W912QR23R0048_CertF_Specs-0011.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

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:

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 X is extended, 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.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

16-Jun-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_CertF_Specs-0011

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:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES AMDT 0011

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

AMENDMENT 0011

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) The required response date has changed from 20 June 2025 at 2:00 PM ET to 24 June 2025 at 2:00 PM ET.

b) Section 00 00 00 – PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS “ORDERING PROCEDURES” – is hereby revised and replaced in its entirety.

c) Section 00 10 00 – The Price Breakout Schedule - Estimated MATOC Binding Rates document has updated and is hereby replaced in its entirety with the MATOC Not To Exceed (NTE) Rates document.

d) Section 00 10 00 – The Price Breakout Schedule – Sample Project document is hereby revised and replaced in its entirety.

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

f) As now stated in Section 00 22 18, Paragraph 2, Submittal of Offers, the proposal submission method will be the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Solicitation Module. Accordingly, Electronic

Proposal Submission Instructions are hereby incorporated.

g) The following SPECIFICATION SECTIONS have been revised and replaced in their entirety:

01 11 00 SUMMARY OF WORK

01 46 00.00 06 TOTAL BUILDING COMMISSIONING

h) Offerors must acknowledge all Amendments and submit signed SF30s with their proposal.

i) All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

(End of Summary of Changes)

ORDERING PROCEDURES

GENERAL CONDITIONS

All Task Orders under this MATOC will be Firm Fixed Price.

The total available contract capacity under this MATOC is $2,000,000,000 with a base ordering period of three (3) years and seven (7), one-year options, for a total possible ordering period of ten (10) years.

The minimum guarantee for each awardee under this MATOC is $10,000 for the duration of the contract, including any option periods that are exercised.

Requirements for performance and payment bonds will be identified at the Task Order level and stated in each Task Order Proposal Request (TORP).

SMALL BUSINESS RESERVE

Individual task order requirements will be reviewed for technical complexity by the Government and may be set aside for the Small Business Reserve firms within the MATOC pool. In accordance with FAR 16.505 (b)(1)(i), projects which the Government determines unsuitable for competitive set-aside within the Small Business Reserve may open up to full competition within the MATOC pool as determined on a project basis. Small Business firms will be afforded a fair opportunity to be considered for all requirements.

SYNOPSIS

In accordance with FAR 5.202(a)(6), the Contracting Officer need not synopsize a contract action if it is an Order placed under Subpart 16.5.

Even if not required, the government may choose to publicize anticipated task orders under this

MATOC. Contractors are encouraged to monitor SAM.gov and other communication channels identified by the Contracting Officer for potential task order opportunities.

PUBLIC NOTICE OF AWARDS NOT PROVIDING FOR FAIR OPPORTUNITY

For orders based on an exception to fair opportunity, in accordance with FAR

16.505(b)(2)(ii)(D), the Contracting Officer must post the required public notice within 14 days after placing the order. If an urgency exception is used, the public notice must be posted within

30 days after placing the order. This posting requirement includes posting the justification approved for the exception at the Government point of entry: https://sam.gov/content/home.

Note the actions excluded from this notice requirement are

(A) ● Disclosures that would compromise national security ;

(B) ● Socioeconomic set-asides authorized by FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(F) and;

(C) ● Sole Source 8(a) orders up to applicable thresholds.

https://sam.gov/content/home

FAIR OPPORTUNITY

All MATOC Contractors will be given a fair opportunity to offer on Task Orders over the micro-purchase threshold (FAR 16.505(b)(1)) unless one of the FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i) exceptions apply.

If the order does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, the Contracting Officer need not contact each of the awardees before selecting an order awardee if the Contracting Officer has information available to ensure that each awardee is provided a fair opportunity to be considered for each order. The competition requirements in FAR Part 6 and the policies in

FAR Subpart 15.3 do not apply to the ordering process. The task order solicitation and award process should be as streamlined as possible to reduce solicitation and proposal preparation costs and time requirements for both the Government and Contractor.

When a task order solicitation TORP is issued, the Government intends to select the responsible, most advantageous offer considering price and other factors. The Government will identify the evaluation criteria in the task order solicitation. Evaluation factors may include, but are not limited to, price, technical approach, past performance, small business participation, and other factors relevant to the specific requirements of the task order. Price will always be a consideration. The relative importance, if any, of each evaluation factor will be specified in the

TORP.

All task orders under this contract will be placed using the procedures under FAR 16.505 -

Ordering. Specific requirements will be provided in the task order solicitation package.

1. When the Government has a new requirement, a solicitation will be issued. The solicitation shall include information concerning the statement of work (SOW), guide specifications, drawings, attachments, site visit information, and any other requirements for submissions (e.g., proposal requirements, price schedule, etc.). The solicitation will also include any applicable clauses required for execution of the project.

2. The solicitation will clearly identify Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) requirements, if applicable, and specify the required CMMC level. The solicitation will also identify whether the submission of proposals containing Controlled Unclassified

Information (CUI) is required and provide instructions for handling CUI in accordance with DFARS 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber

Incident Reporting.

3. The contractor’s attendance at site visits is strongly encouraged for preparation of competitive offers and to understand the total results required by the Government. While failure to attend site visits shall not be used as an excuse for omission or miscalculation in offers, attendance may be considered a positive factor in evaluation. The Contractor will not be reimbursed for attendance during negotiation, site visits, proposal preparation or other pre-Task Order award activities. The Contracting Officer reserves the right to make attendance at site visits mandatory for specific Task Orders.

4. The contractor shall respond within the number of calendar days or by the specific date stated in the solicitation by submitting a proposal to the points of contact identified in the

TORP and in accordance with requirements stated in the solicitation. Due date extensions may be granted if requested in writing and approved by the Contracting

Officer. The Government reserves the right to cancel the solicitation and pursue alternative methods to complete the work. Proposals that do not comply with the requirements outlined in the solicitation may not be evaluated. Failure to propose on a requirement may negatively affect a Contractor’s performance evaluation for the base contract.

5. Evaluation factors will vary depending on the unique requirements for each Task Order;

however, pricing will always be a consideration. The Contracting Officer, in making decisions in award of any individual Task Order, may consider additional factors such as past performance on earlier Task Orders under the MATOC, quality, timeliness, or other factors that the Contracting Officer determines to be relevant in awarding a particular

Task Order. These factors will be clearly articulated in the solicitation.

6. Depending upon the requirements of each task order, the Contractor will provide one of the following in response to the solicitation: (a) a price for each line item in the Schedule or (b) technical proposal in one package and the price proposal in a separate package as directed in the solicitation. The MATOC Not To Exceed Rates incorporated into each awarded contract will apply at the task order level to all construction labor within those labor categories. The MATOC Not To Exceed Rates shall be utilized to price each task order. Supporting documentation to demonstrate that the MATOC Not To Exceed Rates were utilized to price each task order may be requested in the TORP.

7. Task Order proposals will either be accepted as is or negotiated to the mutual agreement of both the Government and the Contractor. Whenever possible, award will be made without discussions/interchanges. If discussions/interchanges are held, MATOC Contractor(s) may be requested to provide a final proposal revision. Task Order award will be made based on the basis for award as described in the solicitation. Upon conclusion of negotiations (if required), a Task Order will be issued by the Contracting

Officer reflecting the negotiated order price and any other negotiated terms and conditions. In any instance where there is failure to reach agreement, the Government reserves the right to withdraw the project and solicit and award by other means.

8. Task Orders will be issued on DD Form 1155. Orders may be placed via mail, telephone, facsimile, or electronic commerce. The Task Order becomes binding when the

Contracting Officer signs the Order.

9. Contract actions are reported in the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) within 3 days after execution of the action. Each task order is reported as an order under the correct contract number. FPDS-NG system will propagate the NAICS code field in the task order with the NAICS code reported for the base contract. FPDS-NG is designed to accept only one NAICS code associated with a procurement action.

SOLE SOURCE

When it is necessary to negotiate with one firm on a sole-source basis, the Contractor shall provide a detailed cost proposal to establish a fair and reasonable price which shall be negotiated and incorporated into the Task Order. The justification for sole source will be documented in accordance with the FAR and supplements as applicable.

Note that because no IDIQ level rates are established for this MATOC, certified cost or pricing data may be required in the event the Government does not receive adequate price competition in response to a TORP and cannot otherwise establish a fair and reasonable price. Note also that certified cost or pricing data will be required for any Task Order modification in excess of the Truth In Negotiations Act (TINA) threshold ($2M as of the date of award of this MATOC).

PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENTS

A project labor agreement (PLAs) is defined in FAR Subpart 22.5 as a pre-hire collective bargaining agreement with one or more labor organizations that establishes the terms and conditions of employment for a specific construction project and is an agreement described in

29 U.S.C. §158(f). PLA requirements apply to federal construction projects within the United

States for which the total estimated cost of the construction contract is $35 million or more.

Though the scope of this MATOC includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, PLAs are not required in Puerto Rico. In accordance with FAR 22.503, Policy, “For indefinite delivery indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contracts, the use of a project labor agreement may be required on an order-by-order basis rather than for the entire contract.” Accordingly, PLA requirements will be identified on a project-specific basis at the task order level, to include associated PLA representation(s) and contract clause(s), as applicable.

CLAUSES INCORPORATED AT THE TASK ORDER LEVEL

While this base contract includes a comprehensive set of clauses, additional clauses or modifications to existing clauses may be applicable at the task order level based on the specific requirements of the individual task order. These additional or modified clauses will be included in the task order solicitation.

Furthermore, any clauses in this base contract that are marked "To Be Determined" (TBD) or otherwise incomplete will be fully defined and provided in the applicable task order solicitation.

Contractors are responsible for reviewing all clauses provided in the solicitation to ensure a complete understanding of the requirements of each task order.

TASK ORDER RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION

Before awarding any task order under this MATOC, the Contracting Officer will determine the prospective awardee to be responsible in accordance with FAR Subpart 9.1. This includes, but is not limited to, ensuring the contractor has the necessary financial resources, technical capabilities, and integrity to perform the work as required. An affirmative determination of responsibility is required before a task order can be awarded. The Government reserves the right to request additional information from the contractor to support the responsibility determination. Failure to provide requested information may result in the contractor being deemed non-responsible and ineligible for award of the task order.

CMMC AND CUI

Specific CMMC and CUI requirements, if any, will be detailed in each individual task order solicitation. The task order solicitation will identify the required CMMC level, if applicable, and specify the handling procedures for CUI. This may include, but is not limited to:

• CMMC Level: The task order solicitation will specify the required CMMC level, if any, for the performance of the work. Contractors must possess the specified CMMC level prior to the award of a task order requiring CMMC certification.

• CUI Handling Procedures: If the task order involves handling CUI, the solicitation will detail the specific requirements for safeguarding CUI in accordance with DFARS Clause 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, and other applicable regulations. This may include requirements for specific security controls, incident reporting procedures, and other safeguards.

Contractors are responsible for carefully reviewing the task order solicitation and ensuring they can meet all specified CMMC and/or CUI requirements prior to the award of a task order requiring CMMC certification or handling of CUI. Failure to meet these requirements may result in the proposal being deemed non-compliant and ineligible for award.

If it is anticipated that access to Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) will be necessary, the task order solicitation will clearly identify CMMC and/or CUI requirements. Certain identified documents are not suitable for public release and will be made available upon request by requesting access through SAM. Only offerors who have complied with DFARS clause 252.204- 7012 will be given access. DFARS 252.204-7012 requires all Department of Defense contractors and subcontractors to implement cybersecurity requirements in National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-171, Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Nonfederal Systems and Organizations. The contractor’s NIST assessment results must be documented in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) at https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/ prior to award of a task order requiring access to CUI. Offerors may go to the SPRS homepage for further information.

If the task order requires access to files, contractors may be required send an access request to the Points of Contact identified in the task order solicitation before receiving the full solicitation package. The contractor’s NIST assessment results must be current (within the last three years of the solicitation date) and be documented in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) prior to access approval. Furthermore, if the summary assessment score is less than 110, the Plan of Action Completion Date must show the most current expected date for when the contractor expects the remainder of the NIST requirements to be implemented. Minimum score of 88 must be acquired in SPRS for CUI access.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Contractor shall identify and mark CUI and/or proprietary and restricted data. Any data that contains CUI shall be submitted via encrypted email. If encrypted email is not available, the vendor shall submit an email request to the Government POC to send the vendor a Department of Defense (DoD) Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE) “Drop Off” link https://safe.apps.mil/. Proposals may not be submitted to the Government via the DoD Safe site; however, the Government may provide information to offerors using the site. DoD SAFE does NOT guarantee a delivery time. Please allow up to 4 hours for delivery. The Government will reject, and thus will not consider, any files containing CUI or proprietary/restricted markings that are received without proper encryption.

W912QR23R0048_CertF_Specs-0011 https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/ https://safe.apps.mil/

PROTESTING TASK ORDERS

Contractors may protest task order awards under this MATOC in accordance with DFARS

233.103 and applicable procedures. For task orders with a value exceeding $25 million, contractors may submit a protest to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). For task orders with a value between $25,000 and $25 million, contractors may submit a protest to the ombudsman identified in FAR 52.216-32 of the base contract and/or TORP. Protests must be submitted in a timely manner, as specified in the applicable regulations. All protests shall be submitted in writing and shall state the grounds for the protest, including specific facts and supporting documentation. The contracting officer will provide a written response to protests filed directly with the agency.

GOVERNMENT CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND OVERSIGHT

The Government may appoint a Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) and/or an

Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) to assist in the administration of task orders. The

Contracting Officer retains ultimate authority for all contractual matters.

• Contracting Officer's Representative (COR): A COR may be appointed by the

Contracting Officer in writing to perform specific technical or administrative functions related to task orders under this MATOC. The COR's duties and limitations of authority will be clearly defined in a written appointment letter. Contractors shall not perform work outside the scope of the task order without a properly authorized modification issued by the Contracting Officer.

• Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO): An ACO may be assigned to perform administrative functions related to the contract. The ACO's responsibilities will be defined in a written appointment letter.

The appointment of a COR and/or ACO does not change the authority of the Contracting

Officer. All contractual modifications, changes to the scope of work, or other contractual actions must be authorized in writing by the Contracting Officer. Contractors shall communicate directly with the Contracting Officer on all contractual matters, unless otherwise directed in writing by the Contracting Officer.

ON-RAMPING AND OFF-RAMPING

The government intends to utilize On-Ramp and Off-Ramp procedures to maintain a sufficient pool of contract awardees. The total number of Contractors within the MATOC pool may fluctuate due to any number of reasons including, but not limited to, competition levels on task orders, mergers & acquisitions; and the Government’s exercise of the on and off-ramp process. It is in the Government’s best interest that there remain an adequate number of Contractors eligible to compete for task orders to meet the Government’s requirements.

On-Ramping is defined as awarding additional contracts under this MATOC during the term of the contract. Contractors are notified that on-ramping may occur at any time during the life of the MATOC, and that the determination to utilize on-ramping procedures rests solely with the Government. The Government will determine when and how often on-ramping will be used throughout the life of the contract.

Contractors will be notified through SAM.gov when on-ramping is to take place.

On-Ramping will be subject to the following conditions:

1. A notice will be published in SAM.gov in accordance with FAR Part 5, Publicizing Contract Actions.

2. The determination of the use of seed or sample projects will be made at the time of acquisition planning for on-ramping. The project(s) utilized will be representative of future projects that will be advertised under the MATOC.

3. The solicitation will identify the total anticipated number of new contracts the Government intends to award.

4. Any Offeror that meets the eligibility requirements set forth in the original solicitation may submit a proposal in response to the solicitation.

5. The award decision will be based on substantially the same evaluation factors/sub-factors as the original solicitation.

6. The minimum guarantee will be $10,000 for each new contract award.

7. The terms and conditions of any resulting awards will be materially identical to the original contracts.

8. The period of performance for any new awards will be coterminous with the existing term for all other Contractors.

9. Immediately upon on-ramping, the Contractor is eligible to submit a proposal in response to any task order solicitation and receive task order awards with the same rights and obligations as any other Contractor.

Off-Ramping is defined as the process of removing a Contractor from the MATOC pool. The Government may Off-Ramp Contractors through any of the following methods:

1. Permitting the Contractor’s contract term to expire by not exercising an option.

Reasons that the Government may elect to allow a contractor’s term to expire include, but are not limited to, unsatisfactory performance on task orders under the MATOC or failure to regularly submit proposals in response to Task Order Requests for Proposal issued under the MATOC.

2. Debarment, Suspension, or Ineligibility as defined in FAR Subpart 9.4.

3. Termination for Default as defined in FAR Part 49.

4. Failure to submit a proposal in response to seventy-five percent (75%) or more

Task Order Requests for Proposal for which the Contractor is eligible.

SCOPE

This work consists of construction (design-build or design-bid-build), repair, and items incidental to the completion of construction and repair projects. The scope includes both the construction of new, as well as the repair, replacement, and modification of existing, electrical and water infrastructure at Department of Defense facilities within the Contiguous United States (CONUS) and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

Electrical infrastructure projects include components such as fossil fuel electrical power generation and cogeneration; solar photovoltaic (PV) power generation; power distribution, switching, and protective devices; and microgrid communications and control systems. Water infrastructure projects include components such as water distribution lines, water purification systems, water storage tanks, and smart water grids. Work may also include activities incidental to the items above such as minor building construction, building/facilities demolition and debris removal, utility installation/replacement, equipment upgrades, landscaping, geotechnical work, security systems, testing, commissioning, and abatement of materials of environmental concern (e.g. materials containing lead, asbestos, PCBs or HTRW).

Though the primary purpose of this MATOC is to fulfill Army energy resilience needs, the energy resilience projects of others within the Department of Defense may be considered based on available contract capacity and available contracting resources within USACE, Louisville District. All requirements accepted into the MATOC will be executed by the Louisville District.

Section 00 10 00 - PRICE BREAKOUT SCHEDULE – MATOC NOT TO EXCEED RATES

MATOC Not To Exceed 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 project.

Base Year 1:

Construction Discipline Not To Exceed

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:

Construction Discipline Not To Exceed

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:

Rate

Unit Estimated Units Subtotal

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 SAMPLE PROJECT PRICE (BASE + ALL OPTIONS) $__________

TOTAL EVALUATED PRICE

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

Note: In addition to the Not To Exceed rates for the Construction 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 $

OPTION

0005. Construction. Provide 1 Genset, Job $

Minimum 1.979 MW, including connecting work, SCR, CO catalyst, and 67dBa enclosure.

Total Option 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—

USE OF MATOC NOT TO EXCEED RATES IN SAMPLE

PROJECT PRICE

Provide the MATOC Not To Exceed (NTE)rates included in job prices above for all base tasks and the option task.

Construction

Discipline

Not To Exceed

Rate Unit 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 = $

TOTAL $__________

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: Ratings 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.

1.4 The sample project has a period of performance of 1,095 days from Notice to Proceed.

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 procurement. For Phase

II, offerors are required to submit a proposal consisting of the information 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 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. 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. Provided the proposal complies with applicable page limits, the drawings, diagrams, and site plans are not subject to the 11 point font size minimum or the margin minimum.

5.2

5.2.1

Evaluation Criteria:

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 the systems to be commissioned, a commissioning timeline, a list with descriptions of the documents to be provided, and a plan for commissioning and testing components for operability in accordance with RFP section 01 46 00.00 06.

• 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.

6.1.2 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 Management Approach factor. Provided the proposal complies with applicable page limits, there is no limit to the number of attachments included in the Management Approach narrative.

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.

NOTE: There is no page limit for the Small Business Participation Plan factor.

The Small Business Participation Plan is required to address each of the following…