W912QR24R0002_CERT_FINAL_Specs-0004.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 Continuation Page)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 48

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 W912QR24R0002

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

06-Nov-2023

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

08-Dec-2023

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:

W912QR24R0002_CERT_FINAL_Specs-0004

W912QR24R0002

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:

AMENDMENT 0004

Solicitation No. W912QR24R0002 for the Design-Bid-Build Construction of the Collective Training Enlisted Barracks East at Ft. McCoy, Wisconsin is hereby amended as follows:

A. Section 00 10 00 – Solicitation, PRICE BREAKOUT SCHEDULE has been revised and replaced in its entirety:

Price Breakout Schedule CT v2 5 DEC 2023_Amendment 0004

B. Section 00 22 00 - Supplementary Instructions, EVALUATION CRITERIA has been revised and replaced in its entirety:

Section 4.6 Ratings Table 3 – Combined Technical Risk Assessment Ratings Table 4 – Small Business Ratings

Section 4.7 Definitions Section 6.0 Volume I – Factor II Management Plan, 6.1 Submission Requirements, NOTE.

Subcontracting Plan – SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (SAMPLE), CONTINUATION

SHEET FOR PARAGRAPH A, Option ‘C’ – Mow strip, sidewalks including fire lane

C. The following SPECIFICATION SECTIONS have been revised and replaced in their entirety:

01 35 26.00 06 GOVERNMENT SAFETY REQUIREMENTS

03 30 00 CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE

32 13 13 PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT FOR ROADS AND SITE

FACILITIES

D. The following SPECIFICATION SECTIONS have been added in their entirety:

NONE added for Amendment 0004

E. The following SPECIFICATION SECTIONS have been deleted in their entirety:

NONE deleted for Amendment 0004

F. The following PLAN SHEETS have been revised and replaced in their entirety:

CD101 OVERALL DEMOLITION PLAN

CD102 DEMOLITION PLAN

CD103 DEMOLITION PLAN

CS101 OVERALL SITE PLAN

CS102 SITE PLAN

CS103 SITE PLAN

CS402 JOINT PLAN

CS403 JOINT PLAN

CS404 JOINT PLAN

CU103 UTILITY PLAN

ES101 OVERALL ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN

ES102 ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN 1

ES103 ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN 2

ES104 ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN 3

ES504 ELECTRICAL SITE DETAILS

A-407 ENLARGED MECHANICAL YARD AND DETAILS

E-403 ENLARGED PLANS

E-602 PANEL SCHEDULES

E-701 ONE-LINE DIAGRAM AND FEEDER SCHEDULE

G. The following PLAN SHEETS have been added new:

NONE added for Amendment 0004

H. The following PLAN SHEETS have been DELETED:

NONE deleted for Amendment 0004

I. FAR Clause 52.225-11 (Dev), Buy American - Construction Materials Under Trade Agreements (Dec

2022) (Deviation 2020-O0019) has been deleted and replaced by FAR Clause 52.225-11, Buy American - Construction Materials Under Trade Agreements (Nov 2023).

J. The due date and time for offers has been extended from 1:00 PM (Eastern Standard Time) on 12 December 2023 to 3:00 PM (Eastern Standard Time) on 18 December 2023.

K. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 12-Dec-2023 01:00 PM to 18-Dec-2023 03:00 PM.

The following have been modified:

PRICE BREAKOUT SCHEDULE

PRICE BREAKOUT SCHEDULE

PROJECT : Collective Training Enlisted Barracks East

LOCATION : Ft McCoy – Ft, McCoy, Wisconsin

PROPOSER’S NAME :

BASE PROPOSAL

Item No. Description Unit Amount

0001 Primary Facilities JOB $ ____________

0002 Project Site Work JOB $ ____________

0003 Xcel Energy (Gas and Electric) JOB $ 98,346.00

BASE PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL $ ____________

Amendment 0004***********************************************************************

OPTION ITEMS

0004 Optional Bid Item ‘A’ – Operations and Maintenance, Army Reserve (OMAR) Funded Laundry Equipment JOB $ ____________

0005 Optional Bid Item ‘B’ – Bona Fide Need Operations and Maintenance, Army Reserve (OMAR) Funded Equipment JOB $ ____________

0006 Optional Bid Item ‘C’ – Mow strip, sidewalks including fire lane JOB $ ____________

0007 Optional Bid Item ‘D’ – Southern third of concrete parking lot JOB $ ____________

0008 Optional Bid Item ‘E’ – Middle third of concrete parking lot JOB $ ____________

0009 Optional Bid Item ‘F’ – Northern third of concrete parking lot JOB $ ____________

TOTAL BASE PROPOSAL + OPTION ITEMS $ ____________

**********************************************************************Amendment 0004

Description of Base Proposal Items

(a) Item No. 0001 “Primary Facilities – Barracks Building” includes all Base Proposal construction work required within a line five feet outside of the building, except that work covered by Items No. 0006, 0007, 0008, and 0009.

(b) Item No. 0002 “Project Site Work”, includes all Base Proposal construction work required beyond a line five feet outside the building, except that work covered by Items No., 0006, 0007, and 0008.

(c) Item No. 0003 “Xcel Energy”, include all Base Proposal construction work required to pay Xcel Energy to route and install gas and electrical infrastructure including pipeline, conduits, wiring and equipment including manholes and handholds from the utility main to the building.

Description of Option Items

(d) Item No. 0004 “Option ‘A’ – Operations, Maintenance – Army Reserve (OMAR) Funded Laundry Equipment Items” includes all work required to furnish and install “OMAR Funded Laundry Equipment Items” as noted below, which are items that are not permanently attached to the construction. OMAR laundry equipment is to be contractor provided and contractor installed (CFCI).

CFCI OMAR Funded Laundry Equipment Items Consist of:

1. Washers at Laundry Rooms 126, 226, 326, 426

2. Dryers at Laundry Rooms 126, 226, 326, 426

***NOTE: This option may be exercised within 450 calendar days from Notice to Proceed.

Amendment 0004***********************************************************************

(e) Item No. 0005 “Option ‘B’ – “Bona Fide Need” Operations, Maintenance – Army Reserve (OMAR)” Funded

Equipment Items” includes all work required to furnish and install “OMAR Funded Equipment Items” which are items that are not permanently attached to the construction. OMAR equipment is to be contractor provided and contractor installed (CFCI).

CFCI “Bona Fide Need” OMAR Funded Equipment Items consist of:

1. Deleted

2. Deleted

3. Window Blinds ‘S3’’ at all Exterior Windows as indicated by Finish Plan Interior Design Note 5 on sheet I-602

***NOTE: This option may be exercised within 450 calendar days from Notice to Proceed.

(f) Item No. 0006 “Option ‘C’ – Sidewalks, Fire lane, Mow strip Concrete” See sheet CS102 and CS103 for the option location limits of the mow strips, sidewalks including fire lanes.

1. Includes all work to install concrete pavement on the mow strips, sidewalks including the fire lane. See sheets CS102 and CS103 for locations of all these entities.

***NOTE: This option may be exercised within 120 calendar days from Notice to Proceed.

***********************************************************************Amendment 0004

(g) Item No. 0007 “Option ‘D’ – Southern Third Concrete Parking Lot” See sheets CS103 for the option location limits of the new parking lot. This is a dependent and sequential bid option that will only be awarded if Item No. 0006 “Option ‘C’” is awarded.

1. Includes all civil, grading, and pavement work to install a portion of the parking lot. Pavement limits are defined by coordinates on sheet CS103. Grading limits and work beyond the pavement are defined on sheet CG103.

2. Includes all work to install the lighting system for the constructed portion of the parking lot as seen on sheets ES101-ES104.

(h) Item No. 0008 “Option ‘E’ – Middle Third Concrete Parking Lot” See sheet CS102 and CS103 for the option location limits of the new parking lot. This is a dependent and sequential bid option that will only be awarded if Items No. 0006 “Option ‘C’” and No. 0007 “Option ‘D’” are awarded.

limits are defined by coordinates on sheets CS102 and CS103. Grading limits and work beyond the pavement are defined on sheets CG102 and CG103.

2. Includes all work to install the lighting system for the constructed portion of the parking lot as

(i) Item No. 0009 “Option ‘F’ – Northern Third Concrete Parking Lot” See sheet CS102 for the option location limits of the new parking lot. This is a dependent and sequential bid option that will only be awarded if Items No. 0006 “Option ‘C’” and No. 0007 “Option ‘D’” and No. 0008 “Option E” are awarded.

limits are defined by coordinates on sheet CS102. Grading limits and work beyond the pavement are defined on sheet CG102.

2. Includes all work to install the lighting system for the constructed portion of the parking lot as

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION CRITERIA

PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL OF OFFERS AND PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. Overview.

1.1 The intent of this solicitation is to select one contractor for the construction of a new Collective Training

Enlisted Barracks – East at Ft. McCoy, Wisconsin. The basis of award is the Best Value Trade-Off process. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein. The Contracting Officer will award a firm-fixed-price contract to the responsible offeror whom the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers.

1.2 This project is for a Design-Bid-Build, Request for Proposal (RFP), Solicitation No. W912QR24R0002, for the construction of a new Collective Training Enlisted Barracks at Fort McCoy, Wisconsin. Supporting facilities include site development, utilities and connections, lighting, paving, parking, walks, curbs and gutters, storm drainage, information systems, landscaping and signage.

2. Submittal of offers.

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

2.2 Offerors shall submit their proposals electronically in accordance with the Electronic Submittal Instructions via the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Solicitation Module to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Louisville District, not later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of the Standard Form 1442. NOTE: The Louisville District is in the Eastern Time Zone. Hard copy of proposals will not be accepted. Offerors are encouraged to save a copy of their confirmation of upload in the event there is a technical issue to show proof of upload.

2.3 Offerors are required to submit a proposal consisting of the information identified in paragraphs 2.4 and 2.5 below. The sections should parallel the submission requirements identified herein.

2.4 Volume I shall be submitted in its own separate Adobe PDF file and shall include the following information:

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

*NOTE: ALL SUBMISSIONS TO THIS PROPOSAL ANNOUNCEMENT SHALL BE SUBMITTED

ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THE PROCUREMENT INTEGRATED ENTERPRISE ENVIRONMENT

(PIEE) SOLICITATION MODULE. No paper copies, CD-ROMs or facsimile, email or DoD SAFE submissions will be accepted. Electronic Proposal Submission is required through the PIEE Solicitation Module (https://piee.eb.mil/). The PIEE Solicitation module application is the Department of Defense’s core tool for facilitating full utilization of electronic processing of data and documents, providing time-stamped submission of contractor proposals for DoD Contracting offices, and was designed to support large file sizes (1.9 GB per file, with no limit on the number of files) that would normally be too large to send via email. PIEE user accounts are required. The Solicitation’s Electronic Proposal Submission instructions provides basic instructions on navigating to the PIEE website and establishing a user account, as well as instructions on electronic submission of proposals in the PIEE Solicitation Module. When posting the Solicitation via the PIEE Solicitation Module, the solicitation is transmitted to the System for Award Management (https://sam.gov/). Interested offerors may access the links transmitted to SAM to directly retrieve the solicitation attachments from the PIEE Solicitation Module, receive web-based training, or obtain registration instructions for the website.

2.5 Volume II shall be submitted in its own separate PDF file and shall include the following information:

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

NOTE: Volume II shall be submitted electronically through the PIEE Solicitation Module. Failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate tab (factor or sub factor) may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information.

3. Proposal Evaluation Process.

3.1. A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of representatives of the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers, User/Customer, and other required personnel will evaluate the proposals. Offerors are advised that the technical evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence. Technical proposals (Volume I) will be reviewed and rated without knowledge of the price offered. The number and identities of offerors are not revealed to anyone not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other offerors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is a Best Value Trade-Off, as stated above.

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

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

3.2.2 Technical Evaluation: The SSEB will evaluate and rate the Volume I proposals against the RFP requirements. Factor I – Past Performance will be rated using Section 4.6, Tables 1 and 2. The rating will be based on overall confidence in performance, with the final confidence assessment rating based on the extent of recent, relevant past experience and the quality of the offeror’s performance. Factor II – Management Plan will be rated using Table 3. Factor III – Small Business Participation Plan will be rated using Table 4.

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

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

4. Proposal Information and Related Evaluation Factors.

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

4.2 Volume I – Factor I – Past Performance 1st

4.3 Volume I – Factor II – Management Plan 2nd

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

4.5 Volume II - Price and Pro Forma Information

Tab A Standard Form 1442 and Price Breakout Schedule Not Rated

Tab B Joint Venture Agreement Not Rated

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

Tab D Pre-Award Information Not Rated

Tab E Subcontracting Plan Not Rated

(Large Business Offerors Only)

4.6 Ratings

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

TABLE 1

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

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

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

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

TABLE 2

Performance Confidence Assessments

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

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

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

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

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

TABLE 3

Combined Technical / Risk Assessment Ratings Adjectival Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant 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 requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

TABLE 4

Small Business Ratings

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

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet 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 with appreciable merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the considerable advantage of the Government during contract performance.

3. Significant Strength. An aspect of an offeror’s proposal with appreciable merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the considerable advantage of 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 discussion 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.

9. Risk. As it pertains to source selection, is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor or subfactor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

10. Performance Confidence Assessment. An evaluation of the likelihood (or Government’s confidence) that the offeror will successfully perform the solicitation’s requirements; the evaluation is based upon past performance information.

5.0 Volume I – Factor I: Past Performance

5.1 Submission Requirements:

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

Contractor within the last seven (7) years (from the solicitation issue date) that are similar to this project in size and scope. Projects completed more than seven (7) years before the solicitation issue date may be considered for evaluation purposes but may lessen the overall relevancy rating for that project. Projects are considered substantially complete if 95% of the work has been performed such that it demonstrates the ability to successfully complete all phases of the project. An Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract may be submitted only if a single task order could be considered similar to this project. Task orders may not be combined in order for the project to be considered similar.

5.1.2 Projects considered similar in size would be a minimum of 48,000 square feet of new construction.

5.1.3 Projects considered similar in scope to this project include New Construction of Military Barracks, Dormitories, Hotels, Senior Living Facilities, and/or Office/Administrative Facilities which consist of three or more stories. Construction of Pre-Engineered Metal Buildings is NOT considered similar and does not count toward a project of similar scope or size.

5.1.4 The prime contractor must have self-performed at least fifteen (15%) percent of the direct contract labor

(including testing and layout personnel), exclusive of other general conditions or field overhead personnel, material, equipment, or subcontractors to be considered similar.

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

a) New Construction Project for USACE or NAVFAC

b) LEED Silver, Gold, or Platinum Certification on the submitted project, along with documentation supporting that the certification has been achieved.

5.1.6 The following information shall be provided for each project:

a) Project Title, Location, and Contract Number/Unique Entity ID (UEID)

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

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

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

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

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

f) Dollar value of the project

g) Customer primary point of contact (POC) and alternate POC (name, relationship to project, agency/firm affiliation, city, state, current and correct phone number, and current and correct email address)

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

NOTE: For purposes of evaluating past performance, the Prime Contractor is defined as the contractor identified in Block 14 of the Standard Form 1442. Projects performed by contractors other than the offeror, including, but not limited to, teaming partners, subcontractors, sister or parent companies, and affiliates will not be evaluated for past performance, unless those other contractors are part of a joint venture offeror as demonstrated by a signed joint venture agreement. If more than one contractor is listed in Block 14, then a signed joint venture must be submitted with the proposal and the joint venture shall be registered as such in the System for Award Management (SAM). However, each party of the Joint Venture (JV) must submit their own Unique Entity Identifier Number (formerly known as DUNS) with the JV proposal. Projects performed by other contractors than the offeror, such as teaming partners or subcontractors, will not be evaluated for past performance, unless those other contractors are part of a JV offeror as demonstrated by a signed JV agreement. If the offeror represents the combining of two or more companies as a JV for the purpose of this RFP, each company in the JV may submit project examples, but the total number of projects submitted by the JV will not exceed three (3) projects.

5.2 Evaluation Criteria:

5.2.1 The SSEB will first evaluate the relevancy of recent past performance identified in the proposal in response to paragraph 5.1 above. By using the criteria identified above, the SSEB will determine how relevant a past project is when compared to the scope, size, and magnitude of effort and complexities of the solicited project. A relevancy rating will be assigned to each submitted project using the Past Performance Relevancy Ratings in Table 1 of Section 4.6.

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

The Government also reserves the right to not contact the provided references. In addition to the information submitted by the offeror, the Government reserves the right to review any other sources of relevant information for evaluating past performance, including projects other than those submitted by the offeror. The Government reserves the right to review past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/Unique Entity Identifier numbers. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved from inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

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

6.0 Volume I – Factor II: Management Plan

6.1 Submission Requirements:

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

Describe the duties of the key project delivery staff (PM, Superintendent, CQCSM, SSHO) and how this team will work together to deliver the project. Describe how you intend to manage the quality control requirements.

Identify the Commissioning Firm and/or Specialist(s) and their qualifications, including at least the following: years of experience in commissioning, types of projects commissioned, and certifications.

Offerors are advised that any subcontractor submitted for review shall be utilized on the contract for the work required by the evaluation. Evaluation and acceptance of a subcontractor does not relieve any of the conditions required by the plans and specifications. If a subcontractor is unable to perform the work or a replacement is needed it shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer for their approval prior to any work being completed.

Describe, in a narrative format, the commissioning process and critical milestones of the commissioning process and how they relate to critical construction milestones. Describe, in narrative format, the key submittals for commissioning process. Describe, by role and qualifications, who will be in lead authority for the contractor (in-house or first tier sub) during the commissioning process.

Lay out their roles and authority over all involved subcontractors.

NOTE: There is a page limit of eight (8) single-sided, 8.5” x 11” pages, using a minimum font size of 11 and a minimum margin of one-half inch on all sides for the Management Plan factor.

6.2 Evaluation Criteria:

Management Plan narratives will be evaluated based on the level of understanding of the work and the involvement the contractor will have in the management, oversight, control, and coordination of the work performed during construction of the project. The Management Plan will be rated by the SSEB using the adjectival ratings listed in Table 3 – Combined Technical /Risk Ratings provided in Section 4.6. Narratives that demonstrate a clear understanding of the project requirements and provide a thorough approach for successfully managing the solicited project may be rated more favorably by the SSEB.

7.0 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 shall be based on the offeror’s best effort and is required to address each of the following areas individually:

The extent to which the Small Business Programs listed in FAR 19 (Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Woman-Owned Small Business, HubZone, Service-Disabled Veteran- Owned Small Business, etc.) are specifically identified in the Small Business Participation Plan;

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

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

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

The Small Business Participation Plan shall be organized as follows:

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

( ) Large ( ) Small (also check type of small business) ( ) Small Non-Disadvantaged Business ( ) Small Disadvantaged Business ( ) Woman-Owned Small Business ( ) HUBZone Small Business ( ) Veteran-Owned Small Business ( ) Service-Disabled, Veteran-Owned Small Business

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

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

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

% of Total

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

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

NOTE: The sum of the percentages of Small Non-Disadvantaged and Small Disadvantaged should equal the entries for the Total Small; however, the sum of all of the percentages need not equal 100% since the prime is not included and individual 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. II. 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 offeror’s best efforts, 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 fifteen (15%) percent of the total contract value (through collective small business participation from any type of small business or sub-category small business).

The Small Business Participation Plan will be rated using the adjectival ratings listed in Table 4 – Small Business Ratings provided in Section 4.6. 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.

8.0 Volume II - Price and Proforma 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 and Section 00 10 00, Proposal Price Breakout Schedule.

8.1.2 Evaluation Criteria:

The price will be evaluated on Base proposal plus all Options. The price will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness using a price analysis. Price will also be checked for unbalancing of line items. Offerors are cautioned to distribute costs appropriately.

8.2 Tab B – Joint Venture Agreements

8.2.1 Submission Requirements:

If more than one contractor is listed in Block 14, or the offeror listed in Block 14 is a joint venture (JV), then a signed JV agreement must be submitted with the proposal and the offeror shall be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) as a legal entity separate from the individual joint venture members. However, each member of the JV must submit its own Unique Entity Identifier (formally DUNS number) with the proposal.

Small Business offerors (e.g., 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSB) submitting a proposal as a JV or Mentor-Protégé shall submit evidence from the offeror's SBA Servicing Agency that the offeror has notified and discussed the proposed joint venture for this specific project with the appropriate SBA Representative or Business Opportunity Specialist. Joint Venture Agreements and approved 8(a) Mentor-Protégé agreements must be submitted with the proposal.

8.2.2 Evaluation Criteria:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

Joint Venture Agreements and Mentor-Protégé agreements must comply with the relevant regulations in Title 13 of the Code of Federal Regulations for an offeror to be eligible for any small business-related price preference.

8.3 Tab C – Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding and Proof of Financial Ability

8.3.1 Submission Requirements:

A. Financial Capability. Submit Proof of Financial Ability (Most recent financial statement covering assets and liabilities). Include the name, address, and telephone number of offeror's banking institution. If the offeror is a joint venture, submit this information for all joint venture members.

B. Bonding Capability. Submit information showing offeror's ability to be bonded for this project. Include the name, address, and telephone number of the offeror's bonding company.

8.3.2 Evaluation Criteria:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

See FAR Part 28 for information related to bonds.

8.4 Tab D – Pre-Award Information

8.4.1 Submission Requirements:

A. The offeror shall submit one completed copy of Section 00 45 00, Representations and

Certification.

B. The offeror shall submit the following information:

a) Number of years the firm has been in business

b) Name, address, and telephone numbers of two credit/trade references

c) A list of present commitments, including the dollar value

If the offeror is a Joint Venture, submit this information for all Joint Venture members.

8.4.2 Evaluation Criteria:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

8.5 Tab E – Subcontracting Plan

8.5.1 Submission Requirements:

Large Business offerors shall submit a Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR Clauses 52.219-8 and 52.219-9 Alt. II. 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 3, AFARS 5119.705-4. The offeror may use the attached sample Sub- Contracting Plan as a starting point. Percentage goals apply to the total amount being subcontracted.

8.5.2 Evaluation Criteria:

Submitted information will be evaluated for acceptability in accordance with AFARS 5119.705. To be acceptable, subcontracting plans 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, Part 3, AFARS 5119.705-4, a copy of which is attached.

(c) To be acceptable, subcontracting plans must 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.

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0) CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: UE ID/DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE

AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE

COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE

THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS. THE

GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS

FORM.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the Contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that Contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the Contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The Contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal rating is appropriate when a significant event occurred from which the Contractor had trouble overcoming and that impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the Contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred from which the contractor had trouble overcoming and that impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an Unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not Applicable

No information or did not apply to your contract

Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING THAT BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE…