Amendment 0001 Attachment- Section 00 22 16- Procedures for Submittal and Evaluation of Offers for Phase One.pdf
PDF 4 MB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W912QR26RA035
About this file
This document is Section 00 22 16, outlining procedures for submittal and evaluation of offers for Phase One of a two-phase Design-Build procurement for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville District.
The project involves design and construction services to repair a failing 31,658 square foot Area Maintenance Support Activity/Equipment Concentration Site (AMSA/ECS) vehicle maintenance facility at Arden Hills Army Reserve Center in Arden Hills, Minnesota. The scope includes repairs to HVAC, electrical, fire alarm and suppression systems, ceilings, windows, doors, floor coverings, and interior finishes, plus retrofit installation of a new 10T crane with 20-foot hook height and exterior facade repairs. All hazardous materials will be properly disposed of per federal guidelines. The project will extend the facility's economic life by 25 years. This procurement follows Revolutionary FAR Overhaul (RFO) Subpart 36.101-2 (Phase One) and RFO Part 15 (Phase Two). Phase One proposals will be evaluated to select five of the most highly qualified offerors to advance to Phase Two, where pricing will be submitted and a Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) contract awarded based on best value trade-off analysis. Award is contingent on fund availability; no award will occur until funding is available.
Phase One submissions must include Volume I (Past Performance for Prime Contractor and A/E Designer of Record, and Technical Approach for Design-Build) and Volume II (Standard Form 1442, Joint Venture Agreements if applicable, Evidence of Bonding and Financial Ability, and Pre-Award Information). All proposals must be submitted electronically through the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) by the deadline specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442. Evaluation will assess Past Performance (weighted approximately equally between Prime and A/E DOR) using relevancy and confidence ratings, and Technical Approach using a combined technical/risk rating scale (Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, Unacceptable). Site visits will be held for the five selected Phase One offerors before Phase Two submissions. Phase One does not involve pricing submission, and rating information from Phase One will not be considered in Phase II evaluation or final selection.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Solicitation Amendment W912QR26RA0350001 SF 30.pdf | ||
| W912QR26RA035_Plans-0000.pdf | ||
| W912QR26RA035_Specs-0000.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
6. Deficiency. Deficiency is any part of an offer that does not conform to a material requirement of a RFP. A material requirement is one that affects price, quantity, quality, or delivery, or that the RFP requires to be met at the time of proposal submission. See RFO 15.001.
7. Strength. An aspect of an offeror's proposal with merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the advantage of the Government during contract performance.
8. 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.
9. Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See
RFO 15.001.
10. Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See RFO 15.001.
11. 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).
12. Clarifications. Limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without negotiations is contemplated. See RFO 15.202.
5. Volume I - Factor I: Past Performance
5 .1 Submission Requirements:
5 .1.1 Prime Contractor:
Provide descriptions of up to three (3) projects substantially complete or completed by the Prime Contractor within the last five (5) years (from the solicitation issue date) that are similar to this project in size and scope. Projects completed more than five (5) years before the solicitation issue date may be considered for evaluation purposes but may lessen the overall relevancy rating for that project. Projects are considered substantially complete if enough work has been performed such that it demonstrates the ability to successfully complete all phases of the project. If commissioning is not finalized, provide its current status. 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.
NOTE 1: Projects that include exclusively new construction will NOT be considered similar in size or scope to the solicited project.
5 .1.2 Projects considered similar in size would be complete building renovation projects that include a minimum of 15,000 square feet of renovated building. If submitting projects that include both new construction and renovation, clearly delineate (in square feet) the renovation versus new construction portion of the project and percentage (%) associated with renovation and new construction.
5.1.3 Projects considered similar in scope to this project include major renovation of building(s) of: Area
Page6
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .