W912QR22R0020-0003.pdf

W912QR22R0020-0003

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE (SF 30)

The following have been added by full text:

AMDT 0003 SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Solicitation: W912QR22R0020 Project: Repair Airfield Lighting Circuits / Repair Taxiway G / Repair Overruns / Repair Runway and

Shoulders / Repair Taxiway C Location: Grissom Air Reserve Base, Indiana

GENERAL INFORMATION:

1. The Site Visit roster is PROVIDED with this amendment.

SECTION 00 21 00 - Instructions:

2. The ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL SUBMISSION Instructions have been REPLACED in their entirety.

3. The PROJNET INSTRUCTIONS have been REVISED.

SECTION 00 22 00 – Supplementary Instructions:

4. SECTION 00 22 12 – Procedures for Submittal of Offers and Proposal Evaluation Criteria has been

REVISED:

a. Paragraph 5.1.1 has been REVISED.

SECTION 00 73 00 – Supplementary Conditions:

5. The applicable Wage Rates have been REVISED:

a. General Decision IN20220006 (Heavy and Highway), Modification 00, has been replaced by

General Decision IN20220006 (Heavy and Highway), Modification 01 effective 04 February 2022. This wage decision is applicable and must be adhered to.

END SUMMARY OF CHANGES.

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

AMDT 0003**************************************************************************

Proposals: All proposal submissions to this contract opportunity shall be submitted electronically through the Solicitation Module of the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) suite at https://piee.eb.mil/.

Proposals submitted by mail or hand carried will not be evaluated. Proposals sent through proprietary or third-party File Transfer Protocol (FTP) sites or DoD SAFE will not be retrieved. Facsimile submission is not authorized.

It is the responsibility of the Offeror to confirm timely receipt of proposals. All proposals received after the exact time specified for receipt shall be treated as late submissions and will not be considered except under facts and circumstances allowed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). For instructions on how to post an offer, please refer to the Vendor Offer Instructions, provided within this section, and/or review the Posting Offer demo available at: https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf.

In order to submit an offer in the PIEE Solicitation Module, a vendor account must be created with the Proposal Manager Role. It is recommended that the user's e-mail address in PIEE match the e-mail address on file in sam.gov. Instructions for how to create a vendor account are included within this section, and are also available at:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/xhtml/wbt/portal/overview/vendorRegister.xhtml

File Size Limitations: Offerors are advised to review the Vendor Offer Instructions for uploading files. PIEE supports file sizes up to 1.9GB in size. If needed, Offerors are advised to break the files down into smaller sections in order to upload it to the system. In such cases, please divide the sections as logically as possible and be sure to clearly name the files as specified below.

File Naming Convention: To ensure your submission is received and processed appropriately, it is important that interested parties CAREFULLY ensure their electronic files adhere to the following naming convention:

W912QR22R0020_FIRMNAME_VOLUME I

W912QR22R0020_FIRMNAME_VOLUME II

Each file name shall begin with the solicitation number followed by the firm’s name and a brief file description.

Please see examples above.

NOTE: Do NOT enter Privacy Act Data (Personal Identification Information (PII)) in the File Description.)

File Organization: Although hard copies are not accepted, each file shall be clearly indexed, and logically assembled. Font size shall be 11 or larger. Pages shall be letter sized (larger page sizes (such as 11x17 fold-outs, etc.) will be counted as two pages. Proposals shall be in a narrative format, organized and titled so that each section of the proposal follows the order and format of the factors. Information presented should be organized so as to pertain to only the evaluation factor in the section that the information is presented. Information pertaining to more than one evaluation factor should be repeated in the each section for each factor.

Upload Completion & Deadline: Interested parties shall submit responses no later than the date specified on the solicitation document. Do not assume that electronic submission will occur instantaneously. Large files may take more time to upload. Offerors should time their upload effort with prudence by not waiting until the last few minutes—this will allow for unexpected delays in the transmittal process. Offerors are encouraged to keep a copy of the upload confirmation for their record. Submissions after the deadline will be considered late and will be processed in accordance with FAR 15.208.

Electronic Files: Files shall be in their native format (i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc.), or if in pdf format, shall be in searchable text. Text and graphics portfolios of the electronic copies shall be in a format readable by Microsoft Office or Adobe applications. Data submitted in a spreadsheet format shall be readable by MS Excel (all cells and formulas should be unlocked). Offerors are responsible for ensuring electronic copies are virus-free and shall run an anti-virus scan before submission.

Any information, presented in a proposal that the Offeror wants safeguarded from disclosure to other parties must be identified and labeled in accordance with the requirements of Provision “FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition (Jan 2017),” subparagraph (e), which is found in 00 21 00 Instructions of the RFP. The Government will endeavor to honor the restrictions against release requested by Offerors, to the extent permitted under United States law and regulations.

Searchable – for the purpose of this solicitation searchable is defined as a pdf document allowing for the “Find” function to be used. (The shortcut command is Ctrl+F)

Posting_Offer Page 1 of 10

Built with Tanida Demo Builder www.demo-builder.com

Intro

Welcome to Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE). This demonstration contains audio narrative. Please adjust your volume accordingly.

Scene 1

After reading the Privacy Statement click the Accept button to continue.

http://www.demo-builder.com/

Posting_Offer Page 2 of 10

Scene 2

This is an overview of posting an offer for a solicitation to the Solicitation Portal. Proposal Manager logs in to PIEE to access the Solicitation application. The Proposal Manager must be logged in to submit an offer.

Scene 5

Select the Solicitation icon.

Posting_Offer Page 3 of 10

Scene 6

The Home screen of the Solicitation Portal displays. The Proposal Manager selects the Search link to find the Solicitation they intend to post an offer against.

Scene 7

Proposal Manager enters search criteria to find the solicitation they want to submit an offer against and then selects Search.

The Solicitation Search Criteria are as follows:

• Solicitation Number - Enter the complete solicitation number

• Open Date - Enter a start and end date to find solicitations that were posted to the site within the range

• Response Date - Enter a start and end date to find solicitations where the Response Due Date is within the range

• Product or Service Code - Enter the Product or Service codes as a comma-delimited list, or use the lookup feature to populate one or more codes

• NAICS - Enter the NAICS codes as a comma-delimited list, or use the lookup feature to populate one or more codes

• Set Aside Code - Select a set Aside code to find solicitations that are set aside

• Place of Performance Zip Code - Enter the Zip Code of the Place of Performance

• Contracting Office DoDAAC - Enter a DoDAAC to find Solicitations that were issued by that Contracting Office

• Status - Select a status of Open, Closed or Both

Posting_Offer Page 4 of 10

Scene 9

The search results display. Select the Solicitation Number link to open the solicitation.

Scene 10

The solicitation displays. The information is view only.

Posting_Offer Page 5 of 10

Scene 11

Scroll down to see the Solicitation Details section.

Scene 12

Scroll down to see the Contract Information and Attachments. The Attachments can be viewed by selecting the File link. Scroll back up to the top of the screen.

Posting_Offer Page 6 of 10

Scene 13

Proposal Manager selects the Offer tab and the Offer submit screen displays. The Solicitation Number is pre-populated and not editable.

Scene 14

Proposal Manager selects the applicable CAGE Code for which they are submitting the offer. The list is prefiltered based on the CAGEs in the Proposal Manager’s profile.

Posting_Offer Page 7 of 10

Scene 15

Proposal Manager uploads the attachments that comprise their offer by selecting the Add Attachment link.

Scene 16

The Add Attachment screen displays, enter the following information to upload an attachment to the Offer:

• Attachment Name - Enter the title of attachment. Cannot contain characters < > & ” or ‘.

Posting_Offer Page 8 of 10

Scene 17

• Upload Attachment - Browse and select the attachment from the local hard drive or server and then select Upload button.

Attachment file name cannot contain spaces. Each attachment can be up to 1.9 GB in size.

Scene 18

Select Save Attachment button when complete.

Posting_Offer Page 9 of 10

Scene 19

The attachment entry is saved and displayed on the offer. To add another attachment, select the Add Attachment link and repeat the previous steps.

When the data entry is complete, select the Post Offer button to save the offer in the Portal.

Scene 27

The system displays a message recording the date and time the offer is posted. It is suggested to print this screen and retain it as part of the offer record.

Posting_Offer Page 10 of 10 www.demo-builder.com

Scene 28

Prior to the Solicitation closing date, the Proposal Manager can withdraw the offer by selecting the Withdraw Offer button. This removes the offer completely from the Portal.

End

This concludes our demonstration.

Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment Vendor Registration Guide

A vendor portal for solicitations was introduced as an enterprise-level service for the Department of Defense (DoD) within the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) platform. This capability allows DoD to have a more automated and secure process for capturing solicitations and their attachments and responses from industry.

There are two vendor roles (Proposal Manager, Proposal View Only) for the PIEE Solicitation Module. The Proposal Manager role is required to submit an offer to a solicitation posted in the PIEE Solicitation Module.

In this guide, you will find step by step by step instructions for new users to self-register for a PIEE user account and existing users to add additional roles. Refer to the Roles and Actions/Functions Matrix, in the help section, to assist with determining which PIEE Solicitation Module role you will need to add.

Guide Contents Step by Step Instructions

New User

Existing User

Help

Getting Started

Account Support

Technical Support

Roles and Actions/Functions Matrix

Step by Step Instructions New User Follow the steps to self-register for a PIEE user account if your company already has an Account Administrator.

1. Click on Register (Top Right) from the PIEE Landing Page https://wawf.eb.mil/

2. Select Vendor

3. Enter a User ID, Password, and CAPTCHA text. Then, select Next.

You cannot change your User ID once you register.

https://wawf.eb.mil/

4. Create your security questions. Then, select Next.

Security Answers must be unique.

5. Complete your User Profile. Then, select Next.

Required fields are marked with an asterisk (*).

6. Complete your Supervisor and Company Information. Then, select Next.

7. Complete Roles. Then, select Next.

A. Step 1. Select SOL - Solicitation from the dropdown.

B. Step 2. Select Proposal Manager (or Proposal View Only).

C. Step 3. Click Add Roles.

D. Step 4. Enter your CAGE Code in the Location Code field.

8. Enter a justification for access and upload any necessary attachments. Then, select Next.

9. Verify the information on the Registration Summary page is correct. Then, select Next.

10. Review the Statement of Accountability Agreement. Then, select Signature.

The ‘Password Confirmation’ modal window will appear.

Enter password created in Step 3.

Click Submit Registration.

11. You will see a success message that your registration was successful. You will receive a confirmation email shortly. Once your account has been activated by an Account Administrator, you can login into PIEE.

Existing User Follow the steps to add additional roles (Proposal Manager, Proposal View Only) to your PIEE user account.

12. After logging into PIEE, click My Account (Top Left)

13. Select Add Additional Roles.

14. Verify all profile information within your account is up-to-date. Then, select Next.

15. Follow Steps 7 - 10 above.

16. You will receive a confirmation email that the new role(s) were activated by your Account Administrator.

Help Getting Started If your company is new to PIEE and has no Account Administrator, the link below provides the general steps in getting started as a vendor to use the PIEE Solicitation Module and other PIEE applications:

https://wawf.eb.mil/xhtml/unauth/web/homepage/vendorGettingStartedHelp.xhtml

Account Support Your company’s Account Administrator can help you view or edit profile information, reset a password or certificate.

You can enter your five-character CAGE Code to find your company’s Account Administrator at the link below:

https://wawf.eb.mil/xhtml/unauth/lookup/gamLookup.xhtml

Technical Support If you are experiencing technical problems with PIEE and your company’s Account Administrator cannot resolve, please contact the DISA DECC Ogden Electronic Business Service Desk or visit the link below and click "Ogden Help Desk" to submit a ticket.

https://wawf.eb.mil/xhtml/unauth/web/homepage/vendorCustomerSupport.xhtml

Email: disa.global.servicedesk.mbx.eb-ticket-requests@mail.mil Phone: 866-618-5988, 801-605-7095

Roles and Actions/Functions Matrix The Roles and Actions Matrix provides a depiction of the available actions for each vendor role.

Action Role(s) Submit Offers Proposal Manager View Offers Proposal Manager

Proposal View Only Posts Offer Revision Proposal Manager

The Roles and Functions Matrix provides a depiction of the Menu Items available for each vendor role.

Menu Item Role(s) Create Unsolicited Proposal Proposal Manager Search Proposal Manager

Proposal View Only Lookup Product/Service Codes Proposal Manager

Proposal View Only Lookup NAICS Proposal Manager

Proposal View Only

*******************************************************************************************AMDT 0003

W912QR22R0020-0003

https://wawf.eb.mil/xhtml/unauth/web/homepage/vendorGettingStartedHelp.xhtml https://wawf.eb.mil/xhtml/unauth/lookup/gamLookup.xhtml https://wawf.eb.mil/xhtml/unauth/web/homepage/vendorCustomerSupport.xhtml mailto:disa.global.servicedesk.mbx.eb-ticket-requests@mail.mil tel:866-618-5988 tel:801-605-7095

PROJNET INSTRUCTIONS

OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

Technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures or bonds are to be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at http://www.ProjNet.org/ProjNet. As noted below, offerors shall not submit their proposals via ProjNet.

Offerors shall submit their proposals in accordance with the provisions stated in the solicitation.

To submit and review bid inquiry items, bidders will need to be a current registered user or self-register into system.

The Solicitation Number is: W912QR22R0020

The Bidder Inquiry Key is: B5VMGG-8RZPVN

Specific Instructions for ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

1. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

2. Identify the Agency. This should be marked as USACE.

3. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

4. Email. Enter the email address you would like to use for communication.

5. Select Continue. A page will then open stating a user account was not found and will ask you to create one using the provided form.

6. Enter your First Name, Last Name, Company, City, State, Phone, Email, Secret Question, Secret Answer, and Time Zone. Make sure to remember your Secret Question and Answer as they will be used from this point on to access the ProjNet system.

7. Select Add User. Once this is completed you are now registered within ProjNet and are currently logged into the system.

Specific Instructions for Future ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

1. For future access to ProjNet, you will not be emailed any type of password. You will utilize your Secret Question and Secret Answer to log in.

2. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

3. Identify the Agency. This should be marked as USACE.

4. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

5. Email. Enter the email address you used to register previously in ProjNet.

6. Select Continue. A page will then open asking you to enter the answer to your Secret Question.

7. Enter your Secret Answer and click Login. Once this is completed you are now logged into the system.

From this page you may view all bidder inquiries or add an inquiry.

Bidders will receive an acknowledgement of their question via email, followed by an answer to their question after it has been processed by our technical team.

Offerors are requested to review the specification in its entirety and to review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry.

The call center operates weekdays from 8AM to 5PM U.S. Central Time Zone (Chicago). The telephone number for the Call Center is 800-428-HELP.

Information concerning the status of the evaluation and/or award will NOT be available after receipt of bids/proposals.

NOTES:

1. Offerors shall not submit their proposals via ProjNet, but in accordance with the provisions stated in the solicitation. Any questions regarding acceptable means of submitting offers shall be made directly to the Contract Specialist identified in the solicitation.

2. Government responses to technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures or bonds that are submitted to ProjNet in accordance with the procedures above are not binding on the Government unless an amendment is issued on Standard Form 30. In the case of any conflicts, the solicitation governs. Any changes or revisions to the solicitation will be made by formal amendment. Government responses will be limited to: (a) Notice that an amendment will be issued; (b) Reference to an existing requirement contained in the solicitation; or (c) Notice that a response is not necessary.

AMDT 0003***************************************************************************

3. The ability to enter technical inquiries and questions relating to proposal procedures or bonds will be disabled five (5) business days prior to the closing date stated in the solicitation. No Government responses will be entered into the ProjNet system within two (2) business days prior to the closing date stated in the solicitation.

***************************************************************************AMDT 0003

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

SECTION 00 22 12

Section 00 22 12

PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL OF OFFERS AND PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. Overview.

1.1 The intent of this solicitation is to select one contractor for the Design Bid Build - Repair (Replace)

Airfield Lighting Circuits/ Repair Taxiway G / Repair Overruns/ Repair Runway and Shoulders/ Repair Taxiway C. The basis of award is the Best Value Trade-Off process. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein. The Contracting Officer will award a firm-fixed-price contract to the responsible offeror whom the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers.

1.2 This project is for the repair of Airfield Lighting Circuits/ Repair Taxiway G / Repair Overruns/ Repair

Runway and Shoulders/ Repair Taxiway C. The project will involve approximately 3,290,000 square feet of mill and overlay work, and the approximate total full depth replacement is 471,000 square feet of Portland Cement Concrete (PCC). The proposed project includes:

Repairing throats at Taxiway C to full depth to include conducting a repair of the north and south Taxiway C throats by removing all layers of pavement at full depth to subgrade and replace with

PCC.

Repairing Taxiway G sections to include removing the Asphalt over Portland cement Concrete (APC) at full depth to subgrade and replacing with PCC.

Repairing the full length of Runway 12,501ft using mill and overlay and full depth PCC methods as designed by variable milling of surface and overlay with asphalt concrete (AC) and repairing 1,200LF to full depth with PCC.

Repairing shoulders for the entire length of the runway (12,501ft) by variable milling of surface and overlaying with asphalt concrete.

Repairing the asphalt concrete paved overruns at the 23 and 05 ends of the runway by milling the surface and overlaying with asphalt concrete.

Repairing by replacement of airfield lighting circuits o (1) the complete approach system for runway 05 o (2) the threshold light bar at the end of runway 23 o (3) feeder cables from home runs at both 23 and 05 ends o (4) Taxiway G edge lighting o (5) airfield guidance sign system.

1.3 The target ceiling for contract award is described below based on the funds made available for this project.

The Government cannot guarantee that additional funds will be available for award. Offerors are under no obligation to approach these ceilings.

Description CLINs Combined Target Ceiling

CTGB222011 Repair Runway

$25,500,000

CTGB222009 Repair Taxiway C

0008B

$4,620,000

CTGB222010 Repair Taxiway G 0008A

$12,500,000

CTGB222012 Repair Overruns

$1,200,000

CTGB152012A Repair (Replace) Airfield Lighting - Phase A

$2,710,000

CTGB152012B Repair (Replace) Airfield Lighting - Phase B

$10,614,000

2. Submittal of offers.

2.1 Offerors submitting proposals for this project should limit submissions to data essential for evaluation of proposals so that a minimum of time and monies will have been expended in preparing information required herein. However, in order to be effectively and equitably evaluated, the proposals must include information sufficiently detailed to clearly describe the offeror's capability for successfully completing the solicited project. Requirements stated in this Request for Proposal (RFP) are minimums. Proposals should follow in the order of sequence set forth in the RFP. Information provided out of sequence may not be evaluated and may result in the offeror’s disqualification from award.

2.2 Offerors shall submit their proposals electronically in accordance with the Electronic Submittal Instruction via DoD Safe to the US Army Corps of Engineers, 600 Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Place, Room 821, Louisville, KY 40202-2267 no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

Mark your proposal submission to the attention of Morgan K. Strong, Morgan.K.Strong@usace.army.mil.

NOTE: The Louisville District is in the Eastern Time Zone. Hard copy proposals will not be accepted.

Offerors are encouraged to save a copy of their confirmation of upload in the event there is a technical issue to show proof of upload.

2.3 Offerors are required to submit a proposal consisting of the information identified in paragraphs 2.4 and 2.5 below. All proposal materials shall be submitted with a table of contents and tabbed section dividers. The sections should parallel the submission requirements identified herein.

2.4 Volume I shall be submitted and include the following information:

Volume I – Factor I: Past Performance Volume I – Factor II: Schedule Narrative Volume I – Factor III: Management Plan Volume I – Factor IV: Small Business Participation Plan

*NOTE: The complete Volume I shall be submitted in Electronically via DoD Safe. Failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate tab (factor) may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information. Any specified page limits will be strictly adhered to and enforced. Information submitted that exceeds the specified limit(s) will not be evaluated.

2.5 Volume II shall be submitted as a separate file from Volume I and shall include the following information:

Volume II – Tab A: Standard Form 1442 and Price Breakout Schedule Volume II – Tab B: Joint Venture Agreements Volume II – Tab C: Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding and Proof of Financial Ability Volume II – Tab D: Pre-Award Information Volume II – Tab E: Subcontracting Plan (Large Businesses)

NOTE: Volume II shall be submitted in Electronically via DoD Safe. Failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate tab (factor) may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information.

3. Proposal Evaluation Process.

3.1. A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of representatives of the Corps of Engineers, User/Customer, and other required personnel will evaluate the proposals. Offerors are advised that the technical evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence. Technical proposals (Volume I) will be reviewed and rated without knowledge of the price offered. The number and identities of offerors are not revealed to anyone not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other offerors.

Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is a Best Value Trade-Off, as stated above.

3.2 The evaluation process essentially consists of four parts: proposal compliance review and responsibility review, technical evaluation, price evaluation, and price/technical trade-off analysis.

3.2.1 Proposal Compliance/Responsibility Review: This is an initial review to ensure that all required forms and certifications are complete, that both a technical and price proposal were received, and that the offeror is financially capable of sustaining performance under the contract and is able to obtain the required level of performance and payment bonds from an acceptable surety.

3.2.2 Technical Evaluation: The SSEB will evaluate and rate the Volume I proposals against the RFP requirements. Factor I – Past Performance will be rated using Tables 1 and 2 below. The rating will be based on overall confidence in performance, with the final confidence assessment rating based on the extent of recent, relevant past experience and the quality of the offeror’s performance. Factors II and III – Schedule Narrative and Management Plan will be rated using Table 3 below. Factor IV – Small Business Participation Plan will be rated using Table 4 below.

3.2.3 Price Evaluation: The SSEB and Contracting Officer/SSA will evaluate price proposals independent of the technical evaluation. The SSEB will not have access to price information until completion of the technical evaluation.

3.2.4 Price/Technical Trade-off Analysis: After all above evaluations are complete, the Contracting Officer/SSA will compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of technical proposals and compare prices. The Source Selection Authority (SSA) will then consider all factors to select the proposal offering the best value to the Government.

4. Proposal Information and Related Evaluation Factors.

4.1 Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the factors below, listed in relative order of importance. All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined are considered approximately equal to price. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

4.2 Volume I – Factor I – Past Performance 1st

4.3 Volume I – Factor II – Schedule Narrative 2nd

4.4 Volume I – Factor III – Management Plan 3rd

4.6 Volume I – Factor IV – Small Business Participation Plan 4th

4.6 Volume II - Price and Pro Forma Information

Tab A Standard Form 1442 and Price Breakout Schedule Not Rated

Tab B Joint Venture Agreement Not Rated

Tab C Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding and Not Rated Proof of Financial Ability

Tab D Pre-Award Information Not Rated

Tab E Subcontracting Plan Acceptable / Unacceptable

4.7 Ratings

Evaluators will apply the l rating for the definition that most closely matches the evaluation.

TABLE 1

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Description Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

TABLE 2

Performance Confidence Assessments

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

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

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

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

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

TABLE 3

Technical / Risk Assessment Ratings

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

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

Acceptable

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

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

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

TABLE 4

Small Business Ratings

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the small business objectives.

4.8 Definitions

1. 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.

2. Strength. An aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

3. Significant Strength. An aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has appreciable merit or appreciably exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

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

FAR 15.001.

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

6. Uncertainty. Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission, or mistake).

7. Clarification. Limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. See FAR 15.306(a)(1).

8. Adverse Past Performance. Past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation. Adverse past performance that must be addressed with Offerors includes unfavorable comments received from sources such as those received from respondents from past performance questionnaires or interviews that have not been finalized within a formal rating system.

5.0 Volume I – Factor I: Past Performance

5.1 Submission Requirements:

5.1.1 Provide descriptions of up to three (3) projects substantially complete or completed by the Prime

Contractor within the last five (5) years (from the solicitation issue date) that are similar to this project in size and scope. Projects completed more than five (5) years before the solicitation issue date may be considered for evaluation purposes but may lessen the overall relevancy rating for that project. Projects are considered substantially complete if enough work has been performed such that it demonstrates the ability to successfully complete all phases of the project. An Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract may be submitted only if a single task order could be considered similar to this project. Task orders may not be combined in order for the project to be considered similar.

AMDT 0003**********************************************************************************

Due to the type of work associated with this project, the Government anticipates the use of key-subcontractors. As a result, if the Prime Contractor (offeror identified in Block 14 of the SF1442) intends to subcontract airfield lighting work and/or airfield paving work, those key-subcontractors must be identified in the proposal for Past Performance. The submission requirements (paragraphs 5.1.1 – 5.1.6) and evaluation criteria (paragraphs 5.2.1 – 5.2.3) utilized for the prime contractor will also be utilized by the SSEB for evaluation of these key-subcontractors (see Note 1 below).

NOTE 1: The projects, a maximum of three (3), submitted for the airfield paving subcontractor (if work will be subcontracted) will be evaluated for size and scope similarity in accordance with paragraphs 5.1.2.1 and 5.1.3 below. The projects, a maximum of three (3), submitted for the airfield lighting subcontractor (if work will be subcontracted) will be evaluated for size and scope similarity in accordance with paragraphs 5.1.2.2 and 5.1.3 below.

Any key-subcontractors identified in the proposal must be used on the project. No substitutions will be accepted, unless otherwise agreed to by the Contracting Officer.

**********************************************************************************AMDT 0003

5.1.2 Projects considered similar in size will conform to the following for paving and lighting criteria:

5.1.2.1 In order to be considered similar in size, paving construction must include mill and overlay of a minimum of 1,645,000 square feet and approximate total full depth replacement of a minimum of 235,000 square feet of PCC.

5.1.2.2 In order to be considered similar in size, airfield lighting construction must repair or replace at least

150 light fixtures and 75,000 LF of cabling.

5.1.3 Projects considered similar in scope to this project include repair, renovation, or construction projects of airfields, interstate highways, or other road projects. Only airfield lighting projects will be considered for the airfield lighting component.

5.1.3.1 In order to be considered similar in scope, paving construction must include paving work involving milling of asphalt, full depth demolition, soil preparation, placement of asphalt pavement, and placement of concrete pavement at least 16-inches thick.

5.1.3.2 In order to be considered similar in scope, the airfield lighting construction must include repair or replacement of light fixtures and cable.

5.1.4 Additional consideration may be given for projects that contain the following features:

a) Paving or airfield lighting work completed for the US Army Corps of Engineers or Department of Defense

b) Airfield paving work

c) Past performance where the contractor has self-performed at least 15 percent of the direct contract labor (including testing and layout personnel), exclusive of other general conditions or field overhead personnel, material, equipment, or subcontractors to be considered similar.

d) PCC paving work performed with slip-form methods meeting the thickness criteria in 5.1.3.1

e) Demonstration of an established, working relationship between the prime contractor and identified key subcontractors on prior new construction and/or replacement of paving and lighting work.

5.1.5 The following information shall be provided for each project:

a) Project Title, Location, and Contract Number/Unique Identifier

b) Current percentage of construction complete and the date it was or will be complete

a. For projects that are not yet complete, provide description of work remaining to be completed.

c) Scope of the project, to include purpose/use of facility

d) Size of the project, differentiate square footage of new construction versus renovation if the project includes both

e) Type and percentage of work that was self-performed

5.1.6 For this factor, also include any ratings, letters, awards, etc. that support past performance on these projects. Any of this information that is submitted shall clearly identify to which of the submitted projects it pertains. A sample Past Performance Questionnaire is attached for your convenience. If used, the Past Performance Questionnaire must be submitted by the offeror with the proposal submission and not sent directly to the agency from the reference. For each project, the offeror may provide information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and the offeror’s respective corrective action.

NOTE: For purposes of evaluating past performance, the Prime Contractor is defined as the contractor identified in Block 14 of the Standard Form 1442. Projects performed by contractors other than the offeror, including, but not limited to, teaming partners, subcontractors, sister or parent companies, and affiliates will not be evaluated for past performance (except as indicated within Section 5 of this document), unless those other contractors are part of a joint venture offeror as demonstrated by a signed joint venture agreement. If more than one contractor is listed in Block 14, then a signed joint venture must be submitted with the proposal and the joint venture shall be registered as such in the System for Award Management (SAM).

However, each party of the Joint Venture (JV) must submit their own Unique Entity Identifier Number (formerly known as DUNS) with the JV proposal. Projects performed by other contractors than the offeror, such as teaming partners or subcontractors, will not be evaluated for past performance, unless those other contractors are part of a JV offeror as demonstrated by a signed JV agreement. If the offeror represents the combining of two or more companies as a JV for the purpose of this RFP, each company in the JV may submit project examples, but the total submitted by the JV will not exceed three (3).

5.2 Evaluation Criteria:

5.2.1 The SSEB will first evaluate the relevancy of recent past performance identified in the proposal in response to paragraph 5.1 above. By using the criteria identified above, the SSEB will determine how relevant a past project is when compared to the scope, size, and magnitude of effort and complexities of the solicited project. A relevancy rating will be assigned to each submitted project using the Past Performance Relevancy Ratings table above.

5.2.2 The SSEB will next review how well the offeror performed on those projects. The Government reserves the right to check any or all cited references to verify supplied information and to assess owner satisfaction.

The Government also reserves the right to not contact the provided references. In addition to the information submitted by the offeror, the Government reserves the right to review any other sources of relevant information for evaluating past performance, including projects other than those submitted by the offeror. The Government will review past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/Unique Entity Identifier numbers.

The Government reserves the right to consider all other sources of past performance information. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved from inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

5.2.3 The SSEB will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the offeror’s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate this information into the performance confidence assessment. The SSEB will assign a final, overall Performance Confidence rating, using the ratings in the Performance Confidence Assessment table above, based on the SSEB’s assessment of (1) the degree of the offeror’s recent, relevant experience, and (2) how well the offeror performed that experience.

6.0 Volume I – Factor II: Schedule Narrative

6.1 Submission Requirements:

6.1.1 Based on the project budget and scope, provide a schedule narrative describing the construction sequence/process for successful completion of the project (Construction, pavement testing, and Close-Out) within the duration shown in FAR 52.211-10. At a minimum, the Schedule Narrative shall address the timing and process(es) necessary to complete the key activities indicated below:

Pre-Construction Submittals and Government Review Airfield Pavement Mix Design Long Lead Items SWPPP Activities Key Permits Construction Activities During Airfield Shutdown Commissioning Activities and Critical Submittals of electrical systems Project Closeout Planning and Coordination (including Red Zone Meeting) As-Builts

6.1.2 Offerors are to provide a schedule that indicates significant effort on all contract line items including options prior to September 30, 2023. Significant work includes physical work performed as well as transmission of any submittals or purchase of materials specific to the contract line item.

6.1.3 Additionally, offerors are to provide a simple bar chart that shows the key activities indicated above.

NOTE: There is a page limit of four (4) single sided, 8.5” x 11” pages, using a minimum font size of 11 and a minimum margin of one-half inch on all sides, for the narrative portion of this factor. There is a page limit of three (3) single sided, 11” x 17” pages, using a minimum font size of 11 and a minimum margin of one-half inch on all sides, for the bar chart portion of this factor.

6.2. Evaluation Criteria:

6.2.1 The narrative will be evaluated based on the understanding of events identified in paragraph 6.1.1 above and the offeror’s capability to complete the schedule within the contract duration. Narratives that demonstrate a clear understanding of the schedule impacts of the key activities and provide a thorough approach for successfully completing the solicited project within the contract duration may be rated more favorably by the SSEB. Schedules that provide shorter airfield shutdown duration may be rated more favorably by the SSEB. Any proposed shorter durations must be supported with the appropriate rationale/logic to show the proposed shorter duration is realistically achievable, without relying on shortening Government required review periods.

6.2.2 The bar chart will be evaluated based on the offeror’s understanding of the appropriate sequencing and durations of the identified key activities.

NOTE: The SSEB will evaluate the offeror’s schedule using calendar days, not dates. The Government reserves the right to accept or decline a proposed shorter duration as part of the contract award. Should the Government accept the proposed shorter duration, the contract completion stated in 52.211-10 will be replaced with the offeror’s proposed completion duration.

7.0 Volume I – Factor III: Management Plan

7.1 Submission Requirements:

Provide a management plan narrative for the project that describes how your labor, resources, designers, subcontractors, and material suppliers will be managed, supervised, coordinated, and used to ensure successful completion of the project. Additionally, the Management Plan shall include the following information:

Identify significant areas of risk and provide your plan for mitigating risk during contract performance. Offerors are encouraged to discuss the following general risk categories: material shortages, extended lead times, labor availability, production delays, unforeseen conditions, construction quality control.

Describe your process for managing, coordinating, and tracking changes that arise during construction.

Provide an organizational chart for this project showing home office support, on-site management, and the responsible chain of command. JV offerors must show the respective areas of responsibility for each partner. Clearly delineate on-site from off-site personnel on the organizational chart.

NOTE: There is a page limit of ten (10) single sided, 8.5” x 11” pages, using a minimum font size of 11 and a minimum margin of one-half inch on all sides for the Management Plan factor.

7.1.2 Evaluation Criteria:

Management Plan narratives will be evaluated based on the level of understanding of the work and the involvement the contractor will have in the management, oversight, control, and coordination of the work performed during construction of the project. Narratives that demonstrate a clear understanding of the project requirements and provide a thorough approach for successfully managing the solicited project may be rated more favorably by the SSEB.

The offeror’s organizational chart will be evaluated based on the clarity, adequacy, capabilities, and strengths for successfully managing the solicited project.

8.0 Volume I – Factor IV: Small Business Participation Plan

8.1 Submission Requirements

ALL OFFERORS ARE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN. The Small Business Participation Plan shall be based on the offeror’s best effort and is required to address each of the following areas individually:

The extent to which the small business programs listed in FAR 19 (small business, small disadvantaged business, woman-owned small business, HubZone, service disabled veteran owned small business, etc.) are specifically identified in the Small Business Participation Plan;

The extent of participation of such firms in terms of the value of the total acquisition in %’s for the base year and for each individual option year; the extent of commitment to use such firms (for example, enforceable commitments, i.e., teaming agreements signed, are to be considered more heavily than non-enforceable ones);

The complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform on this acquisition;

The practicality of the Small Business Participation Plan, i.e., aggressive goals.

The Small Business Participation Plan shall be organized as follows:

(1) Prime Contractor type of business (check all that apply):

( ) Large ( ) Small (also check type of small business) ( ) Small Non-Disadvantaged Business

( ) Small Disadvantaged Business ( ) Woman-Owned Small Business ( ) HUBZone Small Business ( ) Veteran Owned Small Business ( ) Service Disabled, Veteran Owned Small Business

(2) Percentage of your participation as a prime contractor: __________________ %

NOTE: Small Business primes’ self-performance counts as Small Business Participation, and small business primes may achieve small business participation goals through their own performance/participation as a prime and/or through subcontracting to other small businesses.

(3) Percentage of total contract value of subcontracts planned for:

% of Total

Contract Value Large % Total Small % Small Non-Disadvantaged % Small Disadvantaged % Small Woman Owned % Small HUB Zone % Small Veteran Owned % Small Service Disabled Veteran Owned %

Each percentage above shall be accompanied by detailed supporting documentation regarding individual commitments.

NOTE: The sum of the percentages of Small Non-Disadvantaged and Small Disadvantaged should equal the entries for the Total Small; however, the sum of all of the percentages need not equal 100% since the prime is not included and individual…