W912QR23R0048-0009.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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.

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

See Summary of Changes

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 2

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W912QR23R0048

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

23-Aug-2024

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offer 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 1 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 you 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 APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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.

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

Solicitation W912QR23R0048 Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Design Build and Design Bid Build Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) to support construction requirements for the Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program (ERCIP) nationwide is hereby amended as follows:

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

29 - May-2025

CODE

U. S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, LOUISVILLE

600 DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. PLACE

ROOM 821

LOUISVILLE KY 40202-2239

W912QR 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912QR23R0048-0009

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0009 SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Solicitation W912QR23R0048 Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Design Build and Design Bid Build Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) to support construction requirements for the Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program (ERCIP) nationwide is hereby amended as follows:

a) Section 00 10 00 – The Estimated MATOC Binding Rates are hereby incorporated in their entirety.

b) Section 00 10 00 – Price Breakout Schedule is hereby revised and replaced in its entirety.

c) SECTION 00 22 18 – PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL AND EVALUATION OF OFFERS FOR PHASE TWO is hereby revised and replaced in its entirety.

d) The proposal due date is not extended as a result of this amendment.

e) Offerors must acknowledge all Amendments.

f) All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

Section 00 10 00 - PRICE BREAKOUT SCHEDULE – MATOC BINDING RATES

MATOC Binding Rates

Provide the fully burdened contract rates and hours to be included on a task order basis. These rates must be utilized for all tasks awarded under the MATOC and in the sample task order.

Base Year 1:

Discipline Binding Rate Unit Estimated Units Subtotal

Project Manager hours x 3,976 = $ Superintendent hours x 7,952 = $

CQC Manager hours x 3,976 = $

Site Safety Health Officer hours x 3,976 = $

BASE YEAR 1 SUBTOTAL:

Base Year 2:

Superintendent hours x 7,952 = $

BASE YEAR 2 SUBTOTAL:

Base Year 3:

Superintendent hours x 7,952 = $

BASE YEAR 3 SUBTOTAL:

BASE YEARS TOTAL $__________

Option Year 1:

Superintendent hours x 7,952 = $

OPTION YEAR 1 SUBTOTAL:

Option Year 2:

Superintendent hours x 7,952 = $

OPTION YEAR 2 SUBTOTAL:

Option Year 3:

Project Manager hours x 3,976 = $

Superintendent hours x 7,952 = $

OPTION YEAR 3 SUBTOTAL:

Option Year 4:

Superintendent hours x 7,952 = $

OPTION YEAR 4 SUBTOTAL:

Option Year 5:

Superintendent hours x 7,952 = $

OPTION YEAR 5 SUBTOTAL:

Option Year 6:

Superintendent hours x 7,952 = $

OPTION YEAR 6 SUBTOTAL:

Option Year 7:

Superintendent hours x 7,952 = $

OPTION YEAR 7 SUBTOTAL:

OPTION YEARS TOTAL $__________

TOTAL MATOC PRICE (BASE + ALL OPTIONS) $__________

TOTAL PROPOSED PRICE (SAMPLE PROJECT) $__________

TOTAL EVALUATED PRICE

(TOTAL MATOC PRICE + TOTAL SAMPLE PROJECT PRICE) $__________

Note: In addition to the binding rates for the Disciplines listed above, the use of Service Contract Act Wage Determinations and/or Construction Wage Rate Requirements (formerly known as Davis-Bacon Act) will be determined on a task order basis, to provide the prevailing wages and fringe benefits for service employees, classes of laborers, and mechanics working on covered contracts in specific geographic areas. Any and all applicable wage determinations by county will be affixed to task orders for all respective locations.

PRICE BREAKOUT SCHEDULE – SAMPLE PROJECT

00 10 00

PRICE BREAKOUT SCHEDULE

02/13

Sample Project

Line Item No. Description Unit Amount

BASE PROPOSAL

0001. Construction. Provide 2 Gensets, Job $ minimum 1.979 MW each, including Site work, switch gear, enclosures and related work as well as SCR, CO catalyst and 67 dBA enclosure.

0002. Construction. Gas Line work by Job $24,627.00 Local Gas Company.

0003. Construction. Provide all Job $ construction work not included in any other Contract Line Item Number that is necessary to deliver a complete and usable facility in accordance with the plans and specifications.

0004. Design. All work, materials, Job $ and labor required to design the facilities required by this project, including design of option(s) below and design during construction.

Total Base Proposal $

OPTIONS

0005. Construction. Provide 1 Genset, Job $ Minimum 1.979 MW, including connecting work, SCR, CO catalyst, and 67dBa enclosure.

Total Options Proposal $

TOTAL

PROPOSAL

NOTES FOR PRICE BREAKOUT SCHEDULE

NOTE NO. 1. The sample project Price Breakout Schedule will be removed at time of contract award, as this is only for evaluation purposes.

NOTE NO. 2. The sample project is representative of the type of work that will be ordered under this MATOC.

NOTE NO. 3. Offerors must insert a price on all blank numbered items of the Schedule, including options.

NOTE NO. 4. Offerors shall utilize the price provided in the Schedule for CLIN 0002, Gas Line work by Local Gas Company.

--END OF PRICE BREAKOUT SCHEDULE--

SECTION 00 22 18

PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL AND EVALUATION OF OFFERS FOR PHASE TWO

1. Overview.

1.1 The intent of this solicitation is to award a target of twelve (12) Firm Fixed Price Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOCs). The government intends to award a target of twelve (12) contracts overall within the MATOC pool, which will include a target of eight (8) Unrestricted contracts and a target of four

(4) contracts Reserved for Small Business concerns. This MATOC is for Design-Bid-Build and Design- Build Construction, Repair and Incidental Services supporting the Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program (ERCIP) at any location in the Contiguous United States (CONUS) and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. The Government reserves the right to award more (or less) than twelve Firm Fixed Price MATOCs.

1.2 This is a two-phase procurement and the basis of award is the Best Value Trade-Off Process. Following completion of the evaluation of Phase I, up to a maximum of 18 most highly qualified offerors will be selected to participate in Phase II. The selected offerors for Phase II will be invited to submit the information described in this Section 00 22 18, Procedures for Submittal and Evaluation of Offers for Phase II, for review and evaluation by the Government. After evaluating Phase II proposals, the government will conduct a trade-off analysis to select (in accordance with the Phase II selection criteria) the best value offerors for award. To select a target of twelve (12) contracts overall for the MATOC pool, the government will first conduct a trade-off analysis among the Small Business offerors who were selected to submit Phase II proposals within the Reserve group, and will award a target of four (4) contracts to the offerors deemed to represent the best value for the Reserve. Any Small Business offerors who are not selected for award within the Reserve will be moved to the Unrestricted group for further consideration.

The government will then award a target of eight (8) contracts to the offerors deemed to represent the best value for the Unrestricted Group. Price will be evaluated in Phase II through use of a sample project. No seed task order will be awarded as a result of this solicitation. The Government reserves the rights to award to other than the lowest priced offeror and to reject some or all offers.

NOTE: The rating information from Phase I will not be considered in Phase II or in the final selection.

1.3 The sample project has an estimated price range between $10,000,000 and $25,000,000.

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. Innovative, creative, or cost-saving proposals that meet or exceed requirements are encouraged and will be rated accordingly. Proposals shall follow 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 one (1) electronic copy of their offer via the Procurement Integrated Enterprise

Environment (PIEE) Solicitation Module before the time and date specified in Block 13 of this SF 1442.

Mark your proposal submission to the attention of Alex Hamilton. NOTE: The Louisville District is in the Eastern Time Zone.

2.3 The Government is using a two-phase procurement approach for this design/build project. For Phase II, 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 electronically with a table of contents and clearly marked sections. Phase II proposal sections shall parallel the sections identified herein.

2.4 Volume I shall be submitted as one (1) electronic copy via the PIEE Solicitation Module before the proposal due date and time as identified in the solicitation. Failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate factor may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information. Any specified page limits will be strictly enforced. Information submitted which exceeds the specified limit will not be evaluated.

• Volume I – Factor I: Design

• Volume I – Factor II: Management Approach

• Volume I – Factor III: Small Business Participation Plan

2.5 Volume II shall be submitted as one (1) electronic copy via the PIEE Solicitation Module before the proposal due date and time as identified in the solicitation. Failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate tab may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information. Volume II for Phase II shall include the following information:

• Volume II – Tab A: Standard Form 1442 and Price Breakout Schedule

Volume II – Tab B: Subcontracting Plan

NOTE: Any specified page limits will be strictly enforced. Information submitted which exceeds the specified limit will not be evaluated.

3. Proposal Evaluation Process.

3.1 The evaluation process for Phase II consists of four parts: proposal compliance review, technical evaluation, price evaluation, and price/technical trade-off analysis.

3.1.1 Proposal Compliance Review: The Government will conduct an initial review to determine whether the offeror has submitted a complete and compliant proposal. This proposal compliance review will verify whether the offeror submitted the proposal data requested in Volume I and Volume II. Proposals which do not include the information required for Volume I and Volume II may be deemed ineligible for award and may not be further evaluated.

3.1.2 Technical Evaluation: The SSEB will evaluate and rate the Phase II Volume I proposals against the RFP requirements. Factors I and II (Design and Management Approach) will be rated using an adjectival system (Table 1) that applies the technical risk descriptions (Table 2). Factor III – Small Business Participation Plan will be rated using Table 3 below.

3.1.3 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.

3.1.4 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 Phase II proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the factors and sub factors below, listed in descending order of importance. All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than price. The Government reserves the right to award a contract without discussions if discussions are determined inappropriate. 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 determines them to be appropriate. 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 – Design 1st Most Important

4.3 Volume I – Factor II – Management Approach 2nd Most Important

4.4 Volume I – Factor III – Small Business Participation Plan 3rd Most Important

4.5 Volume II - Price and Subcontracting Information

Tab A Standard Form 1442 and Price Breakout Schedule Not Rated

Tab B Subcontracting Plan Acceptable / Unacceptable

4.6 Ratings

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

TABLE 1

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 2

Technical Risk Descriptions

Description

Low Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Unacceptable Proposal contains a material failure or a combination of significant weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level.

TABLE 3

Small Business Ratings

Adjectival Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

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

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the small business objectives.

4.7 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. Clarifications. 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. Volume I – Factor I: Design

5.1 Submission Requirements:

Provide a clear and concise narrative, with drawings, diagrams, and other plans needed to describe the sample project and convey the Offeror’s understanding of the design requirements. Key elements to be addressed in the design include the following:

• Electrical power generation design. Include a one-line diagram showing the interconnection of all major proposed components from the power generation sources to the point of interconnection at the Joint Army Airfield (JAAF) substation.

• How the proposed design complies with UFC 3-540-01, Engine-Driven Generator Systems for Prime and Standby Power Applications, including a discussion of specific design choices for this project to comply with UFC 3-540-01, including but not limited to, Section 2-4.7.3 Class G3 Design.

• Approach for connection of the new medium voltage systems to the existing infrastructure, and for coordination with the electric utilities involved.

• Plan to minimize the duration and operational impact of power outages throughout construction, to include coordination with installation stakeholders.

• Approach for integration and connection of existing 12,470 Volts distribution loop with new switchgear.

• Safety approach, including, but not limited to, lock out/tag out, energized equipment protocol, procedures for shutdown and re-energizing of power.

• Site plan demonstrating that the proposed design will fit within the available footprint and mapping out all utility connections and routing.

• Plan for commissioning and testing components for operability in accordance with RFP section 01 46 00.00

06.

• Project Phasing Plan including design, construction, and designation of long lead time items.

• How the proposed design complies with UFC 4-010-06, Cybersecurity of Facility-Related Control Systems, for each control system incorporated into the design.

NOTE: There is a limit of ten (10) single sided, 8.5” x 11” narrative pages, using a minimum font size of 11 and a minimum margin of one-half inch on all sides, for the Design factor. This page limit does not include drawings, diagrams, and site plans. There is a limit of five (5) single sided 11” x 17” pages for all drawings, diagrams, and site plans for the Design factor.

5.2 Evaluation Criteria:

5.2.1 Design:

The Design factor will be evaluated to assess how well it demonstrates the Offeror’s ability to safely and successfully design, construct, interconnect, and commission the necessary equipment to successfully execute the sample project. The proposal will be evaluated to determine how well the offeror addresses the key elements listed in Para. 5.1 above. Stating that the Offeror will perform an element listed in Para. 5.1 above will not demonstrate the offeror’s ability to perform that element. Proposals that demonstrate how the Offeror will perform a required task, in a way that successfully demonstrates that the Offeror has the understanding and ability to do so, will be rated more favorably.

6. Volume I – Factor II: Management Approach

6.1 Submission Requirements

6.1.1 Provide a narrative for the sample project that describes how the Offeror’s labor, resources, designers, subcontractors, and material suppliers will be managed, supervised, coordinated, and utilized to ensure successful completion of the sample project. Key elements to be addressed in the management approach narrative include the following:

• Identification of key project delivery staff, descriptions of their duties, and how this team will work together to deliver the project, both during the design and construction phases.

• A commissioning plan to include an outline of systems to be commissioned, a commissioning timeline, and documents to be provided.

• A discussion of project delivery risks relative to the sample project and the Offeror’s plan for communicating those risks, limiting their cost and schedule impacts, and safely and successfully delivering a quality project.

6.2 Evaluation Criteria:

6.2.1 The Management Approach will be evaluated based on the level of understanding of the work, and the degree of direct involvement the offeror will have in the management, oversight, control, and coordination of the work performed during design and construction of the sample project. The proposal will be evaluated to determine how well the Management Approach identifies, discusses, and mitigates risks to successful delivery of the sample project. Narratives that demonstrate a clear understanding of the project requirements and provide a thorough approach for successfully managing the sample project will be rated more favorably.

7. Volume I – Factor III: Small Business Participation Plan

7.1 Submission Requirements:

ALL OFFERORS ARE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN. The Small Business Participation Plan 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 total acquisition value in %’s for the base ordering period and for the optional ordering period; the extent of commitment to use such firms (for example, enforceable commitments, i.e., signed teaming agreements are to be considered more heavily than unsigned ones);

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

• The likelihood of achieving the goals stated in the Small Business Participation Plan, i.e., reasonable 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 subcontractors may be counted towards more than one category.

(4) List principal supplies/services (be specific) to be subcontracted to:

Name of

Company Type of

Service/Supply Large Small Non-Disadvantaged Small Disadvantaged Small Woman Owned Small HUB Zone Small Veteran Owned Small Service Disabled Veteran Owned

(5) Prior Performance Information: Provide any information substantiating the offeror’s track record of utilizing small business on past contracts.

(6) For Large and Small Businesses provide descriptive information for all small business categories. Any information concerning long-term relationships with Small Business subcontractors, such as mentor-protégé relationships, should be provided.

(7) Extent of Commitment: Provide documentation regarding enforceable commitments to utilize any small business category as defined in FAR Part 19 as subcontractors.

(8) Small Business Subcontracting Plan: Each Large Business Offeror shall provide a Small Business Subcontracting Plan that contains all of the elements required by FAR Clause 52.219-9 Alt I. This Plan shall be submitted separately from the Small Business Participation information required above, which applies to both Large and Small Businesses. The Subcontracting Plan is not a requirement for evaluation in source selection but rather a requirement for award to a Large Business. The approved Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be incorporated into any resultant contract(s).

7.2 Evaluation Criteria:

ALL OFFERORS ARE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN.

The Small Business Participation Plan will be evaluated based on, the level of small business commitment that is being demonstrated for the proposed acquisition, and the prior level of commitment to utilizing small businesses in performance of prior contracts. The Small Business Participation Plan must meet the minimum Total Small Business Participation goal of 20% of the total contract value (through collective small business participation from any type of small business or sub-category small business).

Pursuant to DFARS PGI 215.304(c)(i)(A), the following elements will be considered in evaluating an offeror’s Participation Plan:

• The extent to which such firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in plans;

• The extent of commitment to use such firms (enforceable commitments will be weighted more heavily than non-enforceable ones);

• The complexity and variety of the work such firms are to perform;

• The realism of the plans;

• Past performance of offerors in complying with the requirements of the Subcontracting Plan Goals for such firms and monetary targets for participation;

• The extent of participation of such firms in terms of the proposed subcontracted value; and

• The extent to which the offeror provides detailed explanations/documentation supporting the proposed participation percentages, or lack thereof. The Department of Defense (DOD) has established small business goals to help ensure small business receives a fair proportion of DOD awards.

8. Volume II - Price and Subcontracting Information

8.1 Tab A - Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Price Breakout Schedule.

8.1.1 Submission Requirements:

The offeror shall complete and submit Standard Form 1442. The price proposal will comprise:

1. Binding Rates for incorporation at the MATOC level (Price Breakout Schedule - MATOC Binding

Rates); and

2. Sample Project that applies the proposed Binding Rates and includes all other labor, materials, and costs to perform the sample project (Price Breakout Schedule – Sample Project).

The offeror shall complete and submit the Price Breakout Schedule - MATOC Binding Rates, located in Section 00 10 00 of this solicitation. The rates proposed for all years of the ordering period will be binding upon award. All lines of the Price Breakout Schedule – MATOC Binding Rates shall be completed. The hourly rates proposed shall be fully burdened rates that shall remain in effect for the duration of the contract. The estimated hours for each discipline are provided for price evaluation purposes only and do not constitute a guarantee that any amount of work above the minimum guarantee will be awarded under this contract.

The offeror shall complete and submit the Price Breakout Schedule – Sample Project, located in Section 00 10 00 of this solicitation, using Year 1 rates of the MATOC Binding Rates. All lines of the Price Breakout Schedule – Sample Project shall be completed. The Sample Project price proposal shall be submitted in both Excel format and pdf format and shall demonstrate that Year 1 rates of the proposed Price Breakout Schedule – MATOC Binding Rates, were utilized to price the sample project.

The Excel and pdf versions of the Sample Project price proposal shall match in all material respects.

Cost or price information beyond that required to demonstrate that the Year 1 MATOC Binding Rates were utilized to complete the Price Breakout Schedule – Sample Project shall not be submitted and will not be evaluated.

8.1.2 Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate price proposals in accordance with FAR Part 15.4 independent of technical evaluation. The Government anticipates adequate price competition to provide the basis for fair and reasonable price. Price will be evaluated for completeness, balance, fairness, and reasonableness through the use of price analysis.

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more line items is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis. Pricing will be evaluated for balance, and Offerors are cautioned to distribute costs appropriately such that no line item is overstated or understated. Offers may be rejected if it is determined that the proposal’s lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

The total evaluated price for purposes of MATOC award is the sum of the Total MATOC Price (base plus all options) and the Total Sample Project Price (base plus all options). The Government will evaluate the price reasonableness of the binding hourly rates submitted in the Price Breakout Schedule – MATOC Binding Rates, for all ten (10) years of the ordering period. The Government will evaluate the Sample Project price proposal to ensure utilization of the offeror’s proposed binding rates in the pricing of the sample project, and will evaluate the labor mix and level of effort proposed for the Binding Rate labor categories. Proposals that do not demonstrate utilization of the proposed binding rates to price the Sample Project may be rejected.

8.2 Tab B – Subcontracting Plan

8.2.1 Submission Requirements:

8.2.2

Large business offerors shall submit a Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR Clauses 52.219-8 and 52.219-9 Alt I. To be acceptable, plans must adequately address the required statutory elements and provide sufficient information to enable the Contracting Officer to answer affirmatively questions 1 through 13 of Appendix DD, Part 2, AFARS 5119.705. The offeror may use the attached sample sub-contracting plan as a starting point. Percentage goals apply to the total amount being subcontracted.

Evaluation Criteria:

Submitted information will be evaluated for acceptability in accordance with AFARS 5119.705. To be acceptable, the subcontracting plan must:

(a) Adequately address the required statutory elements.

(b) Provide sufficient information to enable the Contracting Officer to answer affirmatively questions 1 through 13 of Appendix DD (AFARS 5119.705), a copy of which is attached.

(c) Meet all of the requirements outlined in Appendix DD, Part 3, AFARS 5119.705. If discussions with offerors are necessary, those areas where the plan is deficient will be reviewed with each offeror with the goal of correcting deficiencies.

AFARS -- Appendix DD Subcontracting Plan Evaluation Guide

Part 1 - Introduction

DD-100 Purpose.

The guide provides a methodology for uniform and consistent evaluation of subcontracting plans within the Army. It is designed to facilitate compliance with the mandates of 15 U.S.C.

§ 637(d) to increase opportunities for small and small disadvantaged businesses.

DD-101 Applicability.

In accordance with requirements of FAR 19.705-4, DFARS 219.705-4 and AFARS 5119.705- 4, the contracting officer shall use this guide to review all subcontracting plans (except those for commercial items), including those submitted in response to the provisions in FAR 19.705-2(d) and (e). When the contract will require subcontracting plans, use the clauses designated by FAR 19.708(b)(1) and (2) and DFARS 219.708(b)(1)(A) in the solicitation. A copy of the completed evaluation shall be included in the contract file.

DD-102 Goals.

Contracting officers must place special emphasis on negotiating subcontracting goals that are realistic, challenging and attainable. The plan must express goals in terms of percentages of total planned subcontracting dollars and must be comparable to the dollar commitments in the small business participation plan. In accordance with FAR 19.705- 4(d), the contracting officer must review enough evidence to determine that the:

1. Offeror can meet subcontracting plan goals;

2. Offeror’s goals are consistent with their cost or pricing data or information other than cost or pricing data;

3. Offeror will honor the terms of subcontract agreements (i.e., timely payments of amounts owed, use of firms cited in proposal, etc.); and

4. Offeror’s make or buy policy or program does not conflict with the proposed subcontracting plan and is in the Government’s best interest.

5. Plan includes the contractor’s commitment to adopt and comply with its requirements and goals for small business utilization.

DD-103 Evaluation Rating.

Either the contracting officer, the small business representative, or both, shall evaluate and rate the subcontracting plan as “acceptable” or “unacceptable,” in the context of the particular procurement. For instance, in smaller dollar value contracts, or contracts for uniquely manufactured items, it might be impracticable or not cost effective for offerors to take the type of actions that might be appropriate in contracts for larger dollar values or commercial components. To receive an “Acceptable” rating, the contractor must satisfy all objectives in Part 2 and meet each statutory subcontracting plan requirement outlined in Part 3. Failure to receive a subcontracting plan rating of acceptable could jeopardize the offeror’s selection for contract award. The contracting officer must document the decisions in the contract file.

DD-104 Modification of Guide.

Pursuant to AFARS 5101.403, only senior contracting officials may approve individual deviations to this evaluation guide. This approval authority may not be further delegated.

DD-105 Use of Preaward Surveys.

For contracts administered by the Defense Contract Management Agency, obtain information needed to assess contractor compliance with subcontracting plans in current and previous contracts by requesting a preaward survey in accordance with FAR 9.106, DFARS 209.106 and DFARS PGI 209.106.

Part 2 - Rating System

DD-201 Acceptable Plans.

Objective: The subcontracting plan meets all of the requirements outlined in Part 3. The offeror has provided details that demonstrate an acceptable approach to assisting, promoting and utilizing small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, women-owned small businesses, historically underutilized business zone small businesses, veteran-owned small businesses, service disabled veteran-owned small businesses and, for Defense Research Programs, historically black colleges and universities and minority serving institutions. The offeror has demonstrated an ability to meet prior subcontracting plan goals and honor the terms of subcontract agreements.

Offeror has outlined an approach utilizing mentor protégé firms, joint venture teams, or other partners. The subcontracting goals are realistic, challenging, and attainable. Clarifications and minor rework of the submission may be required to correct slight omissions that do not prejudice other offers.

DD-202 Unacceptable Plans.

Objective: The subcontracting plan fails to meet a requirement outlined in Part 3. The offeror has not provided an acceptable approach to assisting, promoting, and utilizing small businesses. The offeror has a history of failing to honor subcontract agreements. The offeror did not discuss the establishment of mentor protégé relationships, teaming, or joint venture agreements with other firms. Ensure the proposed subcontracting goals are attainable in light of the contractor’s past performance in meeting subcontracting goals. Proposed subcontracting goals reflect less than a good faith effort. Substantial rework of the document is required to correct omissions and establish realistic, challenging, and attainable goals. Failure to receive a rating of acceptable may jeopardize offeror’s eligibility for contract award. See FAR 19.702(a)(1).

Part 3 - Subcontracting Plan Requirements

DD-301 Requirements.

If any of the following are answered “NO”, the plan is not acceptable, and the offeror must revise it before contract award. Does the plan:

1. Contain a policy statement or evidence of internal guidance to company buyers that commits to complying with the Small Business Act (Public Law 99-661, Section 1207 and Public Law 100-180)?

2. Identify separate percentage goals for utilizing small businesses (including Alaska Native Corporations (ANCs) and Indian tribes), veteran-owned small businesses (VOSB), service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses (SDVOSB), historically underutilized business zone small businesses (HUBZone), small disadvantaged businesses (SDB), women-owned small businesses (WOSB), and, for Defense Research Programs, historically black colleges and universities and minority serving institutions where applicable?

Negotiated subcontracting goals must correlate with percentages of small business utilization identified in the contractor’s small business participation plan, see FAR 15.304 and DFARS 215-304, and/or minimum targets identified in the solicitation or contract modification. FAR 19.704(a)(1)

3. Project the total dollars planned to be subcontracted and a separate statement of the total dollars planned to be subcontracted to small business (including ANCs and Indian tribes), VOSB, SDVOSB, HUBZone, SDB, and WOSB concerns? FAR 19.704(a)(2)

4. Describe the principal types of supplies and services to be subcontracted and identify the types planned for subcontracting to small business (including ANCs and Indian tribes), VOSB, SDVOSB, HUBZone, SDB and WOSB concerns?

5. Describe the method to be used to develop the subcontracting goals? FAR 19.704(a)(4)

6. Describe the method for identifying potential sources for solicitation purposes? FAR 19.704(a)(5)

7. State if the offeror included indirect costs in establishing subcontracting goals, and a description of the method used to determine the proportionate share of indirect costs to be incurred with small business, VOSB, SDVOSB, HUBZone, SDB (including ANCs and Indian tribes), and WOSB concerns? FAR 19.704(a)(6)

8. Identify the name of the employee who will administer the offeror’s subcontracting program and describe that person’s duties? FAR 19.704(a)(7)

9. Provide an approach for ensuring that small businesses, VOSB, SDVOSB, HUBZone, SDB, (including ANCs and Indian tribes) and WOSB concerns will have an equitable opportunity to compete for subcontracts?

10. Require the offeror to include the clause at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns in all subcontracts that offer further subcontracting opportunities and require all subcontractors (except small business concerns) that receive subcontracts over $650,000 ($1,500,000 for construction) to adopt a plan that complies with the requirements of the clause at FAR 52.219-9 Alt I., Small Business Subcontracting Plan?

11. Provide assurances that the offeror will:

a. Cooperate in required studies or surveys;

b. Submit periodic reports so that the Government can determine the extent of offeror’s compliance with the subcontracting plan;

c. Submit semi-annual Individual Subcontract Reports (ISRs) and/or Summary Subcontract Reports (SSR) in the Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS) ( http://www.esrs.gov ) in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 Alt I. or provide other ancillary reports as requested by the contracting officer or Army Small Business Office;

d. Ensure that its subcontractors with subcontracting plans agree to submit the ISRs and/or SSRs using the eSRS;

e. Provide its prime contract number and its DUNS number and the e-mail address of the Government or contractor employee responsible for acknowledging or rejecting the reports, to all first-tier subcontractors with subcontracting plans so they can enter this information into the eSRS when submitting their reports; and

f. Require each subcontractor with a subcontracting plan to provide the prime contract number and its own DUNS number, and the e-mail address of the Government or contractor official responsible for acknowledging or rejecting the reports, to its subcontractors with subcontracting plans? FAR 19.704(10)

12. Describe the types of records that the contractor will maintain concerning procedures adopted to comply with the requirements and goals in the plan, including establishing source lists; and a description of the offeror’s efforts to locate small business, VOSB, SDVOSB, HUBZone, SDB, and WOSB concerns and to award subcontracts to them? FAR 19.704(11)

13. Does plan, pursuant to FAR 19.704(11)(c), provide a separate goal for the basic contract and, if applicable, each option?

(End of Summary of Changes)

W912QR23R0048-0009

http://www.esrs.gov/