025

TOC - iv Amendment 3

APPENDIX Q CONCEPTUAL AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS

VOLUME 4 (Cont’d)

APPENDIX R CONCEPTUAL PROJECT DRAWINGS

APPENDIX S ROOM CRITERIA DATA SHEETS

APPENDIX T LEED PROJECT CREDIT GUIDANCE

APPENDIX U LEED OWNER’S PROJECT REQUIREMENTS

APPENDIX V ROOM SUMMARY MATRIX

APPENDIX W REFERENCED DIGITAL SID

APPENDIX X (NOT USED)

APPENDIX Y BLDG 920 ASBESTOS & LEAD REPORTS

APPENDIX Z SUMMARY OF UFC 1-200-02 REQUIRED LIFE CYCLE COST

ANALYSIS

APPENDIX AA LUKE AFB FLOOD CONTROL INVESTIGATION STUDY (JUNE 2013)

APPENDIX BB HYDRANT FLOW TEST

APPENDIX CC BUILDING 920 RENOVATION DRAWINGS - FOR REFERENCE ONLY

APPENDIX DD AIRCRAFT UTILITY PIT DRAWINGS

Forms:

Luke AFB Form 338 – Installation Access Affidavit Am2

-- End of Project Table of Contents --

Design-Build F-35 AMU/Aircraft Maintenance Hangar 3 W912PL-16-R-0025

00 22 16 - Page 1 Amendment 3

SECTION 00 22 16

SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS TO

PROPOSERS

1.0 Eligibility for Contract Award………………………………………………………………….2

2.0 Source Selection Using the Trade-Off Process…………………………………………… …..2

3.0 List of Technical Evaluation Factors………………………………………………………….. 2

4.0 The Relative Weights of Technical Evaluation Factors…………………………………….….2

5.0 Technical Evaluation Factors and Elevation Criteria……………………………..………

6.0 Evaluation of the Price Proposal………………………………………………………..……..9

7.0 Intent to Award without Discussions……………………………………………….……….….9

8.0 Proposal Submittal………………………………………………………………………… …9

Design-Build F-35 AMU/Aircraft Maintenance Hangar 3 W912PL-16-R-0025

00 22 16 - Page 2 Amendment 3

I. ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD

In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), no contract will 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 FAR Part 9 and any special standards set forth in the solicitation.

II. SOURCE SELECTION USING THE TRADE-OFF PROCESS

The Government will select the offer that represents the best value to the Government by using the trade- off process described in FAR Part 15. This process permits tradeoffs between price and technical merit/quality and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced offer. The award decision will be based on a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation. The Construction Cost Limitation is $11,352,000. Proposals that exceed the Construction Cost Limitation may be looked upon unfavorably in the evaluation process.

All non-cost (i.e., technical) evaluation factors, when combined, are approximately equal to price. The Government is concerned with striking the most advantageous balance between Technical merit (quality) and cost to the Government (the price). The degree of importance of price could become greater depending upon the equality of the proposals for the non-price technical evaluation factors.

Where competing technical proposals are determined to be substantially equal, price could become the controlling factor.

III. LIST OF THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

The Technical Proposal will be evaluated based on the following technical evaluation factors

FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE ON SIMILAR DESIGN BUILD AND DESIGN BID

BUILD CONTRACTS

FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE ON SIMILAR DESIGN BUILD AND

DESIGN BID BUILD PROJECTS

FACTOR 3 – PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN

FACTOR 4 – CORPORATE MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE

FACTOR 5 - PROPOSED SCHEDULE

FACTOR 6 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

IV. THE RELATIVE WEIGHTS OF THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS AND RATING

SCHEME. The non-price evaluation factors are listed in descending order of importance.

A. Relative Weights of the Technical Evaluation Factors.

Factor 1 is the most important factor and is worth slightly more than Factors 2 and 3.

Factors 2 & 3 are approximately equal in importance and are significantly more important than factors 4, 5 and 6.

Factors 4 & 5 are worth approximately equal to each other and each is worth slightly more important than Factor 6

Factor 6 is the least important Factor

Design-Build F-35 AMU/Aircraft Maintenance Hangar 3 W912PL-16-R-0025

00 22 16 - Page 3 Amendment 3

B. Rating Scheme:

FACTORS 1, 2, 4, 5, RATING SCHEME

RATING DESCRIPTION

OUTSTANDING

Proposal meets requirements and indicate 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 indicate a through approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

ACCEPTABLE

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

MARGINAL

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

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

FACTORS 3, PAST PERFORMANCE, RATING SCHEME

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.

FACTORS 6, SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN, RATING SCHEME

OUTSTANDING Proposal meets small business requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business requirements. The proposal contains multiple strengths and no deficiencies.

GOOD Proposal meets small business requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business requirements. Proposal contains at least one strength and no deficiencies

ACCEPTABLE

Proposal meets small business requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the small business requirements. Proposal has no strengths or deficiencies.

MARGINAL

Proposal does not clearly meet small business requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business requirements.

UNACCEPTABLE Proposal does not meet the small business requirements and contains one or more deficiencies and is not awardable.

Design-Build F-35 AMU/Aircraft Maintenance Hangar 3 W912PL-16-R-0025

00 22 16 - Page 4 Amendment 3

V. TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA

The weighting of the evaluation factors takes into consideration not only how important that particular factor is to the overall project, but also the latitude for the Offeror to provide features that would be more advantageous to the Government. An evaluation of technical quality/technical merit is inherent in these criteria. Proposals only need to meet the minimum criteria of the Request for Proposals (RFP). The Government will not accept or allow betterments to those minimum requirements. Risk to the Government will be evaluated. Proposal risk is an assessment of the weaknesses and risks associated with the Offerors proposed approach derived from the technical evaluation. Performance risk is an assessment of the Offeror’s demonstrated performance on recent, relevant contracts relative to the past performance factor.

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE ON SIMILAR DESIGN BUILD AND DESIGN BID BUILD CONTRACTS

EXPERIENCE – The Government will evaluate the extent of an offeror’s successful experience and proposed team’s experience (including key subcontractor experience as part of the prime contractor team) on projects of similar type, scope, magnitude and complexity as compared to the work that is required under this RFP.

Offeror shall identify at least three (3) projects for the construction firm and at least three (3) projects for the design firm that are similar in scope, magnitude and complexity to the RFP project, and which were successfully completed within the past five (5) years.

Provide a brief description of each project, describe its scope of work, as well as total dollar value of the contract at the time of award and at the time of completion. Provide the name, address and telephone number of the owner. In the case of a federal, state or local government project, provide the name, address, and telephone number of the contracting officer.

The offeror must demonstrate experience in new hangar design and construction.

The offeror must demonstrate qualifications and experience in sustainable construction and development, based on project experience on projects that have achieved US Green Building Council’s LEED certification or were certifiable at LEED silver or better or project experience on completed Corps of Engineers projects.

Offeror shall identify recent projects that illustrate experience with LEED certified building construction.

Experience on actual certified projects will be considered advantageous to the government. The narrative should address the incorporation of LEED credit compliance in construction, and how the offeror’s experiences will ultimately result in a certified LEED project.

Minimum critical capabilities required include specialized fire protection, DoD/Air Force or Army airfield pavement expertise, Airfield construction, and LEED Silver certification.

The offeror must demonstrate qualifications and experience in Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS), Lightning Protection Systems (LPS), as well as specialized fire protection, airfield paving, airfield construction, and hangars.

Information submitted on projects currently under construction, design-bid-build or design-build will only be evaluated if the work is completed to an extent, from which experience can be creditable, i.e., at least 70% construction complete. Projects older than five years from date of proposal submittal will not be evaluated.

Standard for Acceptability: This standard is met when the proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Design-Build F-35 AMU/Aircraft Maintenance Hangar 3 W912PL-16-R-0025

00 22 16 - Page 5 Amendment 3

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE ON SIMILAR DESIGN BUILD AND DESIGN BID BUILD PROJECTS

PERFORMANCE – This area considers the Offeror's capabilities and past performance for successful completion of recent, relevant construction projects.

For each project identified in Factor #1, describe the scope of the work, contract price at the time of award, explain project cost growth during contract performance, and contract price at the time of completion.

Include explanation of the reasons for cost growth.

For each project, describe the contract performance period set forth in the contract, explain time growth during contract performance, if any, and the number of days from the start of the project to acceptance by the owner/government agency. Include explanation of the reasons for time growth.

Offeror shall identify recent projects that illustrate LEED accredited building construction performance.

Actual Gold, Silver, or Platinum certified project performance will be considered advantageous to the government. The narrative should address the offeror’s past performance in LEED construction, and how the offerer’s performance will result in an accredited LEED project.

Identify and describe any warranty issues raised by the owner, and how the problems were resolved; if no warranty issues were raised, offerors should so state.

Offeror is encouraged to provide information on problems encountered on the projects and the offeror’s corrective action.

(a) The Government will evaluate past performance information to assess the risks associated with each Offeror’s likelihood of success in performing the requirements stated in the RFP based on that Offeror’s demonstrated performance on recent, relevant contracts within the past five years as an indicator of the likelihood of successful completion of the proposed project in terms of time, cost and quality of work. The Government will focus on information that demonstrates quality of performance relative to the size, physically or in dollar value and technical or logistical complexity of the contracts identified in the proposal.

(b) The evaluation may take into consideration the Offeror’s record of conformance to contract specifications and standards of good workmanship; the Offeror’s safety performance, the Offeror’s adherence to contract cost, the Offeror’s adherence to contract schedule, including the administrative aspects of performance; the Offeror’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior, commitment to customer satisfaction, and timely award and management of subcontracts;

(c) The evaluation may take into account the number and severity of problems, the demonstrated effectiveness of corrective actions taken, and the overall work record.

(d) The performance record of proposed major subcontractors and proposed key personnel might also be considered. The result will be a performance risk rating based on the identified strengths and weaknesses in each Offerors record of past performance.

(e) In conducting the performance risk assessment, the government may use data provided by the

Offeror and data obtained from other sources, including but not limited to automated databases, contacting the owner or contracting officer of the project. The “References’ Past Performance/Quality Questionnaire” (Past Performance Reference Check in Section 00 22 00) is one of the means that may be used by the government to collect past performance information. The Government may contact references other than those identified by the Offeror. The Government may also take into consideration the Offerors performance of contracts with the Agency.

Design-Build F-35 AMU/Aircraft Maintenance Hangar 3 W912PL-16-R-0025

00 22 16 - Page 6 Amendment 3

(f) While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing thorough and complete factual information pertaining to recent and relevant contracts from which the Government can ascertain past performance information rests with the Offeror. Inaccurate or incomplete data from the Offeror may result in a less than satisfactory past performance/risk-assessment rating.

(g) Past performance information collected by the Government may be used for both the responsibility determination for this procurement and in conjunction with the technical evaluation.

(h) In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. However, the Government is not precluded from making award to a higher-priced Offeror with a favorable past performance record over a lower-priced Offeror with a “neutral” past performance rating

For this solicitation under Past Performance Evaluation, the Government will assign a Performance Confidence Assessment. The Government will first evaluate the relevancy of the projects submitted and compare them to the effort to be required in this source selection. The Government determines relevancy and in making this determination the following apply:

The Government will also assess how well an offeror performed on the projects submitted. The Government will, as necessary, confirm past performance data identified by the offeror in its proposal and obtain additional past performance information if available from other sources. When the relevant performance record indicates performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any corrective action taken (not just planned or promised). The Government may review more recent contracts or performance evaluations to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and evaluate their effectiveness.

Factor 2 will receive a Performance Confidence Assessment Rating. This is an overall rating which takes into consideration each offerors demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance which reflects the Government’s assessment of the offerors probability of meeting the solicitation requirements.

For Factor 2, in a Joint venture, or if multiple firms are evaluated the overall rating for Factor 2 will be based on the firm on experience from one, the other, or both contractors. In Factor 2, the Government will not evaluate the corporate experience of any corporate entity or any Joint Venture business association by reference to the experience of its principal offerors, key employees, and related companies such as a parent company, its affiliated subsidiaries, or its various divisions if part of a large business entity. Only Past performance information of the corporate entity named on the signed SF 1442 submitted in Volume II will be evaluated. As to past performance information obtained by the Government from other sources, the government will only consider the past performance information for the corporate entity named on the SF 1442 submitted in Volume II.

The Government will give more consideration for experience constructing a LEED accredited project.

If a prime contractor has little or no record of relevant past performance information, or the record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably established, or for whom information on past performance is not available, the SSEB shall rate the offeror either favorable or unfavorable. It shall be rated Unknown Confidence.

Standard for Acceptability: Based on the offeror’s performance records, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown.

Design-Build F-35 AMU/Aircraft Maintenance Hangar 3 W912PL-16-R-0025

00 22 16 - Page 7 Amendment 3

FACTOR 3: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN

The Government will evaluate the offerors’ overall management approach to help ensure a successful project completion. The Government will evaluate the offerors’ corporate, design and construction management structure, experience and qualifications of the key personnel and major subcontractors proposed for the project to include the capability to staff, manage, resource and control successful projects. Personnel will be evaluated on their overall professional experience and on specific experience on projects of similar type, scope, and complexity to the work required under this RFP.

(a) The offeror shall provide narrative and visual representations. The Government will evaluate the management structure of illustrated organizational charts, described levels of personnel authority of the individuals involved specifically with this project and the involvement of the construction team, including major subcontractors. The management structure should enhance communication flow within the construction team as well as with the customer.

(b) The offeror must explain its present workload, how its resources would be used to meet both its current workload and this project, and the availability of the proposed design and construction team to execute the contract. In cases where members of the design or construction teams will be dividing their time between multiple projects, the offeror will indicate the relative anticipated availability of those team members. The Government will evaluate present workload and how its resources would be allocated among the competing interests, and the availability of a team to execute the contract

(c) The Government will evaluate Offeror's Succession Plan: The offer must explain a succession plan for replacement of key personnel for the design and construction team including principals of the company, Joint Venture Partners, project management, site superintendent, scheduler, quality control, safety management, Design Team Project Manager, Design Manager, and Design Quality Control Manager. Offeror’s Succession Plan will identify specific individuals who can step into key roles if needed, and provide some indication of what qualifications those individuals possess; not only for on-site personnel but for other essential employees or principals of the company as well.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s ability to perform in the event it needs to replace business partners, and/or key personnel, including positions for project, site superintendent, scheduler, construction quality control, safety management, Design Team Project Manager, Design Manager, and Design Quality Control Manager.

Standard for Acceptability: This standard is met when the proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation..

FACTOR 4: CORPORATE MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE

The Government will evaluate corporate, design and construction management structure, experience and qualifications of the key personnel and major subcontractors proposed for the project to include the capability to staff, manage, resource and control successful projects. Personnel will be evaluated on their overall professional experience and on specific experience on projects of similar type, scope, and complexity to the work required under this RFP.

The offeror shall provide résumés for persons directly responsible for carrying out the design and construction requirements of this contract. The narrative should also address the LEED accredited personnel that will be a part of the construction teams. The narrative should demonstrate key personnel SCIF and/or SAPF experience. The Government will evaluate design and construction personnel directly responsible for carrying out the day-to-day operations of this contract.

Professional qualifications and years of relevant experience will both be assessed. Specifically the proposed Project Manager, Construction Site Superintendent, LEED Accredited Professional(s), Design-Build F-35 AMU/Aircraft Maintenance Hangar 3 W912PL-16-R-0025

00 22 16 - Page 8 Amendment 3

Safety Manager, Quality Control (QC), Design Team Project Manager, Design Manager, and Design Quality Control Manager, as required within the EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS – CONTSRUCTION KEY PERSONNEL (Résumé) and EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS – DESIGN TEAM KEY PERSONNEL (Résumé).

Technical Spec Section 01 45 01 requires the QC Manager to have a degree, however, on this procurement the degree requirement for Quality Control manager may be waived in lieu of experience. The QC manager must have the degree or minimum 8 years construction/engineering experience with at least 5 years as a CQC Manager or they may be considered deficient for this factor.

Standard for Acceptability: This standard is met when the proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation

FACTOR 5: PROPOSED SCHEDULE

Proposals will be evaluated as to the offeror’s ability to schedule the design and construction of the project. The offeror shall show that the design portion shall be completed to allow time for government reviews. The schedule shall show the remaining time for construction activities.

Evaluation Factor: The Government will evaluate the proposed schedule to determine if the Offeror’s plan assures completion within the specified time stated in Section 00 73 00 or a shorter time proposed by the Offeror. The schedule will be evaluated to determine whether it is, complete, reasonable, realistic, and achievable. A schedule proposing less time than required in Section 00 73 00 will be considered advantageous and will become the revised contract completion time. State in the narrative the total number of calendar days you have shown in your proposed schedule for project execution and acknowledge that this duration will become contractually binding should you receive the award.

This schedule shall clearly show how it compares to the number of calendar days and the sequence of construction as stated in the RFP. The schedule shall be task oriented, indicating the number of calendar days, after notice to proceed, by which milestones are to be achieved. Give special attention to the following tasks:

(a) Show the design phase, including events associated with coordinating the design submittals and Government review.

(b) Show the construction phase for each major feature of construction. The schedule shall indicate the Offeror’s understanding of the relationship between design after award and building construction.

(c) Include long lead material submittals and government review.

(d) Show proposed completion date of the project and the total proposed project duration in calendar days.

(e) Fast Track design and construction is authorized for this project, but is subject to the Contracting Officer’s discretion to approve its use. A schedule based on a Fast Track process must explain how it will be used in this project and how it will affect the schedule.

Fast Track may not be used as a reason to reduce Government review periods for design or construction submittals.

Design-Build F-35 AMU/Aircraft Maintenance Hangar 3 W912PL-16-R-0025

00 22 16 - Page 9 Amendment 3

FACTOR 6: SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

Submission Requirements:

All offerors (both large and small businesses) will be evaluated on the extent of participation of small business concerns in performance of this contract opportunity.

The offeror’s Technical Proposal must demonstrate, through the Small Business Participation Plan, that the offeror will meet the minimum mandatory Total Small Business participation goal of 20% based on the total contract value (through collective small business participation from any type of small business or sub-category small business). The work to be performed directly by a small business prime offeror will also be evaluated as Small Business participation.

All offerors must complete and submit the Small Business Participation Plan form. (See at end of this section).

VI. EVALUATION OF THE PRICE PROPOSAL

Price or cost to the Government will be evaluated and considered in the trade-off process but will not be scored or combined with other aspects of the evaluation. The proposed price will be analyzed for reasonableness. It may also be analyzed to determine whether it is realistic for the work to be performed;

reflects a clear understanding of the requirements; and is consistent with the Offerors Technical Proposal.

All offers with separately priced line items or sub line items will be analyzed for unbalanced pricing.

VII. INTENT TO AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions and receive revised proposals if later determined to be in the best interest of the Government.

VIII. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL:

The proposal submission instructions are written to give prospective contractors, where feasible, an indication of the level of detail desired by the Government. The offeror’s failure to include information that the Government has indicated should be included may result in the proposal being downgraded and/or being found deficient if inadequate detail is provided. Material omission(s) may cause the technical proposal to be rejected as unacceptable. The technical proposals will be reviewed for compliance with the technical specifications and applicable building codes and regulations. Non-compliance with the technical specifications and/or applicable building codes and/or regulations will be considered a deficiency. Proposals which are generic, vague, or lacking in detail, may be downgraded.

-END OF SECTION-

W912PL-16-R-0025

Amendment 03

Design-Build F-35 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar Squadron 3

00 73 00 - 1

SECTION 00 73 00 SUPPLEMENTARY CONDITIONS

ACCRUALS

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

REQUIRED INSURANCE

ER 415-1-15 (OCT 1998) TIME EXTENSION FOR UNSUALLY SEVERE WEATHER

WORK DAYS AND HOURS

ALTERNATE STRUCTURED APPROACH TO WEIGHTED GUIDELINE METHOD FOR CONSTRUCTION

CONTRACTS

GOVERNMENT-FURNISHED RFP DRAWINGS, SURVEYS AND SPECIFICATIONS

52.211-10 COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK (APR 1984)

52.211-12 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES--CONSTRUCTION (SEP 2000)

52.236-1 PERFORMANCE OF WORK BY THE CONTRACTOR (APR 1984)

52.236-25 REQUIREMENTS FOR REGISTRATION OF DESIGNERS (JUN 2003)

52.236-27 SITE VISIT (CONSTRUCTION) (FEB 1995) – ALTERNATE I (FEB 1995)

52.236-5000 DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACT ORDER OF PRECEDENCE (AUG 1997)

52.236-5001 PERSONNEL, SUBCONTRACTORS AND OUTSIDE ASSOCIATES OR CONSULTANTS

PERSONNEL, SUBCONTRACTORS AND OUTSIDE ASSOCIATES OR CONSULTANTS (MAY 2006)

52.236-5002 GOVERNMENT-FURNISHED SPECIFICATIONS, DRAWINGS, SURVEYS, AND SPECIFICATIONS

IN THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (JUL 2002)

52.236-5003 GOVERNMENT-FURNISHED SPECIFICATIONS AND DRAWINGS FOR CONSTRUCTION (JUL 2003)

52.236-5004 RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR FOR DESIGN (MAY 2002)

52.236-5005 WARRANTY OF DESIGN (MAY 2002)

52.236-5006 DEVIATING FROM THE ACCEPTED DESIGN (JUN 2002)

52.236-5007 CONTRACTOR'S ROLE DURING DESIGN PROCESS (JUN 1998)

52.236-5008 VALUE ENGINEERING AFTER AWARD (JUN 1999)

52.236-5009 PARTNERING (FEB 2000)

52.236-5010 GOVERNMENT RE-USE OF DESIGN (MAY 2006)

WARRANTY OF CONSTRUCTION WORK

SEQUENCE OF DESIGN-CONSTRUCTION

RECOMMENDED INSURANCE COVERAGE (HND MAR 2002)

TRAINING (HND FEB 2000)

DESIGN CONFERENCES (HND AUG 1997)

00 73 00 - 2

SUBMITTAL OF WORK TO BE PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR (HND UNDATED)

INVOICES

252.227-7022 GOVERNMENT RIGHTS (UNLIMITED) (MAR 1979)

252.227-7023 DRAWINGS AND OTHER DATA TO BECOME PROPERTY OF GOVERNMENT. (MAR 1979)

252.236-7000 MODIFICATION PROPOSALS - PRICE BREAKDOWN. (DEC 1991)

252.236-7005 AIRFIELD SAFETY PRECAUTIONS. (DEC 1991)

252.236-7008 CONTRACT PRICES - BIDDING SCHEDULES. (DEC 1991)

00 73 00 - 3

ACCRUALS

In accordance with USACE Engineer Financial Regulation (ER) 37-1-30, and other applicable Federal and DOD financial accounting standards, the Contractor is required to assist government personnel with providing reasonably accurate accrual estimates. The accrual is from the thru date of the period of performance (Eng Form 93, block 9) to the end for the month of the value of goods and/or services rendered/expected to be rendered to the Government pursuant to this contract. This is for each calendar month during which goods and services are delivered. Standard forms with instructions will be provided by the Government to assist with meeting this requirement. These monthly estimates, which facilitate timely entry of accruals, must be received by the Government on or before six (6) business days prior to each calendar month-end.

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

The Contract Administration Office for this contract subsequent to award is:

Department of the Army Los Angeles District, Corps of Engineers Luke Air Force Base Project Office 14002 W. Marauder Street, Building 302 Luke AFB, Arizona 85309-1125 ATTN: Joel Rodriguez Telephone No: (623) 282-9859

Payment will be made by:

USACE Finance Center

ATTN: CEFC-AO-P

5270 Integrity Drive Millington, TN 38054-5005

Submit Invoices to:

REFER TO SF 1442, BLOCK 26 WHICH WILL BE COMPLETED AT TIME OF AWARD

REQUIRED INSURANCE

Insurance is required as follows:

a. Either Workman's Compensation or Employer's Liability Insurance with a minimum limit of $100,000.00.

b. General Liability. The Contracting Officer shall require bodily injury liability insurance coverage written on the comprehensive form or policy of at least $500,000.00 per occurrence.

c. Automobile Liability Insurance for Bodily Injury and Property Damage with minimum limits of $200,000.00 for injury or death of any one person; $500,000.00 for each accident or occurrence of bodily injury liability; and $20,000.00 for each accident or occurrence for property liability.

d. In every case the insurance coverage shall amount to at least the limits stated above. However, where the Financial Responsibility Compulsory Insurance Law of the State in which the installation is located requires higher limits, the Automobile Liability Insurance Policy should provide coverage of at least those limits.

Prior to the commencement of work hereunder, the Contractor shall furnish to the Contracting Office a certificate or written statement of the above required insurance. The policies evidencing required nsurance shall contain an endorsement to the effect that cancellation or any material change in the policies adversely affecting the interests of the Government in such insurance shall not be effective until 10 days after written notice thereof to the Contracting Officer.

00 73 00 - 4

The Contractor agrees to insert the substance of this clause, including this paragraph, in all subcontracts hereunder.

DIRECTIONS FOR SUBMITTING OFFERS

(a) Envelopes containing offers, cost and technical, etc., must be sealed, marked and addressed follows:

Envelopes containing bids must be sealed, marked and addressed as follows:

MARK ENVELOPES:

RFP No. W912PL-16-R-0025 Proposal Due Date: see SF 1442, Block 13

ADDRESS ENVELOPES TO:

Department of the Army U. S. Army Engineer District, Los Angeles ATTN: Contracting Division, CESPL-CT-E C/O: Otse A. Adikhai 915 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 930 Los Angeles, CA 90017

EXPRESS MAIL ENVELOPES:

Department of the Army U.S. Army Engineer District, Los Angeles ATTN: Contracting Division, CESPL-CT-E C/O: Otse A. Adikhai 915 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 930 Los Angeles, CA 90017

( b) Hand carried proposals may be deposited prior to the time and date set for receipt of proposals as follows:

US Army Engineer District, Los Angeles Security Office 915 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1101

Los Angeles, California 90017

ER 415-1-15 (OCT 1998) TIME EXTENSION FOR UNSUALLY SEVERE WEATHER

This provision specifies the procedure for the determination of time extensions for unusually severe weather in accordance with the Contract Clause entitled “DEFAULT (FIXED PRICE CONSTRUCTION)”. In order for the Contracting Officer to award a time extension under this clause, the following conditions must be satisfied:

The weather experienced at the project site during the contract period must be found to be unusually severe, that is, more severe that the adverse weather anticipated for the project location during any given month. The unusually severe weather must actually cause a delay to the completion of the project. The delay must be beyond the control and without the fault of negligence of the Contractor.

a. The following schedule of monthly anticipated adverse weather delays is based on National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) or similar data for the project location and will constitute the base line for monthly weather time extensions. The contractor’s progress schedule must reflect these anticipated adverse weather delays in all weather dependent activities.

00 73 00 - 5

Monthly Anticipated Adverse Weather Delay

Work Days Based on (5) Day Work Week

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

5 3 3 1 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 5

b. Upon acknowledgement of the Notice to Proceed (NTP) and continuing throughout the contract, the Contractor will record the daily CQC report, the occurrence of adverse weather and resultant impact to normally scheduled work. Actual adverse weather delay days must prevent work on critical activities for 50 percent or more of the Contractor’s scheduled work day.

c. The number of actual adverse weather delay days shall include days impacted by actual adverse weather (even if adverse weather occurred in previous month), be calculated chronologically from the first to the last day of each month, and be recorded as full days. If the number of actual adverse weather delay days exceeds the number of days anticipated in paragraph (b), above, the Contracting Officer will convert any qualifying delays to calendar days, giving full consideration for equivalent fair weather work days, and issue a modification in accordance with the contract clause entitled “Default (Fixed Price Construction)”.

WORK DAYS AND HOURS

The normal workdays and hours for this project will be Monday through Friday, excluding federal holidays, from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Access to the work site may be restricted to these hours and days. Work during other than normal hours and days must be coordinated in advance with the Administrative Contracting Officer.

ALTERNATE STRUCTURED APPROACH TO WEIGHTED GUIDELINE METHOD FOR

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS

The following alternate structured approach shall be used for all fixed-price construction contract actions.

Factor Rate Weight Value

Degree of risk 20 Relative difficulty of work 15 Size of job 15 Period of performance 15 Contractor's investment 5 Assistance by Government 5 Subcontracting 25

Total 100%

Based on the circumstances of the procurement action, each of the above factors shall be weighted from .03 to .12 as indicated below. "Value shall be obtained by multiplying the rate by the weight. The Value column when totaled indicates the fair and reasonable profit percentage under the circumstances of the particular procurement. The profit percentage should be multiplied by the total contract costs, including general and administrative costs.

(1) Degree of risk. Where the work involves no risk or the degree of risk is very small, the weighting should be .03; as the degree of risk increases, the weighting should be increased up to a maximum of .12. Lump sum items shall generally have a higher weight than unit price items; other things to consider include the nature of the work and where it is to be performed. Consider the portion of the work to be done by subcontractors, amount and type of labor included in costs, whether the negotiation is before or after performance of the work, etc. Modifications settled before the fact have much greater risk than those settled after the fact. A weight of .03 is appropriate for after the fact equitable adjustments and/or settlements.

00 73 00 - 6

(2) Relative Difficulty of Work: If the work is difficult and complex, the weight should be .12 and should be proportionately reduced to .03 on the simplest of jobs. This factor is tied in to some extent with the degree of risk.

Some other things to consider are the nature of the work, by whom it is to be done (i.e., subcontractors, consultants), what is the time schedule.

(3) Size of Job. Work of $100,000 or less shall be weighted at .12. Work estimated between $100,000 and $5,000,000 shall be proportionately weighted from .12 to .05. Work from $5,000,000 to $10,000,000 shall be weighted at .04. Work in excess of $10,000,000 shall be weighted at .03. It should be noted that control of fixed expenses generally improves with increased job magnitude.

(4) Period of Performance. Work not to exceed one month is to be proportionately weighted at .03. Work in excess of 24 months is to be weighted at .12. Durations between one month and 24 months are to be proportionately weighted between .03 and .12.

(5) Contractor's Investment. To be weighted from .03 to .12 on the basis of below average, average and above average. Things to consider include amount of subcontracting, Government-furnished property or data such as surveys, soil tests, method of making progress payments, and any mobilization payment items.

(6) Assistance by Government. To be weighted from .12 to .03 on the basis of average to above average.

Consider use of Government-owned property, equipment and facilities, and expediting assistance.

(7) Subcontracting. To be weighted inversely proportional to the amount of subcontracting. Where 80% or more of the work is to be subcontracted use .03. The weighting should be increased proportionately to .12 where all the work is performed by the contractor's own forces.

GOVERNMENT-FURNISHED RFP DRAWINGS, SURVEYS AND SPECIFICATIONS

a. The Contractor shall

(1) Check all Government-furnished drawings and surveys immediately upon receipt;

(2) Compare all drawings and surveys and verify the figures before laying out the work;

(3) Promptly notify the Contracting Officer of any discrepancies; and

(4) Be responsible for any errors which might have been avoided by complying with this paragraph.

(5) Verify and use latest edition of required design references.

b. Large scale drawings shall, in general, govern small scale drawings. Figures marked on drawings shall, in general, be followed in preference to scale measurements.

c. Omissions from the drawings or specifications or the misdescription of details of work which are manifestly necessary to carry out the intent of the drawings and specifications, or which are customarily performed, shall not relieve the Contractor from performing such omitted or misdescribed details of the work, but shall be performed as if fully and correctly set forth and described in the drawings and specifications.

52.211-10 COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK (APR 1984)

The Contractor shall be required to (a) commence work under this contract within 10 calendar days after the date the Contractor receives the notice to proceed, (b) prosecute the work diligently, and (c) complete the entire work ready for use not later than 600 calendar days after the contractor receives the Notice to Proceed. The project duration will be adjusted to the Contractor’s proposed number of calendar days for the project duration in its response to Evaluation Factor 5 of Section 00 22 16, so long as the proposed duration does not exceed 600 calendar days. The time stated for completion shall include final cleanup of the premises.

(End of clause)

00 73 00 - 7

52.211-12 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES--CONSTRUCTION (SEP 2000)

(a) If the Contractor fails to complete the work within the time specified in the contract, the Contractor shall pay liquidated damages to the Government in the amount of $2028 for each calendar day of delay until the work is completed or accepted.

(b) If the Government terminates the Contractor's right to proceed, liquidated damages will continue to accrue until the work is completed. These liquidated damages are in addition to excess costs of repurchase under the Termination clause.

52.236-1 PERFORMANCE OF WORK BY THE CONTRACTOR (APR 1984)

The Contractor shall perform on the site, and with its own organization, work equivalent to at least fifteen (15%) percent of the total amount of work to be performed under the contract. This percentage may be reduced by a supplemental agreement to this contract if, during performing the work, the Contractor requests a reduction and the Contracting Officer determines that the reduction would be to the advantage of the Government.

52.236-25 REQUIREMENTS FOR REGISTRATION OF DESIGNERS (JUN 2003)

Architects or engineers…