W912PL23R0009 Amendment 01.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

0001 03MAR23

USACE, Los Angeles District ATTN: Contracting Division East Region Branch 915 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 930 Los Angeles, CA 90017

See Item 6

W912PL23R0009

10FEB23

The purpose of this amendment is to extend the due date and make the changes identified within the continuation sheet.

The offer due date is now 15 March 2023 at 2PM PST.

Please see below Continuation Sheet.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

W912PL23R0009

SF 30 CONTINUATION PAGE 1 OF 2

2 March 2023 Amendment 0001

SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

DIVISION 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

Section Number Summary of Change 00 22 16 Supplementary Instruction to Proposers (Updates highlighted in yellow)

OTHER

File Name Summary of Change SF 1442 Extend Due Date, Update NAICS Size Standard, and Magnitude of

Construction

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NUMBER 2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID (IFB)

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

3. DATE ISSUED PAGE OF PAGES

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by the offeror.

4. CONTRACT NUMBER 5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NUMBER 6. PROJECT NUMBER

7. ISSUED BY CODE 8. ADDRESS OFFER TO

9. FOR INFORMATION CALL

A. NAME B. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

SOLICITATION

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS (Title, identifying number, date):

11. The Contractor shall begin performance within calendar days and complete it within calendar days after receiving award, notice to proceed. This performance period is mandatory, negotiable. (See .)

12A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and copies to perform the work required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by (hour) local time (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers will be publicly opened at that time. Sealed envelopes containing offers shall be marked to show the offeror’s name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) work requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due will not be considered and will be rejected.

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

Designed using Perform Pro, WHS/DIOR, Oct 96

1442-103 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85) (EG)

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(d)

W912PL23R0009

X

10FEB2023 1 OF 2

USACE, Los Angeles District Contracting Division, West Region Branch 915 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 930 Los Angeles, CA 90017

Refer to Section 00 21 16, Special Instructions Pertaining to Submission of Electronic Proposals.

Charlie R. Jones 213-452-3243

BUILDING 995 ADAL EGRESS, LUKE AFB, ARIZONA

This Design-Build (DB) project provided for an Addition and Alteration of Building 995 Egress Facility at Luke AFB located in Glendale AZ.

The procurement action will result in a Firm Fixed Price "C" type contract for construction services with a 365-calendar day period of performance.

This DB project constructs a 3,600 SF addition to Egress building 995, with reinforced concrete foundation and concrete floor slab, structural steel frames, split-face masonry unit walls, structural sloping metal seam roof, utilities, and fire detection and protection system.

Provides utilities, site improvements, communication infrastructure, and all necessary work for a complete and usable facility. Work includes renovating 2,200 SF of interior space of the existing facility to meet mission requirements.

North American Industry Classification System(NAICS)code-236220. Size Standard $39,500,000.00.

The magnitude of construction is $5,000,000.00 - $10,000,000.00

10 * 00 73 00

X X *Section 00 73 00

X 10

1 2 PM

15MAR2023

X

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror)

STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK (REV. 4-85)

14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR (Include ZIP Code) 15. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS (Include only if different than Item 14)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the work required at the prices specified below in strict accordance with the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in writing within calendar days after the date offers are due. (Insert any number equal or greater than the minimum requirement stated in 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation - give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER (Type or print) 20B. SIGNATURE 20C. OFFER DATE

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24.SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

ITEM 25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) ( ) 41 U.S.C. 253(c) ( )

26. ADMINISTERED BY 27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BYCODE

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT (Contractor is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.) Contractor agrees to furnish and deliver all items or perform all work requirements identified on this form and any continuation sheets for the consideration stated in this contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be governed by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and

(c) the clauses, representations, certifications, and specifications incorporated by reference in or attached to this contract.

29. AWARD. (Contractor is not required to sign this document.) Your offer on this solicitation is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award consummates the contract, which consists of (a) the Government solicitation and your offer, and (b) this contract award. No further contractual document is necessary.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

(Type or print)

30B. SIGNATURE 30C. DATE

31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

DUNS NO.: TAX ID NO.:

CAGE CODE NO.:

( ) - ; FAX ( ) -

See Section 00 10 00 Solicitation Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Schedule

USACE Los Angeles District Roadrunner Resident Office U.S Army Corps of Engineers 14002 W. Marauder St., BLDG 302 Luke AFB, Arizona 85309

USACE, Finance Center

ATTN: CEFCO-AO-D

5722 Integrity Drive Millington, TN 38054-5005

ADAL Egress B995 Luke Air Force Base, Arizona

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 1 March 2023 Amendment 01

Section 00 22 16 Supplementary Instruction to Proposers

1 OVERVIEW

1.1 ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD

1.2 TWO-PHASE DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.3 SOURCE SELECTION USING BEST VALUE TRADE OFF PROCESS

2 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

2.2 TABS FOR PROPOSAL SUMITTAL

2.3 PAGE FORMATTING FOR PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

2.4 PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL SUMMARY PAGE COUNT

2.5 ELECTRONIC FORMAT

2.6 PROPOSAL REVISIONS

2.7 “CONFIDENTIAL” PROJECTS

3 PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL SUMMARY

3.1 VOLUME 1 ADMINISTRATIVE

3.2 PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

3.3 VOLUME II TECHNIAL

3.4 TABS A and B - TECHNICAL FACTORS RESPONSE FOR PROPOSAL

3.5 FACTOR 1 AND FACTOR 2, GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR

SUBMITTING PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION (PHASE 1)

3.6 TAB A – FACTOR 1 EXPERIENCE AND CAPABILITY

3.7 TAB B – FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

4 EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

4.1 INITIAL EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (VOLUME II)

4.2 INTENT TO AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

4.3 DEBRIEFINGS

4.4 POSSIBLE EXCHANGES DURING THE SELECTION PROCESS

5 DEFINITIONS

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 2

1 OVERVIEW

1.1 ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD

In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (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 the FAR Part 9 and any special standards set forth in the solicitation.

1.2 TWO-PHASE DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 36.3, Two-Phase Design- Build Selection Procedures will be utilized. This solicitation is for Phase 1 only and a scope of work will be provided. Phase 1 will help determine which offerors will be selected for Phase 2.

Only those Offerors who are found to be technically acceptable for all Phase 1 factors will be considered for Phase 2. Offerors will be invited to submit proposals for Phase 2 by amendment.

1.3 SOURCE SELECTION USING LOWEST PRICE TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE

(LPTA)

The Government will make award to the Offeror submitting the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. The Government will first review non-cost technical proposals to determine which are acceptable to the Government.

The objective of the Government is to award a contract to an Offeror who submits a proposal that when evaluated is determined to meet the acceptability levels established in the solicitation for each non-cost evaluation factor. Each non-cost evaluation factor will receive a rating of Acceptable or Unacceptable. The award will be made to the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated proposed price.

1.3.1 PROPOSAL COMPLIANCE REVIEW

Proposals will be initially reviewed to ensure that all required forms and certifications are completed and that both a technical and price proposal were received.

1.3.2 TECHNICAL/QUALITY EVALUATION

The Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will evaluate and rate proposals. Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the (Request for Proposal) RFP requirements.

Factors 1 and 2 will be evaluated in Phase 1. Factors 3, 4, and 5 will be evaluated in Phase 2.

1.3.3 PRICE EVALUATION (Conducted in PHASE 2)

The SSEB will evaluate price proposals independent of the technical/quality evaluation. The SSEB will not have access to price information until completion of the technical/quality

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 3 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 Offeror’s technical proposals. All offers with separately price line items and/or sub line items will be analyzed for unbalanced pricing.

2 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS (For PHASE 1)

2.1 GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information containing sufficient detail to allow review and evaluation by the Government.

organize proposals as requested may adversely affect an Offeror's evaluation. Offerors should provide sufficient detail and clearly define all items required in this section. The Contracting Officer may remove any Offeror from further consideration during the procurement if the Offeror fails to meet the submittal requirements of the RFP or to reduce the competitive range for purposes of efficiency pursuant to FAR 15.306(c)(2).

2.2 TABS FOR PROPOSAL SUMITTAL:

Proposal shall be organized and tabbed as shown in Paragraph 3, “Proposal Submittal Summary”.

2.3 PAGE FORMATTING FOR PROPOSAL SUBMISSION:

Each Volume shall contain a Table of Contents and all pages of each factor shall be sequentially numbered. All text must be legible and easily read. The page size of the Offeror’s proposal shall not exceed 8.5” by 11”. Diagrams, charts and tables shall conform to the paper size. All text shall be typed single-spaced with a minimum size 10 font. Gantt chart, schedule and other charts and graphics can be size 8 font. Margins (1-inch) shall be clean and clear. If fold-out charts are unavoidable, and are to be utilized, all sheets shall be reproduced on 11” by 17” and folded to 8.5” by 11” size.

2.4 PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL SUMMARY PAGE COUNT (PHASE 1):

2.4.1 Volume I has no page count limitation.

2.4.2 Volume II page count limitation as follow:

Offerors shall be limited to a maximum of 50 pages (PHASE 1 only). A page is defined as text or information on one side of paper. If it is printed double-sided, each face will be counted as a page. Factor 1, Past Performance, will not be counted towards this page count. Please note: The Table of Contents and Factor Tabs will not be counted towards the 50-page count limit.

2.4.3 PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL

The Offeror’s adherence to prescribed page and formatting limitations prescribed will be strictly adhered to and enforced. Information submitted which exceeds the specified limit will not be

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 4 evaluated. For example, the government will not evaluate excess information. If four pages are submitted in response to an item with a three (3) page limitation, the information of the fourth page will not be evaluated.

The technical proposals will be reviewed for compliance with the technical specifications. Non-compliance with the technical specifications will be considered a deficiency and an unacceptable adjectival rating will be assigned.

2.5 ELECTRONIC FORMAT:

The Offeror shall provide the complete Proposal Submittal in a .pdf format using Adobe Acrobat software to print to a .pdf file. The “find” feature within Adobe must be functional to search the proposal text. Do not scan or copy the documents into a .pdf file. The text portion of the proposal shall be contained as a single .pdf file. Sections of the proposal shall be linked to the index in logical order.

2.6 PROPOSAL REVISIONS:

Proposal revisions shall be submitted as page replacements with revised text readily identifiable, e.g., bold face print or underlining. The source of the revision, e.g., Error, Omission, or Clarification, or amendment shall be included and be annotated for each revision. Proposal replacement pages shall be numbered, shall be clearly marked “REVISED”, shall show the date of revision. A revised copy of the entire proposal in .pdf format shall be provided.

2.7 “CONFIDENTIAL” PROJECTS:

“Confidential” projects cannot be submitted to demonstrate capability unless all of the information required for evaluation as specified herein can be provided to the Government as part of the Offeror’s technical proposal. Offerors that include in their proposals information that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for

1, “Instructions to Offerors—Competitive Acquisition”, paragraph (e), “Restriction on disclosure and use of data”.

3 PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL SUMMARY

The Proposal Submittal shall be tabbed and submitted in the following format. Submission Requirements and Evaluation Criteria for each Tab are included in the following paragraphs. All information shall be provided within these tabbed sections and shall not be included as an appendix or attachment.

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 5

3.1 VOLUME I ADMINISTRATIVE

Location Description

TAB A

Proposal Cover Sheet

Offerors should ensure telephone number, fax number, e-mail address, Tax ID, and DUNS number are all included. The DUNS number provided will be used to access Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) data. If a separate DUNS has been created for a joint venture, it must also be submitted.

TAB B Table of Contents Identifies the Tabs/Contents of Volume I

TAB C

SF 1442

Completed and signed by authorized individual(s) of the Offeror. Offers submitted in the name of a Joint Venture must be signed in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the joint venture agreement as evidenced in the proposal

TAB D SECTION 00 01 05 Certification Page

TAB E SECTION 00 45 00 Representations and Certifications.

TAB F

Joint Venture Agreement, if applicable

Joint Venture Agreement, if applicable

3.2 PROPOSAL COVER SHEET:

A Proposal Cover Sheet shall be provided (see below). The second sheet shall be a Table of Contents. Offers that violate these rules unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and may be rejected by the Government after the initial evaluation without receiving any further consideration.

Format for the Proposal Cover Sheet:

The proposal cover sheet is required by FAR 52.215-1(c) (i)-(v) “Instructions to Proposers— Competitive Acquisition”. The format is as follows:

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 6

3.3 VOLUME II TECHNIAL

3.4 TABS A and B - TECHNICAL FACTORS RESPONSE FOR PROPOSAL:

Submit responses to the technical factors as identified for each tab.

Each Factor will be rated accordingly to the established evaluation criteria identified with Tables 1 and 2 as specified.

PHASE 1 Requirements:

Location Factor Description

TAB A

Factor 1

PAST PERFORMANCE

OF PRIME

CONTRACTOR

TAB B

Factor 2

PAST PERFORMANCE

OF DESIGNER

PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

Solicitation Number: W912PL23R0009

Project Title

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

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 upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item.

Names, titles, telephone, and electronic addresses of persons authorized to negotiate on the Proposer’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation.

Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal.

Note: 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.

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 7

3.5 FACTOR 1 AND FACTOR 2, GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMITTING

PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION (PHASE 1)

This general submission criterion relates to Tab A, Factor 1, Past Performance of the Prime Construction Contractor and Tab B, Factor 2, Past Performance of the Lead Design Firm (or prime construction contractor if the design is to be self-performed). There are three aspects to past performance that must be addressed: recency, relevancy, and quality. In both Factor 1 and Factor 2, the Offeror shall demonstrate recent and relevant past performance on projects similar to the scope and magnitude of effort and complexity required by this solicitation and demonstrate the quality record of that past effort. The Offeror may use the attachments at the end of this section for submitting the required information for each Factor.

Where the word “project(s)” appears in this solicitation, it is understood to mean a project, contract(s), task order(s), or any other contract document provided for by the Federal Acquisition regulations (FAR 2.10). For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project; rather Offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project. Examples of a project submitted by the Offeror may include projects performed for a City, State or a Federal Agency or for a commercial or private sector customer. If projects submitted were design-build projects, please identify them as such.

Where the word “recent” appears, it is understood to mean design type projects that have been 100% completed (final construction documents completed) within six (6) years from the RFP release date. A recent construction type project is defined in relation to the RFP advertisement date. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to clearly indicate the percentage of completion on construction project examples that are in progress at the time of this submission.

“Relevant” past performance is one indicator of an Offeror’s ability to perform the contract successfully. Where the word “relevant” appears, it is understood to mean that the project is comparable to the type of work covered by this requirement, in terms of size, scope and complexity. A brief description of work is located in RFP Section 01 10 10 paragraph entitled, “PROJECT DESCRIPTION.” Regarding “relevant” prime construction contractor work, the Government will consider the type of work features self-performed, on-site by the Prime Constructor’s own organization in addition to construction management effort.

Quality of Product or Services. The past performance evaluation will establish the overall quality of the Offeror’s past performance.

3.6 TAB A – FACTOR 1 PAST PERFORMANCE OF PRIME CONTRACTOR:

The Contractor shall demonstrate recent, relevant experience and quality of past performance on similar projects. Offerors may identify state and local government and private contracts that are similar to the Government’s requirements. If the Offeror is a joint venture, each firm shall provide information, demonstrating experience relevant to their role on this project and in accordance with the Joint Venture

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 8

Submission Requirements.

3.6.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Minimum requirements of the solicitation:

The Offeror will submit two (2) but no more than three (3) projects. Projects must be fully completed or currently under construction and at least 75% complete within the last 6 years.

The submitted projects shall meet the following criteria:

a. Must have a construction value of a minimum of $4M to a maximum of $10M.

b. Two of the projects must have occurred on a military installation.

c. One project shall be a design build, new, vertical construction.

d. One project indicating experience in construction near Airfield operations, nearby aircraft parking ramp areas as they relate to the Offeror’s ability to design, perform, and construct this project.

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 75% construction complete. Projects older than six years from date of proposal submittal will not be evaluated.

The projects submitted shall clearly demonstrate an Offeror’s ability to design and construct a facility that is similar in size and scope to this project shall demonstrate the Offeror’s experience and capability of performing similar and relevant type work as the subject project.

Use the following format to provide project information:

a. Project Title

b. Location

c. Contract Number

d. Contract Type (Design/Build, Design/Bid/Build)

e. Role of Offeror (address type of work performed, including design, percentage of work performed by the Offeror, as applicable, and any proposed team members that were directly involved in this project, including work performed, roles and responsibilities)

f. Total Dollar Amount; Start and Completion Dates. If project is not complete, indicate percentage complete and anticipated completion date

g. Brief Description of Project. (Address how this project is similar to the types of task orders to be issued under this contract)

h. Customer Primary Point of Contact (name, relationship to project, agency/firm, phone number, and e-mail address). The Government may contact and interview project references. Reference information will not be revealed to other parties.

Offerors shall be evaluated on the construction projects as outlined in Factor 1 (Past Performance of Prime Contractor). This factor will assess the Offeror’s past performance on construction projects based upon the efforts of similar scope, magnitude, and/or similar construction projects.

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 9

The Offeror’s past performance will be evaluated to determine technical capability to perform the proposed contract and how well it satisfied its customers. The information presented in the Offeror’s proposal, together with that from other sources available to the Government, will comprise the input for evaluation of this factor.

The following elements will be evaluated: Offerors are responsible for indicating the percentage of work that is completed, if currently underway. The Offeror shall submit evidence of the quality of their past performance on submitted projects. The Offeror shall provide in their initial proposal a completed Offeror performance evaluation, whether interim or final, found in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) (www.cpars.gov). If a completed Offeror performance evaluation does not exist in CPARS (example, non-U.S.

Government projects) the Offeror shall provide a Past Performance Questionnaire, hereinafter PPQ (Attachment 1). If, at time of evaluation, a completed Offeror performance evaluation exists in CPARS that conflicts with a submitted PPQ, the completed Offeror performance evaluation shall govern. Offerors are permitted to incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQ’s previously submitted for other RFPs. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror. Letters of Recommendation or Appreciation are considered supplemental information to demonstrate customer satisfaction and are not considered equal to Offeror performance evaluations and/or detailed PPQs.

The Government will evaluate the responses from the customers from which Past Performance Questionnaires have been received. The Government may contact and interview points of contact on the Past Performance Questionnaires. The Government reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the listed references if the listed reference is not available. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance.

3.6.2 JOINT VENTURES:

If an Offeror represents the combining of two or more companies for the purpose of this RFP, the proposal shall clearly identify the contractual responsibilities of each firm and the work to be performed by each; describe the nature of the association; indicate whether the firms have experience working together in construction ventures, including how long and how many projects. In addition, each company, including joint venture, shall list their Government contract experience. Provide a copy of the Joint Venture Agreement. Prior to award of any contract, a copy of the Joint Venture Agreement will be required. If approval of the Joint Venture Agreement is required by the Small Business Administration (SBA), failure to timely provide an approved Small Business Administration Joint Venture Agreement may prevent award of a contract. The Joint Venture must be with a Small Business concern that has been certified under the Small Business program as identified in FAR Part 19.

Offerors submitting proposals as a Joint Venture (JV) shall obtain a DUNS number and be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) as the offering Joint Venture. The Offeror must provide two (2) but no more than three (3) “recent”, “relevant” projects performed by the JV that reflect the JV’s ability to perform the work required in this solicitation and satisfy the requirements noted in paragraph 3.6.1.

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 10

If the JV has no “recent”, “relevant” projects performed by the JV, then each member of the JV must provide two (2) “recent”, “relevant” projects performed by the JV member that reflect the JV member’s experience commensurate with their role on this project or how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project. Two of these projects must be located on a military installation and have a greater than $20M construction value each.

The Joint Venture shall provide a brief narrative stating the roles that each partner of the Joint Venture will perform on this project and how the presented projects demonstrate the JV member’s experience commensurate with their role on this project or how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project.

3.6.3 EVALUATION CRITERIA/RATING SCHEME:

Factor 1 shall be evaluated and rated using the ratings shown in Table 1.

The Government will review the projects provided by the Offeror to evaluate the recent and relevant experience of the Offeror with similar projects. If the Offeror cannot provide suitable relevant experience and the evaluators consider the information provided indicates that the Offeror has no relevant experience, a determination will be made as to the risk this lack of construction experience presents to the Government; and the proposal will be evaluated accordingly. The experience of individuals will not be evaluated under this factor.

Note: In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance.

Aspects of Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation results are an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum past performance solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the Offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertain to the products and/or services outlined in the solicitation requirements. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation.

The first is to evaluate whether the Offeror’s present/past performance is relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration should be given to what aspects of an Offeror’s contract history would give the most confidence that the Offeror will satisfy the current procurement.

The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. This evaluation will reflect the Government's confidence in each firm's ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the RFP.

The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the Offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the Offeror performed on those past contracts.

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 11

3.7 TAB B – FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE OF LEAD DESIGN FIRM

Design capability is an important element of this contract. The designer shall demonstrate recent, relevant experience and quality of past performance on similar projects.

3.7.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Minimum requirements of the solicitation:

The Offeror shall submit a project portfolio containing three (3) example projects to demonstrate the Offeror’s military, commercial construction and design-build past performance.

Each project cited shall meet the following criteria:

a. Design Build construction projects and/or Design Bid Build construction projects with a value $20,000,000.00 or greater.

b. Two (2) of the three (3) projects must have occurred on a military installation.

c. Completed or substantially completed within the last six (6) years of RFP release date. A project will be considered substantially complete if it is a design type project that has been 100% completed (final construction documents completed) within six (6) years from the RFP release date.

d. One project indicating experience in construction near Airfield operations, nearby aircraft parking ramp areas as they relate to the Offeror’s ability to design, perform and construct this project.

e. One of the projects must be a design build.

RFP development efforts, studies, partial, schematic or concept designs are not relevant and will not be considered as “100% complete” designs which are defined as final design drawings and specifications. For each recent and relevant design example submitted, provide at a minimum the required information listed below:

(1) Company Name

(2) Name of Project

(3) Location of Project

(4) Owner

(5) General Scope of Project including any state permits obtained

(6) Summary of your role in the design of this project

(7) Identify estimated or actual construction cost

(8) Extent and type of design work you subcontracted

(9) Dates design began, completed dates (Provide month and year)

(10) Your Performance Evaluation by owner, if known

(11) Owner’s point of contact for reference company name

(12) Telephone and email information

Offerors are responsible for indicating the percentage of work that is completed, if currently underway. The Offeror shall submit evidence of the quality of their past performance on

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 12 submitted projects. The Offeror shall provide in their initial proposal a completed Offeror performance evaluation, whether interim or final, found in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) (www.cpars.gov). If a completed Offeror performance evaluation does not exist in CPARS (example, non-U.S. Government projects) the Offeror shall provide a Past Performance Questionnaire, hereinafter PPQ (Attachment 1). If, at time of evaluation, a completed Offeror performance evaluation exists in CPARS that conflicts with a submitted PPQ, the completed Offeror performance evaluation shall govern. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQ’s previously submitted for other RFPs. This does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror. Letters of Recommendation or Appreciation are considered supplemental information to demonstrate customer satisfaction and are not considered equal to Offeror performance evaluations and/or detailed PPQs.

The Offeror may also provide with their initial offer, information (i.e., letters of appreciation, customer awards, etc.) for other completed projects, which demonstrate owner satisfaction with the design firm’s overall design performance. Information submitted must be “recent” and “relevant” as previously defined.

If the Design Firm, or Prime Contractor if design is performed in-house, has been required to take corrective action for any substandard performance, the Offeror should explain in the proposal the circumstances and corrective action taken.

3.7.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA/RATING SCHEME:

Factor 2 shall be evaluated and rated using the ratings shown in Table 1 (Past Performance).

Quality of Past Performance Evaluation. The Government will assess how well an Offeror performed on the projects submitted under Factor 2. 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, i.e., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), When the relevant past 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 contacts or performance evaluation to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and evaluate their effectiveness.

The Government will evaluate each of the projects submitted under Factors 2 comparing the past project information and effort and comparing it to the effort needed to accomplish the project described in this solicitation.

4 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will be established to conduct the evaluation of proposals received in response to this solicitation. The evaluation will be based on the content of the proposal, proposal corrections and any information obtained from other sources, e.g., past performance information. The SSEB will not consider any information or data incorporated by

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 13 reference. Identities of SSEB members are confidential and members will not be available for contact or discussion.

Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts for proposal submission, and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to determine performance capability. Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in their proposal.

4.1 INITIAL EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (VOLUME II)

The Offeror’s 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. Material omission(s) may cause the technical proposal to be rated as unacceptable. The Offeror’s adherence to prescribed page and formatting limitations prescribed will be strictly adhered to and enforced. Information submitted which exceeds the specified limit will not be evaluated. Offerors may be given a chance to clarify certain aspects of their proposal and to resolve minor or clerical mistakes. However, Offerors are not given an opportunity to respond to any identified weaknesses or deficiencies or revise their proposals.

The technical proposals will be reviewed for compliance with the technical specification.

Technical proposals are given an overall rating of technically acceptable or not acceptable. The evaluation factors will be rated based upon the standards listed within the RFP. A rating of “unacceptable” for any evaluation factor will result in an overall rating of “unacceptable” and the proposal will be ineligible for Phase 2.

4.1.1 ADJECTIVAL RATING SCHEME:

Table 1: Factor 1 and 2, Past Performance Rating Method

RATING DESCRIPTION

Acceptable

Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the Offeror’s performance record is unknown.

Unacceptable

Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

4.2 INTENT TO AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

Offerors may be given a chance to clarify certain aspects of their proposal and to resolve minor or clerical mistakes. However, Offerors are not given an opportunity to respond to any identified weaknesses or deficiencies or revise their proposals.

The government intends to evaluate proposals and issue a contract without discussions but

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 14 reserves the right to conduct discussions and receive revised proposals if it is later determined to be necessary.

4.3 DEBRIEFINGS

The PCO shall ensure Offerors are debriefed, if requested, in accordance with FAR 15.505 and FAR 15.506, as applicable.

4.4 POSSIBLE EXCHANGES DURING THE SELECTION PROCESS

Clarifications. A clarification is defined as limited exchanges, between the Government and Offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. If award is to be made without discussions, Offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of proposals, including an Offeror’s past performance, or to resolve minor or clerical errors. When clarifications are needed, communication with an Offeror will be handled through the Contracting Officer. Clarifications do not provide the Offeror an opportunity to revise or modify its proposal, except for correction of apparent clerical mistakes that would ultimately result in a revision.

Communications. Communications may take place with Offerors before the establishment of a competitive range. Communications are exchanges, between the Government and Offerors, after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range. Communications may only be held with Offerors whose past performance information is the determining factor, preventing them from being placed within the competitive range. Such communications, if required, shall address adverse past performance information to which an Offeror has not had a prior opportunity to respond and may only be held with those Offerors whose exclusion from, or inclusion in, the competitive range is uncertain. Communications may be conducted to enhance Government understanding of proposals; allow reasonable interpretation of the proposal; or facilitate the Government’s evaluation process. Such communications shall not be used to cure proposal deficiencies or material omissions, materially alter the technical or cost elements of the proposal, and/or otherwise revise the proposal. Such communications may be considered in rating proposals for the purpose of establishing the competitive range. Communications shall not provide an opportunity for the Offeror to revise its proposal, but may address ambiguities in the proposal or other concerns such as perceived deficiencies, weaknesses, errors, omissions, or mistakes, and information relative to relevant past performance.

Discussions. Exchanges with Offerors, between the Government and Offerors that are undertaken with the intent of allowing the Offeror to revise its proposal. These exchanges with Offerors take place after the establishment of the competitive range and are called discussions.

The objective of discussions is to maximize the Government’s ability to obtain best value, based on the requirement and the evaluation factors set forth in the solicitation.

5 DEFINITIONS:

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

Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

W912PL23R0009

00 22 16 - 15

See FAR 15.001.

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

Strength. An aspect of a proposal that, when judged against a stated evaluation criterion, enhances the merit of the proposal or increases the probability of successful performance of the contract.

Deviation. Proposal implies or specifically offers a deviation below the specified criteria. The firm may or may not have called the deviation to the Government’s attention. A deviation is a deficiency. The proposal must conform to the solicitation requirements for award.