W912PL23R0029_Amendment0003.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 30

0003 20SEP23

USACE, Los Angeles District ATTN: Contracting Division East Region Branch 915 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1109 Los Angeles, CA 90017

W912PL23R0029

25JUL23

The amendment 0003 is to make a change in Section 00 22 16 and extend the RFP closing date to Monday 25 September 2023 at 2:00pm Pacific Standard Time.

Please see below Continuation Sheet.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

Replace Fire Suppression, B12 W912PL23R0029

Tucson, Arizona

20 September 2023 Amendment 0003

Amendment 0003 Summary of Changes

1. SF‐1442

2. Attachment 1: Refer to Evaluation Section 00 22‐16, under FACTOR 1 ‐ PAST

PERFORMANCE OF PRIME CONTRACTOR, 3.6.1 Submission Requirements, part d has been removed as part submission requirement.

Section 00 22-16

FACTOR 1 ‐ PAST PERFORMANCE OF PRIME CONTRACTOR

3.6.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

The Offeror will submit at least 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. Each of the submitted projects must have a construction value over $5,000,000.

b. At least two of the projects must have occurred on a military installation.

c. At least one project shall be a design build, new, vertical construction.

d. At least one projects shall demonstrate experience and capability in ICD (Intelligence Community Directive) 705of similar scale and magnitude as the subject project.

-End of Summary Changes-

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)De

W912PL23R0029

X

25-JuLY-2023 1 OF 2

W912PL

USACE, Los Angeles District Contracting Division, East Region Branch C/O RubyAnn Prout 915 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 930 Los Angeles, CA 90017

SAME AS BLOCK #7

Nardos Taeme 213.452.4295

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District is soliciting for award of a design and construction contract for the Replace Fire Suppression, B12 at Tucson Air National Guard Base, Tucson, AZ in accordance with the criteria contained herein and using industry standard materials and efficient practices.

THIS PROJECT IS A SMALL BUSINESS SET ASIDE. This will be a Competitive Request for Proposal (RFP), the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection process (SEE FAR 15.101-2) resulting in a firm fixed-price contract. Under this process is appropriate when best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price.

The estimated magnitude range for this project is between $5,000,000 and 10,000,000.00.

The North American Industry Classification Code (NAICS) for this procurement is 238990, All Other Specialty Trade Contractors, with a size standard of $19,000,000.00.

ALL OFFERORS/BIDDERS ARE ALSO ADVISED THAT THIS PROCUREMENT MAY BE DELAYED, CANCELLED OR REVISED AT ANY TIME DURING THE SOLICITATION, EVALUATION NEGOTIATION, AND/OR FINAL AWARD PROCESS.

10 480

X X *Section 00 73 00

X 10

0 02:00pm

September 25 2023

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

UEI NO.: TAX ID NO.:

CAGE CODE NO.:

SEE PRICING SCHEDULE

Department of the Army Los Angeles District, Corps of Engineers Tucson Resident Office 5205 East Comanche Street Building 1605 Tucson, Arizona 85707

USACE, Finance Center

ATTN: CEFCO-AO-D

5722 Integrity Drive Millington, TN 38054-5005

Replace Fire Suppression, B12

W912PL23R0029

SECTION 00 22 16 - 1

SECTION 00 22 16

SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTION TO PROPOSERS

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS,

EVALAUTION PROCEDURES AND BASIS FOR AWARD

1 OVERVIEW

1.1 ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD

1.2 SOURCE SELECTION USING LOWEST PRICE TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE (LPTA) 2

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 TECHNICAL

3.4 TABS A, B, C, D, and E - TECHNICAL FACTORS RESPONSE FOR PROPOSAL:

3.5 FACTOR 1 AND FACTOR 2, GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMITTING PAST

PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

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

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

3.8 TAB C – FACTOR 3 – TECHNICAL APPROACH

3.9 TAB D – FACTOR 4 ‐ MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS

3.10 TAB E – FACTOR 5 - SCHEDULE

4 EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

5 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

5.1 EVALUATION OF PRICE PROPOSAL (VOLUME I)

5.2 INITIAL EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (VOLUME II)

5.3 INTENT TO AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

5.4 DISCUSSION PROCESS

SECTION 00 22 16 - 2

5.5 FINAL PROPOSAL REVISIONS

5.6 DEBRIEFINGS

5.7 ESTABLISHMENT OF A COMPETITIVE RANGE (IF NECESSARY)

5.8 POSSIBLE EXCHANGES DURING THE SELECTION PROCESS:

6 DEFINITIONS:

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 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.

Responses that the Offeror understands, or will comply with the specifications, statements paraphrasing the specifications, and general or overly broad responses such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used”, will be rated unacceptable.

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.

1.2.1 PROPOSAL COMPLIANCE REVIEW

This is an initial review to ensure that all required forms and certifications are completed and that both a technical and price proposal were received.

SECTION 00 22 16 - 3

1.2.2 TECHNICAL/QUALITY EVALUATION

The Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will evaluate and rate proposals. Proposals will be evaluated against the (Request for Proposal) RFP requirements. As identified in Tables 1, 2, and 3.

1.2.3 PRICE EVALUATION

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 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

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.

Proposal clarity, organization, and cross‐referencing are mandatory. Failures to submit and 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 sine-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:

SECTION 00 22 16 - 4

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. 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 of Prime Contractor and Factor 2 Past Performance of Designer, 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 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 evaluation purposes, must be clearly marked in accordance with the instructions at FAR 52.215‐

SECTION 00 22 16 - 5

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.

3.1 VOLUME 1 ADMINISTRATIVE

Location Description

TAB A

Proposal Cover Sheet

Offerors should ensure telephone number, fax number, e-mail address, Tax ID, and UEI number are all included. The UEI number provided will be used to access Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) data. If a separate UEI 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

TAB G

Bid Bond The Offeror is required to submit a bid bond and a power of attorney, as applicable.

SECTION 00 22 16 - 6

PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

Solicitation Number: W912PL23R0029

Project Title: Replace Fire Suppression, B12 at Tucson Air National Guard Base, Tucson, AZ

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.

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). This provision, titled “Instructions to Proposers—Competitive Acquisition”. The format is as follows:

3.3 VOLUME II TECHNICAL

3.4 TABS A, B, C, D, and E - 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.

Location Factor Description

SECTION 00 22 16 - 7

TAB A Factor 1 PAST PERFORMANCE OF PRIME CONTRACTOR

TAB B Factor 2 PAST PERFORMANCE OF LEAD DESIGN FIRM

TAB C Factor 3 TECHNICAL APPROACH

TAB D Factor 4 MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS

TAB E Factor 5 SCHEDULE

3.5 FACTOR 1 AND FACTOR 2, GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMITTING

PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

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. 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

SECTION 00 22 16 - 8

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:

This Factor is an assessment of the probability that the Prime Contractor will meet the requirements of this Solicitation. To this end, the Prime Contractor shall demonstrate recent, relevant experience and acceptable quality of past performance on similar projects. Offerors may identify state and local government and private contracts 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 Submission Requirements.

3.6.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

The Offeror will submit at least 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. Each of the submitted projects must have a construction value over $5,000,000.

b. At least two of the projects must have occurred on a military installation.

c. At least one project shall be a design build, new, vertical construction.

d. At least one projects shall demonstrate experience and capability in ICD (Intelligence

Community Directive) 705of similar scale and magnitude as the subject project.

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

SECTION 00 22 16 - 9

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.

3.6.2 JOINT VENTURES:

If 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.

Offerors submitting proposals as a Joint Venture (JV) shall obtain a UEI 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 3.5.1.

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 $5M 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 2.

requirements of this Solicitation. The Government will review the projects provided by the Offeror to evaluate the recent and relevant experience of the Offeror with similar projects. In making its assessment under this Factor, the Government will consider the currency and

SECTION 00 22 16 - 10

relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data and general trends in the Contractor’s performance. 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 corporate 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.

Offerors shall be evaluated on the construction projects as outlined in Factor 1 (Past Performance).

This factor will assess the offeror’s past performance on construction projects based upon the efforts of similar scope, magnitude, similar construction projects.

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.

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

SECTION 00 22 16 - 11

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 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.

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

This Factor is an assessment of the design capability as it is an important element of this contract. The designer shall demonstrate recent, relevant experience and acceptable quality of past performance on similar projects. Offerors may identify state and local government and private contracts similar to the Government’s requirements.

3.7.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

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 $5,000,000.00 or greater each.

b. At least 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. At least two of the projects must show design experience in ICD 705 of similar scale and magnitude as the subject project.

e. At least one of the projects must be a design build.

RFP development efforts, studies, partial, schematic or concept designs are not relevant and will

SECTION 00 22 16 - 12

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 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 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 2.

SECTION 00 22 16 - 13

requirements of this Solicitation. The Government will review the projects provided by the Offeror to evaluate the recent and relevant experience of the Offeror with similar projects. In making its assessment under this Factor, the Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data and general trends in the Contractor’s performance. 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 corporate 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.

3.8 TAB C – FACTOR 3 – TECHNICAL APPROACH

Under this factor, the Offerors will be evaluated on its technical approach to execute this design-build contract for this project. Offerors will provide information on its technical approach to demonstrates its understanding of the Scope of Work. NOTE: OFFEROR SHALL SUBMIT A

PROPOSAL BASED ON SPECIFICATIONS AND DRAWINGS CONTAINED IN THIS RFP.

NO OFFERS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED WITH DEVIATIONS TO THE RFP.

SECTION 00 22 16 - 14

3.8.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Provide a concise technical approach for the project that describes how labor and resources will be coordinated and used to ensure successful completion of the project.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Design-Build approach to the Scope of Work (SOW) provided for this project. The narrative should discuss the design and construction activities that the design-build team is offering in order to demonstrate to the Government that the proposal meets or exceeds the minimum Solicitation requirements. The technical narrative must address the following areas:

a. Design-Build Approach: Narrative discusses the design after award process along with the construction activities as they apply to demonstrate the Offeror’s understanding of the design-build. Include considerations, constraints, and risks.

b. Civil/Site Design-Build approach. Provide brief narrative on sequencing of work regarding grading, foundation, fast-tracking, lay down area, material storage, utilities, exterior lights, and environmental drainage.

c. HVAC Design-Build Approach. Narrative describes systems and components proposed in terms of maintenance considerations, operability, durability, sustainability, and energy consumption.

d. Plumbing and Fire Protection Design-Build Approach: Narrative describes selected systems and components proposed in terms of maintenance considerations, operability, and durability.

e. Exterior and site improvements. Narrative provides conceptual level information and clearly defines the proposed scope and quality levels that the design-build team is offering in enough detail for the Government to understand whether or not the proposal meets or exceeds the minimum Solicitation requirements.

f. Electrical, communications and security Design-Build Approach: Narrative provides information relevant to power, lighting, telecommunications, security systems and cybersecurity measures and discusses the ICD 705 security measures being constructed.

3.8.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA/RATING SCHEME:

Factor 3 shall be evaluated and rated using the ratings shown in Table 1.

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Scheme. After evaluating the Offeror’s Technical Approach, under Factor 3, the SSEB will assign an overall factor rating to reflect the degree to which the proposal meets or does not meet the minimum requirements outlined above. This will be accomplished through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and any risks identified in the proposal. Factor 3 will receive one of the combined technical/risk ratings

SECTION 00 22 16 - 15

described in Table 1.

3.9 TAB D – FACTOR 4 ‐ MANAGEMENT EFFECTIVENESS

Under this factor, the Offerors will be evaluated on their management effectiveness by considering the demonstrating an understanding and capability of successfully managing the project to completion. The following elements will be evaluated:

a. Management Plan

b. Organizational Chart

c. Resumes

3.9.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Proposals will be evaluated as to the Offeror’s ability to satisfy all contract requirements within its Management Plan. The Government will evaluate corporate 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 education, training and experience and on specific experience on projects of similar type, scope, and complexity to the work required under this RFP.

The plan shall include an Organizational Chart outlining the entities responsible for program Execution and show clear lines of authority among team members including USACE personnel.

The plan shall describe the proposed management structure for the Offeror, describing how the design and construction process will be managed and the authorities and the delegations of authority within the Offeror’s organization.

The Government will review the key personnel provided by the Offeror to evaluate and rate the recent experience of the key personnel in similar projects. Resumes shall indicate: (1) the individual’s relevant experience in the key position and the beginning and end dates for each position. (2) Key Personnel resumes should name projects and roles that the respective personnel played on the project as well as the time in that designated role. (3) Resumes should reflect if the person was on any of the Projects submitted under Factor 1 or Factor 2 and their role in the project. These key personnel are persons directly responsible for carrying out the day-to-day operations of this project. The Offeror shall submit Key Personnel resumes (limited to one page per individual) for the following positions that would satisfy the requirements of the RFP:

a. Site Safety Health Officer

b. Field Quality Control Manager

c. Superintendent

d. Project Manager

e. Design Manager

SECTION 00 22 16 - 16

3.9.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA/RATING SCHEME:

Factor 4 shall be evaluated and using the ratings shown in Table 1.

The Government will evaluate corporate 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 education, training, and experience and on specific experience on projects of similar type, scope, and complexity to the work required under this

RFP.

Resumes will be evaluated for qualifications, relevant technical experience to this project, and any previous experience with DoD and USACE.

3.10 TAB E – FACTOR 5 - SCHEDULE

Under this factor, the Offerors will be evaluated on its schedule narrative to execute this design-build contract. Offerors will provide information on its team’s project scheduling capabilities for the design-build construction project.

3.10.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

Proposals will be evaluated as to the offeror’s ability to schedule the design and construction of the project. The proposed schedule shall include a narrative and a detailed construction schedule in Gantt chart format indicating the Offeror’s proposed design and all major construction features/activities for the project.

Please identify, as outlined in 01 10 10, 1.7.1, the Operational Test Facility Spaces as well as the Shared spaces (Main Entry Lobby, Break Room and Utility spaces identified as ‘Priority 1’ indicated in Sheet A-102) as early as possible for interim BOD. The Offeror shall show that the design portion shall be completed to allow time for government reviews.

The period of performance for the contract is 720 days. The offerors schedule must show that the project can be finished within 720 days from notice to proceed (NTP).

3.10.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA/RATING SCHEME:

Factor 5 shall be evaluated and using the ratings shown in Table 1.

The Government will evaluate the content of each offerors' schedule. The length of the schedule must match the Offeror’s proposed contract duration. The Government will evaluate the schedule to assess the understanding of the project scope.

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

SECTION 00 22 16 - 17

offeror. The schedule will be evaluated to determine whether it is, complete, reasonable, realistic, and achievable. 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.

Show the key submittals. Include events associated with coordinating…