W912WJ20R0001_Solicitation.pdf

NOTICE TO OFFERORS: ALL REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION (RFIs) SHALL BE ADDRESSED VIA EMAIL TO ELIZABETH.K.GLASGOW@USACE.ARMY.MIL The Government requests RFI submission to be no later than 16 June 2020.

Contractors are requested to review requirements and instructions for Tw o-Phase Design Build Selection in response to this RFP and submit responses to Phase 1 as stated.

NOTE TO BIDDERS: Please pay special attention to Sections:

Section 00100 (Instructions to Off erors);

Section 00600 (Representations & Certif ications) and Contract Clauses 52.204-7 (System for Aw ard Management) and 252.204-7004 Alt A (System for Aw ard Management).

All Offerors must complete the annual representations and certif ications electronically via the System for Aw ard Management (SAM) w ebsite at https://w w w .sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/ or by telephone at 1-866-606-8220. Please ensure your f irm is registered in the SAM Database.

NAICS Code: 236220 Size Standard: $39.5 Million

This solicitation is unrestricted.

ELIZABETH K GLASGOW 978-318-8671

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

30-Apr-2020

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______15 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________548 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________Section 00800

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________0 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________07 Jul 2020 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time of fers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______90 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

U S ARMY ENGR DISTRICT, NEW ENGLAND

696 VIRGINIA RD

CONCORD MA 01742-2751

W912WJ

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

02:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

978-318-8207FAX:TEL: 9783188084 TEL: FAX:

W912WJ20R0001 100

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

W912WJ20R0001

Section 00010 - Solicitation Contract Form

BIDDING SCHEDULE

BIDDING SCHEDULE

Refer to Section 01 22 00 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT.

Item Unit

No. Description Quantity Unit Price Amount

Base Bid Items

0001 Design Vandenburg Gate Complex 1 Job Job $

0002 Construct Vandenburg Gate Complex 1 Job Job $

TOTAL AMOUNT BASE BID ITEMS $

Optional Bid Items

0003 Traffic Check House Third Lane 1 Job Job $

0004 Traffic Check House Canopy Extension Over Third Lane

Job

0005 Traffic Check House ID Total Two (2)

Check Booth

0006 Asphalt Bike Lane 1 Job Job $

0007 Emergency Generator 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 bidder. Offers will be evaluated and the low bidder determined by the Total Estimated Amount for Line Items 0001 through 0007, 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 0003 through 0007 above are Optional Line Items that may, at the option of the Government, be exercised at any time up to receipt by the Contractor of the Notice to Proceed. If one or more of the 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.

Section 00100 - Bidding Schedule/Instructions to Bidders

NOTICE TO OFFERORS: THIS IS A UNRESTRICTED SOLICITATION.

This solicitation is a two phase Design-Build solicitation. Currently, this solicitation is for Phase 1 proposals only.

Phase 1 submissions will be reviewed and a maximum of five of the most highly qualified proposals will be invited to submit Phase 2 proposals. Bid bonds are not required to be submitted until Phase 2 submissions.

****PLEASE NOTE: All offerors must be registered in SAM at the time of submission in accordance with FAR 52.204-7.****

A SIGNED SF 1442 AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF ANY SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS SHALL BE

SUBMITTED WITH PHASE I PROPOSALS. THESE ITEMS WILL NOT COUNT TOWARDS THE PAGE

COUNT LIMITATION.

SUMMARY OF WORK

The existing main entrance gate to Hanscom Air Force Base (AFB), located on the west side of the installation, operates as the installation’s primary entrance/access point for military personnel, commercial contractors and other base visitors. The existing entrance is not in compliance with current Anti-Terrorism (AT) requirements and experiences significant congestion due to high traffic volumes. As a result, Hanscom AFB requires the construction of a new access control facility, known as the Vandenberg Gate Complex, to bring the main gate entrance up to current AT standards and to improve overall traffic flow into the installation.

This project will be designed as permanent construction in accordance with UFC 1-200-01, General Building Requirements, UFC 1-200-02, High Performance & Sustainable Building Requirements and UFC 4-010- 01Minimum Antiterrorism Standards for Buildings. The Vandenberg Gate Complex shall meet the current Anti- Terrorism/Force Protection standards IAW UFC 4-022-01 Entry Control Security Engineering, UFC 4-010-02 DoD Minimum Anti-terrorism Standoff Distances for Buildings, and UFC 4-022-02 Selection and Application of Vehicle Barriers.

INSTRUCTIONS AND EVALUATION

A. Basis for Award

Evaluation of proposals will be made using a two-phase, best value trade-off process in accordance with FAR Part

36.3 and Part 15.101. Award of the proposed contract will be based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal which is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government with appropriate consideration given to the evaluation factors established for each phase. The Government intends to award one, firm-fixed price (FFP) Design Build (D/B) contract as a result of this procurement effort.

B. Evaluation Factors

Phase I will consist of the following three (3) non-Price, technical evaluation factors:

Factor 1 – Technical Experience, Factor 2 - Management Approach, and Factor 3 - Past Performance.

The Phase I evaluation factors are presented in descending order of importance.

NOTE: Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in their proposal after submitting it in response to Phase 1. Up to five (5) of the most highly-qualified Offerors who submit a proposal in Phase 1 will be invited to submit proposals for Phase 2, where they will submit a technical and price proposal.

The specific evaluation criteria (adjectival ratings) for all non-Price factors are presented in subsequent sections of this Solicitation. To be considered for advancement to Phase II, offerors must receive an adjectival rating of no less than “Acceptable” for each of the non-price technical factors and “Satisfactory” or “Neutral” on Past Performance must be achieved.

Following evaluation of the responsive Phase I submittals, up to five (5) of the most highly-qualified Offerors will be invited to submit proposals for Phase II, where they will be requested to submit their technical, small business participation plan, and price proposal for the Vandenberg Gate Complex project.

Phase II will consist of the following two (2) technical evaluation factors and price:

Factor 1 - Technical Approach Factor 2 – Small Business Participation Plan Factor 3 - Price.

The Phase II evaluation factors are presented in descending order of importance. All evaluation factors other than Price, when combined, are significantly more important than Price.

During evaluations of each Phase II proposal, the Government will assign an adjectival rating for each factor with a written narrative of the evaluation findings. The specific evaluation criteria (adjectival ratings) for all non-Price factors are presented in subsequent sections of this Solicitation. To receive consideration for award, ratings of no less than “Acceptable” on the technical factors.

The Government intends to make one (1) contract award to the Offeror whose proposal is determined to be most advantageous to the Government based on the best-value integrated assessment of the evaluation factors.

C. Evaluation Approach

1. Overall Approach

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team (SST). The overarching evaluation approach for all factors is as follows:

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 solicitation. 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 solicitation.

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.

For submission requirements designated as “shall” or “must,” failure to provide the requested information will be considered a deficiency and the specified factor will be rated “unacceptable”, and the Offer will be considered un-awardable unless revised. For submission requirements designated as “should,” Offerors who demonstrate their ability to meet the requirement may be considered more favorably. Offerors are cautioned that award may be made without discussions, and Offerors may not have the opportunity to submit revised proposals.

Note: Offerors are cautioned that award may be made without discussions, and Offerors may not have the opportunity to submit revised proposals.

2. Phase I Evaluation

The non-Price technical factors of Experience, Management Approach and Past Performance will be evaluated during Phase I. “Marginal” and “Unacceptable” ratings for non-price technical factors could indicate a lack of understanding concerning mission requirement, and may result in the entire proposal being eliminated from competition. To be considered for award, the Offeror must achieve an adjectival rating of “Acceptable” (or greater), for each non-Price, technical factor and “Satisfactory” or “Neutral” for the past performance factor. The government will evaluate the qualifications of proposals based on the following:

Factor 1 – Technical Experience. This evaluation factor is comprised of three components:

Demonstrates State of Massachusetts Department of Transportation (Mass DOT) roadway experience; and Demonstrates Design-Build experience related to Access Control Points (or Entry Control Points) with multiple buildings/structures for Department of Defense Military installations, designed and constructed in accordance with UFC and UFGS criteria.

o The Offeror's Access Control Point project(s) should demonstrate experience designing and/or installing Active Vehicle Barriers (AVB) (K-4, K-8, K-12 or M30, M40, M50 rated type) and associated safety and control system. Responsive active vehicle barrier projects may include wedge, tine/post, bollard or net type in the submitted projects, and should indicate the rating of the active vehicle barrier system. The Offeror who demonstrates experience with designing and installing a new active vehicle barrier system to include both physical barriers and associated safety and controls may be rated higher.

o The Offeror's Access Control Point project(s) should demonstrate experience designing and/or installing Passive vehicle barriers (K-4, K-8, K-12, M30, M40, or M50 rated type) with the project(s) having a crash-rated cable-based passive barrier system or a crash-rated fence barrier system. The offeror should indicate the rating of the passive vehicle barrier system.

Demonstrates successful Design-Build experience with temporarily re-routing traffic routes with multiple lane convergences to accommodate construction project phasing.

NOTE: Projects completed for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may be considered more relevant than those completed for other U.S. Federal Government agencies or private entities.

Offerors shall submit no more than five (5) projects, each must have been completed within the last ten (10) years, as evidence of recent and relevant experience. The roles and responsibilities of work performed by the Offeror and the Offeror’s proposed team members will be considered when determining relevancy and must be clearly marked for each project presented. For the purposes of this Section, a completed project will be defined as one that is physically complete and turned over to the end-user.

Recent and relevant experience of the Designer of Record (DOR) must be demonstrated in the projects. A minimum of one (1) project, but no more than two (2) projects, shall be submitted specific to the DOR alone.

Note: Projects demonstrating a history of successful project experience between the DOR and the proposed construction contractor may receive higher consideration.

This factor will be rated using Table 1 below.

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable.

Proposal is un-awardable.

The combined technical/risk ratings, presented in Table 1, focuses on the strengths, deficiencies, weaknesses, risks and uncertainties of the Offeror's proposal. The adjectival ratings depict how well the Offeror’s proposal meets Factor 1 requirements.

The standard is met if the Offeror’s proposal is sound and reflects an understanding of the technical requirements.

Proposals that do not demonstrate a clear understanding of the technical requirements will be considered unresponsive (i.e. does not meet solicitation requirements).

Factor 2 – Management Approach. This evaluation factor is comprised of the following components:

Identifies the proposed organizational structure, with the roles and responsibilities of each proposed team partner, including the Designer of Record, clearly identified;

Defines the lines of authority and communication across the proposed team, including the Government;

Describes the Offeror’s proposed management approach for performance of work under the contract. At a minimum, this description shall include the planned approach for:

o Start-up/mobilization o Design development o Construction administration o Quality control (for both design and construction) o Cost and schedule control o Coordination and management of personnel across the proposed team o Coordination with USACE and stakeholders o Management of design during construction

The Offeror’s Management Approach will be evaluated for completeness, reasonableness, and level of risk to the Government. This factor will be rated using Table 1 above.

Factor 3 – Past Performance. This evaluation factor is comprised of the following component:

Demonstrates the Offeror’s performance history on relevant and recent contracts.

To facilitate a meaningful evaluation of this factor, the Offeror shall submit past performance information for each project presented for consideration under Factor 1. The Government will review past performance information directly related to the Factor 1 projects.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s record of past performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the requirements under this solicitation. An adjectival Past Performance rating will be assigned for each project, as defined in the table below.

Table 2 - Evaluation Ratings for Past Performance

Rating Description

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.

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.

At no time during this process, during the debriefing, or after award, will the names of individuals providing reference information be revealed to the Offerors or to any other party.

In order to be considered for award, the Offeror must achieve a Past Performance rating of “Satisfactory Confidence” or “Neutral Confidence.” A rating of “Limited Confidence” may indicate significant risk of unsuccessful performance and assignment of this rating will remove the Offeror from further consideration.

NOTE: Offerors will be notified as to whether they have been selected for participation in Phase II. Offerors selected to participate in Phase II will receive a letter inviting them to compete and design documents shall be provided.

3. Phase II Evaluation

The non-Price technical factors of Technical Approach, Small Business Participation Plan, and Price will be evaluated during Phase II. “Marginal” and “Unacceptable” ratings for the non-Price technical factor could indicate a lack of understanding concerning the mission requirement, and may result in the entire proposal being eliminated from competition. To be considered for award, the Offeror must achieve an adjectival rating of “Acceptable” (or greater), for the non-Price, technical factor. The Offeror’s proposed Price will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness. The government will evaluate the qualifications of proposals based on the following:

Factor 1 – Technical Approach. This factor will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed technical approach for accomplishing the requirements of project, as described in the solicitation documents. The technical design information will be evaluated for completeness, reasonableness, and level of risk to the Government when compared to the solicitation requirements. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s submitted information to assess conformance with the solicitation requirements, and the strength of understanding of and the approach to address the project scope and constraints. This factor will be rated using Table 1, above.

The Offeror’s proposed Technical Approach will be evaluated for completeness, reasonableness, and level of risk to the Government. The Government will evaluate the degree to which the plan:

Includes all elements described in the solicitation;

Is reasonable and logical in relation to the anticipated project, and;

Describes a viable strategy to execute the anticipated project.

This factor will be rated using Table 1 above.

Factor 2 – Small Business Participation Plan.

Ratings using an adjectival, combined technical rating, in accordance with Table 4, will be determined by the Government. 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 businesses (enforceable commitments will be considered more favorably than non-enforceable ones). Describe what types of commitments if any are in place for this specific acquisition – small business prime, written contract, verbal, enforceable, non-enforceable, joint ventures, mentor-protégé, teaming agreements, partnership letters of commitment(s), etc. Provide documentation regarding enforceable commitments to utilize any Small Business category, as defined in FAR Part 19, as subcontractors or partners. Documentation validating business relationships described should be submitted. In order to get credit, the enforceable commitments should be with a small business, specific to the subject requirement and include acknowledgment via signatures with signature blocks from both parties (duly authorized). The enforceable commitment(s) should include the socioeconomic category of the small business and identify the services/supplies the firm will provide. The firm’s name, socioeconomic category and the supplies/services being provided should be included within item d below.

c. Identification of the complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform; (In support of this provide a brief description of what supplies/services small businesses will provide that are considered complex) within Item d below. List the principle services and supplies to be provided by small businesses.

If the prime offeror is a small business, the firm should state what supplies or services they will self-perform.

d. The extent to which the Offeror meets or exceeds the goals. Offerors that exceed the small business goal and provide more aggressive goals for the Socio-Economic Small Business Categories may be more highly rated. The goals for this procurement are:

Small Business (SB): {25%} of the total contract value Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB): {5%} of the total contract value Women Owned Small Business (WOSB): {5%} of the total contract value Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone): {0.5%} of the total contract value Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB): {3%} of the total contract value Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB): {2%} of the total contract value

If the Offeror does not submit a detailed rationale/explanation for providing less than the stated RFP participation goal, this factor may be evaluated as a Deficiency.

e. Large Business Only: The extent to which past performance in utilizing small businesses indicates a high likelihood of successfully meeting the small business goals proposed

This factor will be rated using Table 2 below.

Table 4 – Small Business Rating Method Color Rating Description Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

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

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

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

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

Factor 3 - Price. The proposed contract will be a Firm-Fixed Price, design-build contract. The Government will evaluate the price to determine if the proposed price offered is fair and reasonable. Further definition of the Price analysis is as follows:

This RFP requires Firm-Fixed-Price contract line items (CLINs). A price reasonableness approach will be utilized by the Government to determine that the proposed prices offered are fair and reasonable and that there is no unbalanced pricing between CLINs. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more line items is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. Indications of unbalanced pricing will be subject to a risk analysis to determine whether award on the basis of an apparently unbalanced offer would result in paying unreasonably high prices or would otherwise present an unacceptable level of risk to the government.

The Offeror shall submit their proposed price using the Bid Schedule provided by the Government. No unauthorized changes to the Bid Schedule will be allowed. For purposes of the Best Value Trade Off analysis and award, the evaluated price will be determined by the total sum of the line items, plus Options, in the Bid Schedule.

4. Final Decision

The Government intends to award without discussions. Therefore, the Offeror’s Phase II submittal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a technical and a price standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions in Phase II if the Source Selection Authority (SSA) later determines it necessary. The Government reserves the right to limit the Competitive Range for purposes of efficiency.

One contract will be awarded to the Offeror whose proposal is considered most advantageous to the Government, based on the integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and which the SSA determines has conformed to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered.

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the Offeror selected in accordance with the above procedures. The Government may reject any or all offers if such action is determined to be in the best interest of the Government.

In the course of evaluating proposals, the Government may contact references submitted by the Offeror.

The Government may also check past performance information obtained from sources other than those identified by the Offeror. All gathered information will be used to evaluate the Offerors’ overall past performance. The SSA may determine that a “Satisfactory Confidence” rating is worth more than a “Neutral Confidence” in the Best Value Trade-Off analysis.

D. Proposal Submission Requirements

1. Introduction

The Offeror’s proposal, except for the Bid Bond, shall be submitted electronically, as described below. The RFP will provide the Government address and receipt date for proposal submittal. The Offeror’s proposal shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

NOTE: The only authorized transmission method for proposals in response to this solicitation is via electronic upload to the DOD SAFE website (address provided below). NO OTHER TRANSMISSION METHODS

(EMAIL, FACSIMILE, REGULAR MAIL, HAND CARRIED, ETC) WILL BE ACCEPTED.

The Offeror’s proposal must be received by the Government by the date/time specified in the solicitation. Offerors shall submit their proposals using the following link:

https://safe.apps.mil/

INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMITTING ELECTRONIC PROPOSALS:

In an effort to reduce paperwork and cost, all proposals shall be submitted electronically through the SAFE site.

Submission shall be in Adobe PDF format. You are limited to five (5) maximum files per upload (total size cannot exceed 2GB). If you have a large number of files, recommend that you combine or ZIP your files before uploading to the SAFE site. Offerors may use compression utility software such as WinZip or PKZip to reduce file size and facilitate transmission.

REQUEST FOR UPLOAD CODE: Offerors must email Contract Specialist Elizabeth Glasgow at elizabeth.k.glasgow@usace.army.mil and to Contracting Officer Erin Bradley at erin.e.bradley@usace.army.mil no later than five (5) working days prior to the proposal due date to receive a request code with will allow for file uploads via the SAFE site. The code will expire 14 days after the Contract Specialist or Contracting Officer sends the code via the SAFE site. Offerors that fail to email to request a code five (5) working days before proposal submission date may not be able to receive a request code in time to upload their submissions.

FILE DESCRIPTION: Include a “File Description” for each file(s) you upload. The “File Description” will be included in the email notice to each of the recipients you choose to have access to your file(s). NOTE: Do NOT enter Privacy Act Data (Personal Identification Information (PII)) in the File Description. Submission shall be in Adobe PDF format.

INSTRUCTIONS TO FOLLOW ON THE DOD SAFE SITE:

1. Once at the SAFE website select the “Drop-off” icon. Offerors should access the DoD SAFE site as a guest.

2. After selecting the “Click Here” link, you will be prompted to add your personal information, file information, file information, recipient (Government representative) information and email settings.

3. When completing your file information for transmittal via the SAFE website, you will be required to enter the email address for all recipients. Fort this solicitation, the recipients are the Contract Specialist and the Contracting Officer. The Contract Specialist for this solicitation is Elizabeth Glasgow at elizabeth.k.glasgow@usace.army.mil, and the Contracting Officer is Erin Bradley at erin.e.bradley@usace.army.mil. The email address of the Government Employee who initiated the request code will be automatically entered. The Offeror Must manually enter the email address for both the Contracting Officer and the Contract Specialist. The Offeror can enter an additional email address if desired. After entering the email address, click the “ADD” button to add the person(s) email to the “Recipients List” of your response. When your response is submitted, a notification will be sent to the recipients you added.

NOTE: Drop-Off File button should only be used after all proposal submission files are uploaded. SAFE codes and links will expire once Drop Off is completed. Do NOT send the SAFE site packages to group email accounts.

Even if you successfully upload your proposal to the SAFE site, notification will not be sent to the Government recipients until you verify your email address. Entering an incorrect email may result in rejection of your submission for lateness. A proposer can confirm proper submission by the “Drop-Off Completed” screen which generates based on proper file submission.

NOTE: It has been reported that documents are more quickly uploaded into the DOD SAFE website when using a Firefox web browser. The Government cannot verify that this is true and offers no guarantee that Offerors will have more success utilizing any particular browser.

RECEIPT OF SUBMISSIONS: For the purposes of establishing whether a submission is considered late, the government considers the date and time the submission is completely uploaded and submitted into the SAFE website. For proposals larger than the 2GB capacity of the website and require multiple submissions, the government will consider the date and time the last submission is completely uploaded and submitted into the SAFE website. Do not assume that electronic communication is instantaneous. It can take several minutes or even hours in some cases.

The Government will not be responsible for submissions delivered to any location or to anyone other than those designated to receive responses on its behalf. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that responses are submitted so as to reach the designated recipient. Offerors are responsible for allowing sufficient time for the response to be received in accordance with the instructions provided.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Please note that the ORIGINAL Bid Bond must be received by the Contract Specialist on or before the proposal due date and time for submission of Phase II proposals. Bid Bonds are not required with Phase I Proposals.

Please send Bid Bonds to the following address:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Attn: Elizabeth Glasgow, Contracting 696 Virginia Road Concord, MA 01742

The Offeror’s proposal for Phase I shall consist of one (1) volume to address Experience, Technical/Management Approach, and Past Performance.

If an Offeror is selected to proceed to Phase II, the Offeror’s Phase II proposal shall consist of two (2) volumes.

Phase II, Volume I shall address Technical Approach for the project. Volume II shall address Price using the Government provided Excel spreadsheet, and as further required below; and must contain all required documentation including JV agreements, Terms and Conditions and certifications/representations.

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the technical requirements of the scope in Phase II, Volume I 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.

2. Proposal Submission Requirements

a. Each volume shall be submitted in a digital format. Any pages that are changed (as a result of discussions or proposal revisions) shall be of a different color and shall have changed information clearly marked by a vertical line in the right margin of the page. The revised pages shall be dated. Each volume shall be clearly labeled with its title.

b. Each volume shall be single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or Times New Roman fonts are required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscape oriented.

c. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

VOLUME TITLE

DIGITAL

COPIES

PAGE

LIMITS

Phase I Proposal:

Volume I: Experience, Management Approach and Past Performance Information

1 25

Phase II Proposal:

Volume 1: Technical Approach 1 35 Volume II: Small Business Participation Plan, Price, SF1442 and Amendments, Reps/Certs, and Certificate of Corporate Authority

1 None

NOTE: All pages, including but not limited to cover letters, Table of Contents pages, tables, illustrations, and appendices will be counted in the page calculation; with the exception of Past Performance Questionnaires. Past performance questionnaires WILL NOT count against the page limit. Pages that exceed the above noted page limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed, not read, and will not be evaluated by the Government.

3. Proposal File Format and Packaging

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 consecutively numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and solicitation number in the header and/or footer.

MS Word (doc/docx) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

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 pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations; however, each 11X17 page counts as two pages.

b. File Packaging. All of the proposal electronic files shall be submitted in their native formats (e.g., docx, xlsx, ppt) and uploaded electronically to USACE’s DOD SAFE website. CDs, DVD, Zip disks or USB drives are not permitted. **Please note – Self extracting exe files are not acceptable. ** In addition, copies of all files in PDF format shall also be provided. All price breakdown information to aid in the price evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format and viewable in Microsoft Excel 2007.

4. Content Requirement

The Offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner and to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the technical requirements of the scope 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.

The following shall be included in the Offeror’s narrative discussion for Volume I:

Factor 1 – Experience. The Offeror shall submit a maximum of five (5) projects demonstrating team experience that best demonstrates the Offeror’s team experience, including the Designer of Record and Construction Contractor, on recent and relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, complexity, and price.

NOTE: The maximum number of projects that may be submitted is five (5). If more than five (5) projects are submitted, only the first five (5) projects will be evaluated.

Recent and relevant experience of the DOR should be demonstrated in the projects, but no more than two (2) projects can be submitted that are specific to the DOR alone.

For all submitted projects, the Offeror shall include the following information:

Role on the contract (i.e. Prime or Sub for each member of the proposed team who participated in the project);

Project description;

Type of contract (e.g., Design -Build (DB), design for a Design-Bid-Build (DBB) contract or construction of a DBB);

Month/year that the design and construction phases started and completed;

Contract award value and final cost of construction (if Prime);

Specialized design and construction features of the project; and Customer’s point-of-contact who can be reached for references (phone number and email address).

Projects provided must be substantially completed (beneficial occupancy obtained) within the past ten (10) years.

The description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this solicitation (i.e., unique features, area, construction methods). The description of the project should identify the design disciplines that were involved.

The Offeror may submit more than one project to meet the access control point technical experience. If the experience involving the active and passive vehicle barriers was not self-performed by the Contractor, the Offeror must clearly indicate the name of the firm with the subject experience, AND, the offeror must clearly demonstrate how that firm will be utilized during the execution of this contract in their Factor 2 (Management Approach) discussion.

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV) or other type of entity, recent and relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the JV/other entity. If the JV/other entity does not have such experience, projects shall be submitted for each JV/other entity partner. Offerors who fail to submit experience for each of the JV/other entity partners may be rated lower. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects that may be submitted for Factor 1. All joint ventures shall submit a fully-executed copy of their joint venture agreement, that shall provide the information requested on Appendix B. Small business offerors must submit joint venture agreements that are fully compliant with small business regulations for their socioeconomic category.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience of affiliates, subsidiaries, parent, LLC, LTD member companies (i.e., Offeror’s name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal should clearly demonstrate that the entity whose experience is being considered will have meaningful involvement in the performance of this proposed contract. The relevant consideration is whether the resources of the parent or affiliated company – its workforce, management, facilities, or other resources – will be provided or relied upon for contract performance, such that the parent or affiliate will have meaningful involvement in contract performance. The proposal must demonstrate similarity between the affiliate’s proposed role on this procurement and the role of the affiliate on the experience submitted in order to receive credit for the affiliate’s experience.

A project is defined as a construction project performed under a single task order or contract which included both design and construction of the project. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole should not be submitted as a project; rather, Offerors should submit the work performed under an individual task order as a project.

Factor 2 – Management Approach. The Offeror’s proposed Management Approach should include:

4. An expanded organizational chart of the Offeror’s overall structure and management of the project team from the Offeror’s Headquarters to the Offeror’s site office(s). The chart should present the following information:

Identify all offices (entity name and location) anticipated to be involved in this contract.

Identify the DOR who will be responsible for the project.

Identify all positions by title, organization, and physical location to include all proposed team members such as in-house personnel, subcontractors and consultants.

Identify lines of authority across the Offeror’s proposed team.

Identify lines of communication between technical areas of responsibility and the Government.

5. A narrative description of the following:

Cost and Schedule Management;

Communication plan across the team, USACE and stakeholders;

All offices/team members (entity name and location) anticipated to be involved in this contract; including

DOR, Construction Contractor, consultants and subcontracting approach.

Length of time and number of projects working with proposed team.

Roles, responsibilities and authorities for each team member and how work will be coordinated across the proposed team, including at a minimum:

o Coordinated management of the design phase, to include design development, design meetings, requests for information, timing and content of submittals, submittal revisions and USACE/stakeholder involvement.

o Coordinated management of construction phase, to include construction administration, design during construction, control and approval of revisions and changes to the accepted design; notification to USACE of design changes; coordination of requests for information, shop drawing and submittal reviews and approvals; attendance of progress meetings and site visits; periodic on-site visits by the design team members to observe progress of construction and to ensure that construction is in conformance with the design intent and contract completion, as-built and close-out documentation.

Key personnel who will perform, at a minimum, the following functions:

o Project Manager o Design Manager o Site Superintendent o Contractor Quality Control (CQC) Manager o Site Safety and Health Officer

Quality control plan for design and construction phases, including quality control lines of authority between Prime, team members and subcontractors.

NOTE: Except for the Design Manager, the specific key personnel defined above must be employed directly by the prime contractor.

3. Provide résumé/qualifications, for key personnel identified above, using the appended format or containing the respective information requested in Appendix C. See table below for minimum Key Personnel requirements:

Discipline Professional Registration

Minimum Years in Discipline

Minimum Years of Relevant Experience

Project Manager* 10 5 Design Manager PE or RA 10 5 Site Superintendent 10 5 CQC Manager USACE CQC

Training Certification**

10 5

Site Safety and Health Officer 10 5 Notes:*Contractors who provide resumes for Project Manager who show PE or RA professional certifications, may be considered more favorably.

**Any contractors in need of this class/certification, should contact Wendy Sylvia, by phone at (978) 318- 8110, or by email at Wendy.L.Sylvia@usace.army.mil, to make arrangements to take this course. The course must be completed and certification obtained PRIOR TO submission of Phase I proposals.

4. Identify any additional and/or unique management advantages its proposal provides to the Government.

Factor 3 – Past Performance. The Offeror shall submit past performance information for each project that was submitted for consideration under Factor 1.

NOTE: USACE does not intend to create or maintain a database of PPQs submitted by Offerors. Therefore, it will be the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure the submission of PPQs in its proposal that are relevant to the solicitation.

The Offeror’s past performance information shall be submitted as follows:

a. For Federal Government projects with a Past Performance Information Retrieval System/ Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Evaluation: provide the contract number, contract place of performance, and DUNS number. In the case of Indefinite Delivery type contracts, GSA contracts, and Blanket Purchase Agreements, include Task or Delivery Order Numbers.

b. For non-Federal Government projects, commercial projects, and Federal Government projects without a CPARS Evaluation (more than six years since completion): provide a Past Performance Questionnaire (Appendix A). The Offeror should complete Blocks 1-4 of the PPQ and send it to the non-Federal project client or commercial project client. The client should complete Blocks 5-8 along with the two page questionnaire. The Offeror should include the PPQ in Volume I of the proposal.

As an alternative, Offerors may submit a copy of a client-signed PPQ (in the format provided in Appendix A) for any project submitted for consideration under Factor 1. The Offeror may retain PPQs in its files for submission on future procurements. In cases where the validity of the completed PPQ is questioned, contracting personnel may contact the reference for verification or additional information.

If an offeror has CPARs evaluations for Federal Government projects completed within the past ten (10) years, the CPARS evaluations may be submitted in lieu of a PPQ.

c. 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.