W912WJ-16-R-0007_-_Amendment_2.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

The purpose of this amendment is to revise portions of the solicitation, provide RFI responses and incorporate additional clauses in secitons 0600, 0700 and 0800. In addition, the site visit has been rescheduled to 3/23/2016 from 1:30 - 3:00 pm (EST) and the required response date/time has changed from 24-Mar-2016 02:00 PM to 22-Apr-2016 04:30 PM.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 43

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 11-Mar-2016

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 W912WJ-16-R-0007

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

05-Feb-2016

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

10-Mar-2016

CODE

US ARMY ENGR DISTRICT, NEW ENGLAND

696 VIRGINIA ROAD

CONCORD MA 01742-2751

W912WJ 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912WJ-16-R-0007

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 24-Mar-2016 02:00 PM to 22-Apr-2016

04:30 PM.

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 2

Solicitation Revisions

Revised Sections and Paragraphs of the Solicitation are as follows:

Sections M & L

Sections M & L have been reversed so that section L (PROPOSAL SUBMISSION) precedes section M

(BASIS FOR AWARD).

Bid Schedule

0016 Operable Window Vents (Option #16) has been changed to:

0016 Operable Window Vents (Option #15)

INSTRUCTIONS AND EVALUATION

A. BASIS FOR AWARD (Section M), page 5.

First sentence has been revised as shown in bold, below:

The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the five (5) factors (Technical Experience, Management Plan, Past Performance, Small Business Participation and Price).

The rest of A. Basis for Award, remains the same.

E. EVALUATION APPROACH

2. Past Performance Factor 3, Para (a), page 9, has been revised as shown in bold, below:

Evaluation of past performance will be as set forth below and utilizing the appended forms and questionnaires.

The rest of E., Evaluation Approach, remains the same.

Final Selection

Page 13, NOTE: Each offeror is required to complete (in entirety) the Excel spreadsheet titled “Price Proposal Breakdown,” which is attached to the solicitation. Additional price information may be provided in addition to the required “Price Proposal Breakdown” is deleted in its entirety.

All requirements of Section L remain the same.

SECTION 00100 – Schedule/ Instruction to Offerors is revised as follows:

52.003-4015 MAGNITUDE OF PROJECT

The estimated cost of the project is $25,000,000.00 to $45,000,000.00.

52.236-27 SITE VISIT (CONSTRUCTION) (FEB 1995)

(a) ) The clauses at 52.236-2, Differing Site Conditions, and 52.236-3, Site Investigations and Conditions Affecting the Work, will be included in any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation. Accordingly, offerors are urged and expected to inspect the site where the work will be performed.

(b) An organized site visit has been scheduled for—

3/23/2016 from 1:00 – 3:00 pm (EST).

Participants attending the site visit must submit their name(s) and date of birth to the following POC by 03/18/2016:

POC: Stephen Jones Email: Stephen.e.jones@usace.army.mil

Individuals who fail to provide the required information by 03/18/2016 will not be admitted to the work site.

(c) Participants will meet at—

Hanscom AFB Marrett Drive Meet in front of the existing Primary School

You will need to provide a valid drivers license or other identification at the Main Gate.

(End of provision)

SECTION 00600 - REPRESENTATIONS & CERTIFICATIONS

The following have been added by reference:

52.223-4 Recovered Material Certification MAY 2008

SECTION 00700 - CONTRACT CLAUSES

The following have been added by reference:

52.223-2 Affirmative Procurement of Biobased Products Under Service and Construction Contracts

SEP 2013

52.223-17 Affirmative Procurement of EPA-Designated Items in Service and Construction Contracts

MAY 2008

mailto:Stephen.e.jones@usace.army.mil

52.226-1 Utilization Of Indian Organizations And Indian- Owned Economic Enterprises

JUN 2000

252.226-7001 Utilization of Indian Organizations and Indian- Owned Economic Enterprises, and Native Hawaiian Small Business Concerns

SEP 2004

RFI

10. For the fire protection piping is schedule 10 piping permitted or is schedule 40 only allowed?

Response: Per Specification 21 13 13, Paragraph 2.4.1.1, pipe in which threads or grooves are cut or rolled formed shall be Schedule 40 or shall be listed by Underwriters' Laboratories to have a corrosion resistance ratio (CRR) of 1.0 or greater after threads or grooves are cut or rolled formed.

13. Please confirm that the Government will sign all manifest as the owner / generator of any existing hazardous materials discovered that require abatement.

Response:

HAFB Environmental Staff (CEIE) must review and sign all RCRA HW manifests and all asbestos waste manifests and other bills of lading. Also, proper state manifest documents and notifications need to be coordinated with CEIE throughout the process.

18. Where the new foundation ties into the existing foundation, detail 7 and 7a/S-301 are referenced. The details referenced don't show the new foundation footing and wall. There is a note that says "For fdn. Wall and ftg, info. See related sects.". Should we use detail 1/S-301 for the new ftg and foundation wall along the existing foundation?

Response: Yes, Use Sections 1/S-301 and 2B/S-301.

19. Please verify shear lugs are only required at combined footings per detail 2 on S-401

Response: Provide Shear lugs per Section 1C/S-402 and1D/S-402 where required

22. Confirm that there is only one (1) hoist way opening located at the front and zero (0) to the rear.

Response: Yes, front only. Refer to Sheet A-721

23. Please provide foundation information for the new cooling tower foundations per A/S-311. Detail AA/S- 311 only notes a concrete column, but no size is given. Are spread footings needed?

Response: See Section 1/S-311 for foundation information.

The following have been modified:

BID SCHEDULE

BIDDING SCHEDULE

Refer to Section 01 22 00 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT.

Item Unit Number Description Quantity Unit Price Amount

Base Bid

0001 Construction of Primary School 1 Job Job $________

TOTAL BASE BID $_____________

Optional Bid Items

0002 Telescopic Stands (Option #01) 1 Job Job $________

0003 Vegetated Roof Assembly at Outdoor Learning Area 2H14 and above Info Center Annex (Option #02) 1 Job Job $________

0004 LED Lighting (Option #03) 1 Job Job $________

0005 Exterior Covered Walkway (Option #04) 1 Job Job $________

0006 Energy Dashboard (Option #05) 1 Job Job $________

0007 Solar Hot Water System (Option #06) 1 Job Job $________

0008 Additional Landscape Features (Option #07) 1 Job Job $________

0009 Radiant Floor Heating (Option #08) 1 Job Job $________

0010 Courtyard Snowmelt System (Option #09) 1 Job Job $________

0011 Additional Operable Partitions

- Solid (Option #10) 1 Job Job $________

0012 Additional Operable Partitions

- Glazed (Option #11) 1 Job Job $________

0013 Classroom Millwork (Option #12) 1 Job Job $________

0014 Parking Lot Expansion (Option #13) 1 Job Job $________

0015 Vegetated Roof Assembly at Outdoor Learning Areas C02, 2I14 and 2G12 (Option #14) 1 Job Job $________

0016 Operable Window Vents (Option #15) 1 Job Job $________

TOTAL AMOUNT, OPTIONAL BID ITEMS $_____________

TOTAL AMOUNT, BASE AND OPTIONAL BID ITEMS $_____________

Note 1: Bidders must bid all items. The work will be awarded as a whole to one offeror and will be evaluated and determined by the Total Estimated Amount for Line Items 0001 through 0016, including the Base Bid items and all of the Optional Items. The minimum work awarded will be the Base Bid work.

Note 2: Line Item Numbers 0002 through 0016 above are Optional Line Items that may, at the option of the Government, be exercised at any time up to 90 days after receipt by the Contractor of the Notice to Proceed. If any or all Optional Items are awarded, no additional calendar days will be added to the project duration.

Note 3: All work shall be completed within the time period specified in Section 00 80 00 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS, Subpart "COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION AND

COMPLETION OF WORK (APR 1984) FAR 52.211-10".

-- End of Bidding Schedule --

-- End of Document --

INSTRUCTIONS AND EVALUATION

A. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION (Section L)

1. Introduction. The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted in hard copy, with accompanying digital copies, as set forth below. The RFP shall provide the Government address and receipt date for proposal submittal.

The offeror’s proposal shall consist of two volumes. The Volumes are listed below. Files shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements or the specifications with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

All information submitted demonstrating an Offeror’s goal/achievements must be verifiable; therefore, provide Government or other Point Of Contact information. In addition, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) and eSRS.

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

a. Each volume shall be submitted in a separate three-ring binder. If revised proposals are requested, any pages that are changed (as a result of negotiations or proposal revisions) should be of a different color and have changed information clearly marked by a vertical line in the right margin of the page. The revised pages shall be dated. Each binder shall be clearly labeled with its Title and a copy number (e.g., copy 1 of 5). Double sided pages will count as two (2) pages.

b. Printing should be single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line.

A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are required.

Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscape.

c. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

PRINTED

VOLUME TITLE COPIES

DIGITAL

COPIES

MAXIMUM

PAGES

I – Technical (Factors 1&2), Original + 3 1 175 and Past Performance

II – Small Business Participation, Original + 3 1 Unlimited Solicitation, Certification/

Representations, Offer and Price

NOTE: All pages, including cover letters, table of contents pages, tables, illustrations and appendices (but not tabs) and past performance information submitted in support of the proposal will be considered in the page calculation. Cross-referencing is not allowed. Any pages over the maximum number of pages allowed will be removed and will not be evaluated by the Government.

3. PROPOSAL FILES

a. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and RFP number in the header and/or footer. A Table of Contents should be created and pages of the Proposal shall be formatted as follows:

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1” Gutter – 0”

From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5” Page Size, Width – 8.5” Page Size, Height – 11” NOTE: 11X17 folded pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations; however, each 11X17 page counts as two pages.

The following additional restrictions apply:

b. File Packaging. All of the proposal files shall be compressed (zipped) into one file entitled “proposal zip” using WinZip version 6.2 or later, or as separate uploads in their native format, i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc., and provided on CDs or DVDs. Zip disks are not permitted. Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. All price breakdown information to aide in the price evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format and viewable in Microsoft Excel 2007. Each disc shall be externally labeled with the volume number, date, and the offeror’s name. **Please note – Self extracting exe files are not acceptable. ** If the hard-copy proposal differs from the electronic version, the hard copy will govern.

c. Content Requirement. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal.

Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

(i) VOLUME I The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Technical Section 1 – Factor 1. The offeror’s Technical Experience. The proposal shall bulletize key points and reference supporting narrative in the Section and subsequent Sections where relevant. Each Section shall be separated with a tab. The following is provided as an example:

• KEY POINT #1

• KEY POINT #2

• KEY POINT #3

(2) Technical Section 2 – Factor 2. This factor evaluates the offeror’s Management Plan. The proposal shall bulletize key points. Each Section shall be separated with a tab. The following is provided as an example:

• KEY POINT #1

• KEY POINT #2

• KEY POINT #3

(ii) VOLUME I – Past Performance. This volume shall contain past performance information for projects submitted by the offeror under Factor 1. This volume shall not exceed 25 pages. Offerors shall submit information regarding all federal Government, non-federal government or commercial contracts submitted under Factor 1, as identified below.

(1) Section 1 – Contract Descriptions. This section shall include the following information (separated with tabs) in the following format:

(a) For Federal Government projects submitted under Factor 1, provide the contract number, contract place of performance, CAGE Code and DUNS Number;

(b) In the case of Indefinite Delivery type contracts, GSA contracts, and Blanket Purchase Agreements, include Delivery Order Numbers.

(c) Federal Government contracting activity, current address, Contracting Officer’s name, e-mail address and telephone.

(d) For non-federal government projects and commercial projects submitted under Factor 1, a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) must be completed and submitted. The offeror shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire (Appendix A) and send that and the questionnaire to the non-federal project client or commercial project client.

(2) Section 2 – Performance. Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract submitted under Factor 1, describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirement of this RFP.

(3) Section 3 – New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its officers and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information on their proposed roles should be included in the project descriptions submitted in response to the RFP requirements. If applicable, Joint Ventures shall submit the information requested in Appendix H.

(4) Section 4 – Past Performance Questionnaire. The appended Past Performance Questionnaire included in the solicitation is provided for the Offeror, to submit to the client for each non-federal government project included in Factor 1. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) should be submitted with your proposal in a sealed envelope with the client’s signature across the seal. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the appended PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQ, those projects previously submitted for other RFPs.

Offerors may also include performance recognition documents received within the last ten years such as awards, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information received through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of client representative(s), Federal Awardees’ Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

(iii) VOLUME II – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION FORM – All offerors must provide a Small Business Participation Plan form demonstrating the requirements that must be met for small business participation above. The form is at Appendix B, Small Business Participation Plan Evaluation Form.

(iv)VOLUME II - SOLICITATIONS, OFFER AND CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS

Certifications and Representations – Each offeror shall complete (fill-in and sign) the solicitation sections indicated below using the file (without modification to the file) provided with the RFP. An authorized official of the firm shall sign the SF 1442 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission.

Section A – Standard Form 1442 (SF 1442), Solicitation, Offer and Award Section G – Contract Administration Data Section K – Representations, Certification and Other Statements of Offerors

Solicitations, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations shall not be addressed separately from that submitted in VOLUME II – SOLICITATIONS, OFFER AND AW ARD DOCUMENTS AND

CERTIFICATIONS /REPRESENTATIONS

(v) VOLUME II – PRICE. The contract will be a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contract for the construction of a new primary school to replace the existing primary school on Hanscom Air Force Base, Bedford, MA. Work will begin around Spring 2016 and will be completed by 800 calendar days from the Notice to Proceed.

B. DISCUSSIONS

1. GENERAL INFORMATION. In accordance with FAR 15.306(d), discussions may be held. Should discussions take place, all offerors in the competitive range will be allowed an adequate amount of time to submit Proposal Revisions.

C. BASIS FOR AWARD (Section M)

The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the five (5) factors (Technical Experience, Management Plan, Past Performance, Small Business Participation and Price). The evaluation methodology for selecting the responsible Offeror is the Best Value Source Selection Process (see FAR 15.101-1). All evaluation factors other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than price. Factors other than price are listed in descending order of importance. All factors will be evaluated on the completeness, conciseness and relevance of information provided.

To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for the Technical Experience, Management factors and the Small Business Participation factor. Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offered.

D. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal. Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE

Technical experience shall include the construction of new school buildings, demonstrating specialty spaces such as cafeteria, classrooms, gymnasium, science laboratories, and administrative space.

Provide at least two (2), and no more than five (5) projects completed within the last ten (10) years demonstrating experience with all of the following activities. Offerors that submit single projects that individually demonstrate all of the following activities may be more highly rated:

• Construction on Active School Campus – Show experience constructing a building on an active school campus, with students, bus traffic, and operating classrooms within close proximity to the construction area;

• Providing Temporary Space – Show experience providing temporary space (temporary modular classroom facilities, office space, working areas) including the provision of all necessary utilities, access and parking which are similar to this Hanscom Air Force Base (HAFB) Primary School (PS) project Temporary Space in size and scope;

• Demolition of structures in constricted areas where the abatement of hazardous materials such as asbestos and lead was necessary prior to beginning structure demolition;

• Connecting to existing structure(s) and utilities;

• Participating in the construction of LEED-certified projects (silver or better) and in those that achieved LEED certification.

Evaluation Criteria for Factor 1:

Evaluation Criteria: Factor 1 will be evaluated and rated using an adjectival, combined technical/risk rating, in accordance with Table 1, in the Evaluation Approach Section below. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Factor 1 will be evaluated first, on whether the Offeror’s past projects are relevant and recent to the work under the RFP. Relevancy will be determined by similarity of projects completed within the past ten (10) years that are similar to this solicitation in size, scope, price, and complexity. Documentation that demonstrates completion of at least (2) projects similar in size, scope, price, and complexity to this Hanscom Primary School project and collectively address the five activities above will be considered to have met the minimum requirements of the RFP.

FACTOR 2 –MANAGEMENT PLAN

The Offeror must submit a Management Plan that effectively demonstrates the Offeror’s approach and ability to manage the work and sub-contractors, resulting in a quality project. The work has two (2) major milestones which must be achieved: the opening of the temporary classrooms (Swingspace Trailer Facility) for the CY16/17 primary school (beneficial occupancy on 01 August 2016 and physical completion on 21 August 2016) and the completion of the newly constructed Primary School for the CY18/19 school year (1 August 2018). These must be accomplished without disrupting school activities (such as parking, traffic, academic or extra-curricular). For purposes of preparing a proposal, the Offeror shall assume access to the site will be made available on/about 05 July 2016.

The Management Plan is to include a narrative of the Offeror’s approach to on- and off-site administration in executing the scope of work, including: a schedule; organizational chart(s); a quality control narrative;

and the key personnel responsible for the effort.

The management plan shall show how the temporary classrooms will be completed during the narrow timeframe available for this segment of work (from 05 July 2016 to 01 August 2016 beneficial occupancy and 21 August 2016 physical completion); and how the newly constructed primary school will be completed by 800 calendar days from the Notice to Proceed. In addition, offerors shall present their plan for managing their schedule, consistent with their graphical schedule required below. For purposes of preparing a proposal, the Offeror shall assume a Notice to Proceed of 01 June 2016.

Schedule

The Offeror shall submit a graphical representation of the schedule for construction.

The schedule shall show features of work and a critical path, and include: temporary classroom work;

superstructure construction complete; permanent power complete; building systems commissioning complete; project completion (Notice to Proceed plus 800 calendar days); quality control turnover inspection requirements; and any other Offeror-proposed milestones.

Organizational Chart(s)

The Offeror shall submit organizational chart(s) for the project which includes the key prime contractor personnel (as described in the Key Personnel section below), Project Executive(s), any additional Offeror personnel proposed, and any subcontractor disciplines (with company names, where available) proposed to be used on this project with their assigned roles. The organizational chart(s) must indicate, at a minimum, the company(s) proposed to complete the work on the temporary trailers. Offeror’s personnel are to be identified by name and position, while the sub-contractor corporate firm names and discipline are to be identified on the organizational chart(s). Personnel and firms shall be identified by name, position/discipline and physical location during the course of the work. The organizational chart(s) shall clearly indicate reporting and communication lines.

Quality Control Narrative

The Offeror shall submit a Quality Control Narrative which discusses the offeror’s approach to ensuring the quality of the work, not only on primary school but work involved with the temporary classrooms.

This Narrative is to include all quality control processes involved with the planning and completion of the work from selecting qualified sub-contractors up to acceptance and physical completion of the work.

Key Personnel

The Key Personnel are defined as: Project Manager, Site Superintendent, Site Safety and Health Officer, Contract Quality Control Manager and Commissioning Agent. The Offeror shall provide the resumes of their key personnel. Résumés, using the format in, or containing the information requested in the appended Key Personnel Qualifications Summary, shall be provided for all Key Personnel, including name, employee’s position title and description, education, and qualifying academic, design, construction, Professional Registration and Government experience.

Discipline Registration * Relevant Experience Required (years)* Project Manager -- 8 Site Superintendent -- 10 Site Safety and Health Officer OSHA 30 5 Contract Quality Control Supervisor -- 8 Commissioning Specialist -- 10

*Contractor to provide Personnel Qualifications to support qualification. Résumés, using the appended format in, or containing the respective information requested in in that Attachment, shall be provided for all Key Personnel, including name, employee’s position description, education, and qualifying academic, design, construction, Professional Registration and Government experience. To receive a rating of “Acceptable”, Key personnel must meet the relevant experience requirement above. Relevant Experience is considered to be experience on projects of the same size, scope, price and complexity.

Evaluation Criteria for Factor 2

Factor 2 will be evaluated and rated using an adjectival, combined technical/risk rating, in accordance with Table 1 in the Evaluation Approach Section, below. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

Evaluation Criteria: Evaluation will be based on the Offeror’s approach to on- and off-site administration in executing the scope of work, a schedule, organizational chart(s), a quality control narrative, and the key personnel responsible for the effort. At a minimum, an acceptable proposal will present a realistic and reasonable management plan that can meet the tight project schedule as well as meeting the minimum experience requirements for key personnel listed above.

. Proposals that present a management plan that reduces project risk of not meeting schedule or quality requirements may be more highly rated.

Past experience using Corps of Engineers Resident Management System (RMS) may receive additional consideration.

FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

Factor 3 will be evaluated first, based on whether the Offeror’s projects submitted under Factor 1 are relevant and recent to the work under the RFP, in accordance with Table 2 in the Evaluation Approach Section, below. Relevancy will be determined by similarity of projects completed within the last ten (10) years that are comparable to this solicitation in size, scope, price and complexity. Next, past performance information will be reviewed and a performance confidence assessment will be determined for the Offeror.

For those projects submitted under Factor 1 that are not federal government projects, Past performance questionnaires will also be utilized to gather past performance information. Instructions for submission of past project performance questionnaires are provided below. If an Offeror lacks a relevant record of past performance, or where the information is not available, the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on this factor.

The Offeror shall submit past performance information for the same projects that were submitted under Factor 1.

The SST will review this past performance information and determine its quality and relevancy in the performance confidence assessment using the ratings in the Performance Confidence Table 1 in the Evaluation Approach Section below.

FACTOR 4 - SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION:

All offerors (both large and small businesses) will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of small businesses in the performance of the contract (as small business prime offerors or small business subcontractors) relative to the objectives and goals established herein. The Offeror shall articulate within the Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP) (Appendix G of this solicitation) how they intend to meet the small business objectives and include information regarding the type of small business or sub-category small business and the services/supplies to be provided by each business.

Offeror’s proposals must meet the minimum mandatory Total Small Business Participation goal of 30% of total contract value (through collective small business participation from any type of small business or sub-category small business). All Offerors, Small or Large Business, shall articulate how small businesses will participate through performance as a Small Business Prime Offeror; or, for Large Businesses, ‘first tier’ small business subcontracting only. Second and third tier small business subcontractors will not be considered towards the Total Small Business Participation percentage in this factor.

The Government will evaluate the following:

a. The extent to which small business firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in proposals to include the company identifying information along with CAGE Code and DUNS Number;

b. The extent of commitment to use small business firms (and enforceable commitments will be considered more favorably than non-enforceable ones). Provide documentation regarding enforceable commitments e.g. mentor protégés, joint ventures, subcontracting or partnership letters of commitment(s), etc. to utilize any Small Business category, as defined in FAR Part 19, as subcontractors. Documentation validating business relationships described must be submitted. Enforceable commitments must be with small businesses, be specific to the subject requirement, and be signed by both parties;

c. The complexity and variety of the work small business firms are to perform (Identify and discuss complex work to be performed by small businesses). See item d in the SBPP format below;

d. The extent to which the Offeror meets or exceeds the goals. These goals are a percentage of the total contract value. The goals for this procurement are:

Small Business: {30%} of the total contract value *;

Small Disadvantaged Businesses to include 8(a): {10%} of the total contract value *;

Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB): {10%} of the total contract value*;

Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) SB: {2%} of the total contract value*;

Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB): {10%} of the total contract value*;

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB): {8%} of the total contract value*.

(Note: For example, a participation plan that reflects {10%} of the contract value for WOSB would also count towards the overall Small Business Goal; and percentages for SDVOSB also count towards VOSB).

* If the Offeror is unable to meet the full RFP participation goals for any of the socioeconomic categories (e.g. HUBZone, WOSB, etc.), the Offeror must provide an explanation as to why the goal(s) cannot be met. Not doing so may result in a weakness.

e. In addition to the information requested in Appendix B, Large Businesses only offerors shall demonstrate Past Performance in Utilizing Small Businesses. T h o s e Offerors shall submit detailed documentation that demonstrates small business achievements in three recent and relevant contracts. Submissions may include ISR (Individual Subcontracting Report) or other documentation validating offerors small business achievements from local, state or federal agencies. Offeror must indicate small business goals for each project and indicate if the goals were achieved. If small business goals were not achieved, offerors are required to provide an explanation why the goals were not achieved. All information submitted demonstrating an Offeror’s goal/achievements must be verifiable; therefore, provide Government or other Point Of Contact information. In addition, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) and eSRS.

E. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team (SST).

1. The evaluation approach for Technical Experience and Management Plan Factors is as follows:

a. Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the RFP.

b. Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

Specific technical requirements to be rated for Factors 1 and 2 were provided following each factor description above.

The Technical Factor Ratings in the Table below focus on the strengths, deficiencies, weaknesses, risks and uncertainties of the offeror's proposal. The color rating depicts how well the offeror’s proposal meets the technical requirements.

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Green

Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Yellow

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

Red

2. Past Performance Factor 3: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the project.

a. Evaluation of past performance will be as set forth below and utilizing the appended forms and questionnaires.

b. The Government will focus its inquiries on the offeror’s record of performance as it relates to all solicitation requirements, including price, schedule, performance and management of subcontractors. A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of the work can become an important consideration in the evaluation process. Absent any recent and relevant past performance history or when the performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will be assigned an “unknown confidence rating” and its proposal will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance. The Government may use data provided by the offeror in its proposal and data obtained from other sources, including data in Government files or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor and their current and past performance under Federal, State or Local government or commercial contracts for same or similar services as compared to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 236220. Data used in conducting performance risk assessments shall not extend past ten years prior to the issue date of this RFP.

c. The past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation: relevancy and performance confidence assessment.

(i) RELEVANCY: The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to assess the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. Relevancy is not separately rated; however, the following criteria will be used to establish what is relevant which shall include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming.

TABLE 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

Rating Definition

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.

(ii) QUALITY ASSESSMENT: Assess the quality of the offeror’s past performance on those recent efforts that were determined relevant by determining how well the contractor performed on the contracts. Documented results from Past Performance Questionnaires, interviews, CPARS, and other sources form the support and basis for this assessment.

(iii) PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT: The final step is for the team to arrive at a single consensus performance confidence assessment for the offeror, selecting the most appropriate rating from the chart below. This rating considers the assessed quality of the relevant/recent efforts gathered. Ensure the rationale for the conclusions reached are included.

TABLE 3 - PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

Rating Definition

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.

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 be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral) 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.

3. Small Business Participation Factor 4. All offerors (both large and small businesses) will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of small businesses in the performance of acquisition (as small business prime offerors or small business subcontractors) relative to the objectives and goals established above. The government will evaluate:

a. The extent to which small business firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in proposals to include the company identifying information along with CAGE Code and DUNS Number;

b. The extent of commitment to use small business firms (and enforceable commitments will be considered more favorably than non-enforceable ones). Provide documentation regarding enforceable commitments e.g. mentor protégés, joint ventures, subcontracting or partnership letters of commitment(s), etc. to utilize any Small Business category, as defined in FAR Part 19, as subcontractors. Documentation validating business relationships described must be submitted.

Enforceable commitments must be with small businesses, be specific to the subject requirement, and be signed by both parties;

c. The complexity and variety of the work small business firms are to perform (Identify and discuss complex work to be performed by small businesses). See item d in the SBPP format below;

d. The extent of participation of small business prime offerors and small business subcontractors in terms of the percentage of the value of the total acquisitions. The Government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror meets or exceeds the goals: Goals for this procurement are -- Small Business: {30%} of the total contract value; Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB): {10%} of the total contract value; Woman- Owned Small Business (WOSB): {10%} of the total contract value;

Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) Small Business: {2%} of the total contract value; VeteranOwned Small Business (VOSB): {10%} of the total contract value; Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB): {8%} of the total contract value.

(Note, for example, that a participation plan that reflects {10%} of the contract value forWOSB would also count towards the overall Small Business Goal; and percentages for SDVOSB also count towards VOSB).

NOTE: Prime Contractors can only get credit for first tier subcontracting. It is important to note this when it comes to submission of the price proposal and how obtaining small business credit is achieved. This information will also flow into the Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (www.esrs.gov). This is a requirement of the contract that the prime contractor has to go into this system twice a year to fill out the small business subcontract data on the project.

e. Past Performance in Utilizing Small Businesses (Large Business Only): Offeror shall submit detailed documentation that demonstrates small business achievements in three recent and relevant contracts.

Submissions may include ISR (Individual Subcontracting Report) or other documentation validating offerors small business achievements from local, state or federal agencies. Offeror must indicate small business goals for each project and indicate if the goals were achieved. If small business goals were not achieved, offerors are required to provide an explanation why the goals were not achieved. All information submitted demonstrating an Offeror’s goal/achievements must be verifiable; therefore, provide Government or other Point Of Contact information. In addition, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) and eSRS.

Table 4. Small Business Participation Factor Rating Definitions

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Green

Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Yellow

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

Red

If the proposal fails to address a material requirement of a factor, it will be identified as a deficiency. The evaluator, however, will continue to evaluate the remaining technical portions of the proposal. Specific reasons for declaring a proposal to have a defect shall be clearly identified and documented.

If critical defects are…