12-R-0005-0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions ofthe document referenced in Item9A 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 solicitation has been amendment as follow s:

Section 00010

Paragraph 2(B) (Chart-Block 1) change amount to read: $200-$1M.

Deleted Max-Min delivery order information, deleted inspection and delivery dates. Not necessary on the basic contract.

Section 00110

Paragraph 2.2.1.6. Delete the follow ing sentence: “ a minimum of three (3) of the six (6) contracts referenced should be for each member of the joint venture, if available”. Government just needs the agreement.

Section 00120

Paragraph: 1.1.12 Joint Venture language has changed.

Paragraph 2.2.1. Add at the end “in the prototypical price”.

Paragraph 6.3. Prototypical Project. Change to: The Prototypical project w ill not be aw arded fromthis solicitation.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 20

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 06-Mar-2012

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 W91364-12-R-0005

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

14-Feb-2012

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 Item14. The hour and date specified for receipt ofOffer is extended, X 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 ofthe following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt ofthis amendment on each copy ofthe offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegramwhich 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. Ifby virtue ofthis amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegramor letter, provided each telegramor 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.(Ifapplicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

05-Mar-2012

CODE

121 OH AIR NATIONAL GUARD

121 ARW/MSG CONTRACTING OFFICE-WAWF W9136

RICKENBACKER IAP

7381 ZISTEL STREET

COLUMBUS OH 432171161

W91364 7. ADMINISTERED BY (Ifother than item6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W91364-12-R-0005

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The following have been modified:

TABLE OF CONTENTS/NOTES

TABLE OF CONTENTS/NOTES

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD SF 1442 and SF 1442 BACK

SECTION 00010 - PRICING SCHEDULE, NOTES AREAS OF CONSIDERATION,

SECTION 00100 - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

SECTION 00600 – REPRESENTATIONS & CERTIFICATION

SECTION 00700 - CONTRACT CLAUSES

SECTION 00800 - SPECIAL MATOC CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

SECTION 01001 - 01700 – DIVISION 1 - TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS “TO BE PROVIDED AT TIME OF AWARD”

ATTACHMENT 1 – MASTER SPECIFICATIONS “TO BE PROVIDED AT TIME OF AWARD”

ATTACHMENT 2- QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS DOCUMENT DATED “TO BE INSERTED AT TIME OF AWARD.”

EXHIBIT A- Performance Relevancy Questionnaire EXHIBIT B- Subcontract Information and Consent Form EXHIBIT C- Package Information & Forms; Cover Letter; Respondent Identification & Ratings EXHIBIT D-Technical Proposal Format and Questions EXHIBIT E- Prototypical Project Offering Form EXHIBIT E-1– Self-Performed Work Form

EXHIBIT E – ATTACHMENT 1 – PROTOTYPICAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS

EXHIBIT F – Proposal Volume Contents Aid EXHIBIT G – Proposal Inquiry Form

SECTION 00010 NOTES

The following apply to this contract:

Task orders in the following location(s) are applicable to this contract: (to be completed by the contracting officer at time of award) In addition to task orders issued on a small business set-aside basis contractor is eligible to complete for task orders set-aside for: (to be completed by the contracting officer at time of award) Applicable Maximum order dollar values (to be completed by the contracting officer at time of award) The Design Build Option (is/is not)(to be completed by the contracting officer at time of award) applicable to this contract.

A task order in the amount of $200.00 will be issued upon award of this contract. Contractors may invoice for the initial task order following acceptance by the Contracting Officer of the Master Safety and Quality Control Plans. These plans shall be submitted not later than 30 days from the award of a MATOC contract and receipt of the initial task order. Plans submitted with the proposal in response to the solicitation are not acceptable. In the event the Contractor awarded a MATOC does not submit the required plans within 60 days of award the Contracting Officer may unilaterally cancel the MATOC contract at no cost to the Government.

Areas in Table of Contents shown in gray which include Sections, 00100, 00110, 00120, and 00600 will be physically removed and not placed in contract award, however shall remain in the Table of Contents and deemed to be incorporated by reference in that award.

Contractor’s attention is invited to Section 00800, Special Contract Requirements. Important information on the Task Order process is contained therein. Offerors are encouraged to read this section in its entirety to reach a better understanding of the MATOC Task

Order Process. The minimum guaranteed task order amount for the entire contract period, to include any exercised option periods, is $200.00 per IDIQ contract awarded. See note No. 2.

The term “Contracting Officer” is applicable to this Solicitation and resulting contract(s). The terms “Contracting Officer” and “Ordering Officer” may be used interchangeably when referring to individual Task Orders.

Reference Contract Clause 252.236-7008, CONTRACT PRICES – BIDDING SCHEDULES. The term Bidding Schedule shall also be construed to mean Offer Schedule or Schedule. The terms “bid” and “offer” shall be construed as having the same meaning in this solicitation and resulting contract(s) and any future task orders.

Reference Contract Clause 52.215-5, FACSIMILE PROPOSALS. This clause may apply to individual Task Order Request for Proposals to be issued under the basic contract. It does not apply to this (Basic Contract) solicitation. Individual MATOC Task Order Requests for Proposals will indicate the applicability of this clause.

Reference Contract Clause 52.228-15, PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS. Applicability will be defined in individual MATOC orders.

The Government intends to award Multiple Contracts pursuant to this solicitation. Federally warranted Contracting Officers at any National Guard activities in the State of Ohio may place task orders against resulting contracts.

DO NOT insert prices in the Basic and Option Years CLINs provided immediately after the SF 1442. Instructions for the preparation of proposals are located in Sections 00100, 00110 and 00120.

AREAS OF CONSIDERATION- OFFERORS MUST RETURN THE FOLLOWING WITH THEIR PROPOSAL

NOTE: OFFERORS MUST COMPLETE AREAS OF CONSIDERATION BELOW AND RETURN WITH PROPOSAL.

1. LOCATIONS OF WORK - The majority of projects will be performed at Columbus, Cleveland, Mansfield, Newton Falls, Springfield and Toledo Ohio. Contractors shall identify all location(s) they desire to be considered for award of individual MATOC projects. Contractors will be provided a fair opportunity to compete for task orders at those locations checked within the dollar range indicated below, if they are awarded a contract.

PLACE AN “X” IN THE BLOCK (OF ALL THAT APPLY) IF YOUR FIRM WILL ACTIVELY PURSUE PROJECT(s) AT

THESE LOCATIONS

( ) Central Ohio Area, to include but not limited to; Army and Air National Guard Facilities located at Beightler Armory, Rickenbacker International Airport, Defense Construction, Supply (DLA). Zanesville Municipal Airport.

( ) West, Southwest Ohio Area, to include but not limited to; Army and Air National Guard Facilities located at Springfield Beckley Municipal Airport, Blue Ash, Cincinnati and Dayton.

( ) Northwest Ohio, to include but not limited to; Army and Air National Guard Facilities located at Toledo Express Airport, Port Clinton, Sandusky, Camp Perry.

( ) Northeast Ohio, to include but not limited to; Army and Air National Guard Facilities located at Mansfield-Lahm Airport, Akron, Youngstown, Newton Falls.

2. DOLLAR VALUE OF PROJECTS

The contractor must identify the dollar range of projects they are interested in receiving consideration for under the MATOC contract.

Each offeror must check ONLY one of the ranges listed below. (This limitation may be due to business size or company bonding limitations). Note: Task order offerings in excess of $5M will be offered only to contractors awarded at the $5M level or through options have reached the $5M level. Such contractors may be required to provide additional capability information to include bonding capability and financial capability depending on the dollar amount f the proposed task order.

Table B allows an offeror to start at a smaller dollar range and grow with the program based on successful performance and capabilities. Select from A OR B but not both.

A- DOLLAR VALUE

( ) $200 - $250,000 ( ) $200 - $500,000 ( ) $200 –

$1 Million ( ) $200- $3 Million

( ) $200 – $5 Million

( ) $2 Million – $5 Million

B- Optional Escalating Scale The amount on this chart allow for increases in limits in option years.

( ) Basic $200 - $250,000 Option One $200- $500,000 Option Two $200- $1M Option Three 200-$2M

( ) Basic $200 - $500,000 Option One $200- $1M Option Two $200- $2M Option Three 200-$3M

( ) Basic $200 - $1M Option One $200- $2M Option Two $200-$3M Option Three $200-$5M

( ) Basic $200 - $2M Option One $200- $5M

Increases in option years will be granted based on Satisfactory performance at sole discretion of the Contracting Officer.

End of Section 00010

The following have been deleted:

INSPECTION/ACCEPTANCE TERMS

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

SECTION 00110

SECTION 00110

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS

1. GENERAL PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS:

1.1. These instructions prescribe the format of proposals, and describe the approach for the development and presentation of the proposal data. They are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information to provide for the understanding and comprehensive evaluation of proposals. Carefully review this section prior to commencing proposal preparation. In order for proposals to receive full consideration for award, offerors should ensure that the information furnished in support of the proposal is factual, accurate, and complete.

1.2. Offerors are cautioned to strictly comply with all instructions within this solicitation to ensure submission of a complete proposal. Failure to furnish a complete proposal at the time of proposal submission may result in the proposal being unacceptable to the Government and elimination from consideration for award. All solicitation amendments must be acknowledged in accordance with FAR Clause 52.215-1, and Instructions to Offerors.

1.3. Reserved.

1.4. PROPOSAL CONTENT: Prospective offerors shall submit the proposal in two separate binders.

1.4.1. Binder # 1 includes Volume 1: Pro forma documents in original and (1) one copy, except as noted, and Exhibit E- Price proposal, in accordance with instruction contained herein.

1.4.2. Binder # 2 contains Volume 2, Past Performance and Volume 3, Technical information proposals in four copies (original and 3 copies).

1.4.3. Offerors shall also submit Volumes 2 and 3 in their entirety in electronic format.

1.4.4. Although the assessment of Past Performance as a specific evaluation factor is separate and distinct from the Determination of Responsibility required by FAR Part 9, Past Performance information obtained herein will be used during the Government’s responsibility determination. In addition contractors shall submit a single copy of the following information in a sealed envelope with their name on the outside. This information is sought pursuant to FAR 9.105-1 and will be opened and utilized only if the contractor is selected for a MATOC award. Information will be used in determining the contractor responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9. If an award is not being offered the envelope will be filed unopened with the original proposal.

1.4.4.1. Documentation of adequate financial resources: Provide letters of reference from financial institution(s) concerning credit worthiness and from bonding companies indicating capability to bond to, at a minimum, the highest level requested in areas of consideration.

1.5. PROPOSAL DUE DATE SCHEDULE:

1.5.1. Proposal Volumes and the electronic copy are due by the date and time set for the receipt of proposals shown in Block 13 of the SF 1442. The due date for receipt of Past Performance Questionnaires from your references is the same as the date and time set for the receipt of proposals shown in Block 13 of the SF 1442.

1.5.2. After compiling all required information, submit the information in accordance with the “Proposal Due Date Schedule” paragraph and Block 13 of the SF 1442. Return the original and specified number of copies to the issuing office listed in Block 7 of the SF 1442. Mark the front of the envelope/box with the following:

“PROPOSAL No W91364-12-R-0005” DO NOT OPEN--- Competitive Proposal--

1.6. PROPOSAL FORMAT:

1.6.1. Purpose: These instructions prescribe the format of proposals, and describe the approach for the development and presentation of the proposed data. The proposal shall include all of the information requested in the specific instructions. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the RFP will be considered unacceptable. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will enable the Government to easily understand and perform a thorough and fair evaluation.

1.6.2. Offerors are cautioned to submit enough information to enable the evaluation committee to fully ascertain each offeror’s capability to perform all of the requirements contemplated by this solicitation. All commitments made in the proposal may become a part of the resultant contract. The data submitted with each proposal should be complete and concise, but not overly elaborate. Excessive reliance on promotional brochures is discouraged.

1.6.3. Written proposals shall be prepared on standard 8.5 x 11 inch paper (charts may be landscaped but must be on 8.5 x 11 inch paper) and shall be in a legible font size (10). All pages of each proposal shall be appropriately numbered, and identified with the RFP number. For ease of reference, consecutive page numbering with tabs is required.

1.6.4. Binding: Elaborate format and binding are neither necessary nor desirable. All binders will be capable of lying flat when opened. Three ring binders are preferred. The cover and spine of each binder will clearly identify the offeror’s name, Part number, RFP number, RFP title and copy number, (e.g. copy 2 of 3). The original for each volume will be clearly identified on the cover and the spine. All binders will allow for easy removal and replacement of pages.

1.6.5. Indexing: Each volume will contain a “Table of Contents” for that volume. The “Table of Contents” will identify major areas, paragraphs and subparagraphs by number and title as well as by page number and volume locations. Tab indexing will be used to identify sections as appropriate.

1.6.6. Electronic Copy: Provide one (1) electronic copy of all of the proposal information for Volumes 2 & 3. Electronic copies are to be submitted on DVD or CD-ROM saved in Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat format. (“Read Only” files are acceptable). All disks shall be virus checked prior to submission.

1.6.7. If revised proposals are requested, all proposal revisions shall be submitted on colored paper as page changes with each page identified by date and page number. Revised pages shall be printed on one side and punched with a 3-hole punch along the left margin. The number of revised copies to be submitted is the same as the initial proposal.

2. PROPOSAL VOLUME CONTENTS: Each offeror’s proposal shall be submitted as set forth below and all information shall be confined to the appropriate part to facilitate independent evaluation. Proposals which do not include the requested minimum information may be eliminated from further consideration for award.

2.1. BINDER 1- VOLUME 1, OFFER DOCUMENTS AND PRICE/COST INFORMATION:

2.1.1. Offer and Section 00010 – Complete in its entirety the “Offeror” portion of the Standard Form (SF) 1442. An official having the authority to contractually bind your company must sign the SF 1442 in accordance with FAR 4.102. One copy of the SF 1442 is required to have an original signature.

2.1.2. DO NOT PUT ANY AMOUNTS IN THE BASIC CONTRACT SCHEDULE IN SECTION

00010- ALL FUNDING WILL BE ON THE TASK ORDERS WHEN AWARDED.

2.1.3. Section 00010 –Areas of Consideration. Mark your selections for the Areas (Location, Price, and Design Build option) for which you want consideration.

2.1.4. Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors- Section 00600: Include in your proposal only the Representations and Certifications contained in Section 00600 of this solicitation. All other required representations and certifications are to be completed on line in “ORCA”.

2.1.4.1. All potential offerors are required to register in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR), http://www.ccr.gov, in order to complete the annual Representations and Certifications found at the ORCA website.

The ORCA site contains an ORCA Application Handbook and an ORCA Quick Reference Guide. To access them, simply click on the "Help" link at the top of the ORCA homepage. Ensure your Central Contractor Registration (CCR) information is up-to-date. Complete annual Representations and Certifications on line at http://orca.bpn.gov if you have not already done so. You are not required to provide a copy of the Representations and Certifications completed in ORCA with your written proposal. Do include any Representations and Certifications and other statements of offerors contained in Section 00600 of this solicitation, which are in addition to the annual certifications on ORCA.

2.1.5. Prototypical Project Requirements: All offerors, regardless of the areas of consideration on location and price shall price the prototypical project for evaluation purposes. Failure to provide a priced Exhibit E may be grounds for elimination from consideration/evaluation.

2.1.5.1. Offerors shall provide all price/cost information necessary to provide a meaningful basis for Government's analysis and evaluation of price/cost for the project set forth in Section 00120 of this solicitation. The Government is not and does not intend to request certified cost or pricing data. Offerors may be required, during the evaluation process to provided sufficient price/cost information that will enable the Government to perform an evaluation in accordance with Section 00120. If an offeror proposes an unusually low price, the offeror shall also provide rationale to justify the price.

2.1.5.2. Exhibit E – Insert the price/cost associated with the prototypical project on the Prototypical Proposal Offer Schedule provided in Exhibit E.

2.1.5.3. Include an introductory letter that contains a points of contact with names and email and phone numbers. Provide the names of authorized negotiators. Provide Cage Code, Duns number, Tax ID number.

Statement of socio-economic size.

2.1.5.4. 1 copy in a sealed envelope of documentation of adequate financial resources: Provide letters of reference from financial institution(s) concerning credit worthiness and from bonding companies indicating capability to bond to, at a minimum, the highest level requested in areas of consideration.

http://www.ccr.gov/ http://orca.bpn.gov/

2.2. BINDER 2- VOLUME 2, PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Past Performance includes current on-going (present) performance on contracts/task orders 70% or more complete. Do not include price or pricing information in this section.

2.2.1. Offerors shall discuss, using the Performance Relevancy Questionnaire format, Exhibit A, Part 1 their performance for six (6) general construction projects. Contractors should select their projects carefully because the quality of the contractor’s relevant performance is more important than the quantity of projects submitted.

Projects may be on going, if complete to 70 %, and cannot have been completed any earlier than 5 years prior to the solicitation issue date.

2.2.1.1. Offerors are to provide information to demonstrate a history of performance that demonstrates construction experience in performing multidiscipline work that is similar in scope, size, and complexity to that category of projects selected in Section 00010 – Areas of Consideration, Paragraph 2 entitled “Dollar Value of Projects”. This requirement is for a multiple discipline Task Orders at various dollar levels.

Projects discussed should generally show performance on a variety of projects at various levels, to include the highest level you are requesting. Offerors should consider the currency and relevancy of the Past performance information. Current performance may have greater impact than older performance. In determining relevancy to the solicitation requirement, offerors should provide references for projects: which employed similar construction methods; had similar project complexity and scope; and were performed in a similar location to those anticipated for the proposed effort.

2.2.1.2. This information shall address relevant contracts held within the last five years.

2.2.1.3. Offerors are strongly cautioned to complete Exhibit A, Parts 1 and 2, in its entirety, in the format provided. Failure to include this information may eliminate your proposal from consideration for award.

2.2.1.4. Offerors shall answer each question on the Exhibit A, Performance Relevancy Questionnaire in detail. Use as much space as necessary.

2.2.1.5. Offerors should include with their proposal information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and the offeror's correction actions. Include construction awards, customer letters of commendation, etc., with points of contact and telephone numbers.

2.2.1.6. If proposing as a joint venture a copy of the executed joint venture agreement must be included with the proposal.

2.2.2. Provide a list of major subcontractors and or Teaming Partners to be utilized on this project.

(Include those identified in Exhibit A narratives, as applicable.) If a formal teaming arrangement is proposed, a copy of the executed Teaming Agreement shall also be included with the proposal.

2.2.2.1. As a minimum, provide the name(s) of subcontractors to be utilized in the following areas:

Electrical, Mechanical, Roofing, Horizontal disciplines, Civil Site Work.

2.2.2.2. Each major subcontractor and or Teaming Partner must also complete an Exhibit B, “Subcontractor Information and Consent Form” to be considered. Offerors shall have major subcontractors identify on the Exhibit B three references, owners (if they were the Prime) or other Prime contractors they have worked for. References for subcontractors from the proposing offeror are not acceptable. See Exhibit “B” format for information to be provided. Written references for subcontractors may be included and are encouraged. However, subcontractors do not need to send out Exhibit C questionnaires.

2.2.2.3. Multiple subcontractors may be named for the same discipline, but are limited to a maximum of three (3) subcontractors per discipline. When multiple subcontractors are provided for the same discipline the evaluation will be in accordance with Section 00120.

2.2.2.4. The Government reserves the right to request additional reference contact information for subcontractors, as necessary, through the clarification process to complete the evaluations. Such information, if obtained, shall be considered clarifications and not discussions.

2.2.3. Past Performance References – REQUIRED – A “Final” Performance Evaluation (Construction) (also referred to as CCASS Evaluation) issued for a project may be included in lieu of sending out reference package for the project. OR Offerors shall prepare and submit to prior client(s) of the all the projects listed on your Exhibit A submission a Reference Package (Exhibit C) (Detailed instructions are included in Exhibit C Package).

This includes correspondence explaining the requirement to obtain an independent evaluation of prior contract performance, and the Past Performance Questionnaire for use in evaluating Past Performance.

2.2.3.1. Completed Performance Questionnaire shall be mailed to: USPFO for Ohio Purchasing and Contracting Office, 2811 West Dublin-Granville Rd, Columbus OH 43225, so as to arrive not later than the closing date for receipt of proposal shown on the SF 1442. Reference packages may also be faxed to 614-336- 7232 or emailed to elaine.farabee@us.army.mil and/or mark.miesse@ang.af.mil. NOTE: Offeror or subcontractor must not review the Past Performance Questionnaire prior to submission. They must be submitted by the client/evaluator directly to the Contracting Officer.

2.2.3.2. Offerors should follow-up and encourage references to get the questionnaires to the Contracting Officer in a timely manner. Do not include copies of the letters or questionnaires in the proposal. Do include a one page statement affirming the reference packages were sent out, date sent and to who sent.

2.2.4. Offerors lacking relevant Past Performance experience may submit information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement if such information is relevant to this acquisition. Offerors without design/build experience, but who wish to be considered for an award including the design-build option, should use this section to provide information on A&E firms with whom they have a relationship for possible future subcontracts. In this case, offerors shall provide relevant information to allow Government evaluators to conduct a Past Performance evaluation on the predecessor companies, key personnel and/or subcontractors.

2.2.4.1. Such information shall, as a minimum, include: Name(s) of Predecessor Company/Subcontractor and/or Key Personnel and include: Complete Address and Point of Contact; Telephone, Fax Number and email address; and a brief synopsis of the experience (a resume may be submitted for "Key Personnel") and relevancy to this project.

2.2.5. Other Optional Past Performance Considerations: Offerors are encouraged to include in Volume 2 other relevant information that the Government may take into consideration in the evaluation process. The type of information that should be provided is detailed on Exhibit A Part 2. The information, if provided, shall be limited to the period starting five (5) years prior to the solicitation release date.

2.2.6. Offerors are advised that the Government may use all data provided by the offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources, including, but not limited to, Government–wide databases, in the development of performance confidence assessments. Past Performance information on contracts not listed by the offeror, or that of planned subcontractors, may also be evaluated. The Government may contact references provided by the offeror, as well as any other source it identifies, and information received may be used in the evaluation of the offeror’s Past Performance. While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing current, accurate and complete Past Performance information rests with the offeror.

2.3. BINDER 2-VOLUME 3, TECHNICAL INFORMATION. Additional requirements for the technical proposal are found in Exhibit D. The Technical proposal shall be prepared in accordance with the instructions and format given in this section and on Exhibit D. Failure to provide a Technical proposal in accordance with Exhibit D and the solicitation may render an offeror’s proposal incomplete and ineligible for award. Offerors are strongly cautioned to follow the format of Exhibit D in preparing their proposals. Include the question before each narrative. This will allow for ease of evaluation. Technical Proposals shall not include price or pricing information.

mailto:elaine.farabee@us.army.mil mailto:mark.miesse@ang.af.mil

2.3.1. General Instructions: The Technical proposal shall be submitted in accordance with the instruction contained herein and on Exhibit D. In no case shall statements such as “we comply with the requirements of the contract” or its equivalent be acceptable to meet the requirements of this request for proposal. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the RFP will be considered unacceptable. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will enable the Government to easily understand and perform a thorough and fair evaluation. This should preclude the rejection of a proposal due to items not being addressed.

2.3.1.1. The Government acknowledges that this will involve discussion of some of the same projects/contracts discussed in the Past Performance volume. While Past Performance examines how an offeror performed in the past, so as to determine the probability of success on future projects, this subfactor examines the offeror’s experience with multidiscipline project management and execution and how the offeror demonstrates an understanding of the contract’s requirements taking this experience into consideration. The Government intends to use Exhibit A Part 1 information in the evaluation of experience.

2.3.2. In order for the Government to evaluate the offeror’s understanding of the contract requirements, offerors are required to discuss their technical and administrative capabilities in a manner that demonstrates these are adequate to meet contract requirements. The information in Exhibit D will address your capability and experience to perform multi-discipline/multi-project projects; your organization; key personnel; subcontractors; your ability to schedule; quality control; safety.

2.3.3. T he Exhibit D question narratives and required attachments should include necessary information regarding the offeror’s ability to perform complete project management of multi-disciplined construction projects.

Project management includes the full spectrum of activities such as: estimating, proposal preparation, subcontract purchasing and management, work scoping and planning, construction superintendent duties, quality controls, limited architect and engineering design, and safety. Additional clarification of these requirements is to be inferred from information contained in the each question of the Technical proposal, as well as the evaluation factors for award identified in Section 00120.

2.3.4. OFFERORS ARE CAUTIONED TO READ SECTIONS 00120 AND 00800 and DIVISION 1

OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS BEFORE COMPLETING EXHIBIT D, AS YOUR ANSWERS MUST

MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOUND IN THESE SECTIONS.

2.3.5. Offerors are cautioned to read FAR CLAUSE 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting.

Resulting task orders will require a minimum of 15% of the work to be self-performed. Firms must be capable of self-performing at least the minimum. The contracts resulting from this solicitation are not intended for management firms or construction firms who self perform only management functions.

End of Section 00110

SECTION 00120

SECTION 00120

PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND BASIS FOR AWARD

1. GENERAL INFORMATION:

1.1. GENERAL:

1.1.1. This solicitation is for multiple award indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ Task Order Contracts (MATOC). The Government intends to award contracts to a minimum of nine (9) qualified offerors deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose proposals conform to the

RFP's requirements and are judged to represent the Best Value to the Government. The Best Value is the most advantageous offer, price and other factors considered, and consistent with the Government's stated importance of evaluation criteria. This may result in award being made to a high-rated, higher-priced offeror where the Contracting Officer determines that the Past Performance and Technical capability of the higher-priced offeror outweighs the cost difference.

1.1.2. To arrive at a Best Value decision, the Contracting Officer will integrate the evaluation of Past Performance, Technical and Price, with Past Performance and Technical being of equal weight, but when combined, are significantly more important than Price. While the Government and the Contracting Officer will strive for maximum objectivity, the evaluation process, by its nature, is subjective and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire evaluation process.

1.1.3. The source selection process will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.3, Source Selection. Offers will be evaluated using the criteria listed in “Evaluation Factors and Basis for Award.”

1.1.4. The Contracting Officer will conduct proposal compliance review after closing for determination of basic proposal adequacy prior to providing the proposals to the board. Failure to provide a complete proposal consisting of all Exhibits, (Exhibits A, B, D) required in the 3 volumes and the Prototypical Pricing Sheet(s) E may result in the proposal being removed from further consideration for award.

1.1.5. Noncompliance with the RFP requirements may raise serious questions regarding an offeror’s technical and/or cost performance and may be grounds to eliminate the proposal from consideration for contract award. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the RFP will be considered unacceptable. A Proposal that is not presented in an orderly format may be considered noncompliant with solicitation instructions not evaluated and removed from consideration for award. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will be easy for the Government to understand and will enable the Government to perform a thorough and fair evaluation.

1.1.6. Offerors must ensure that no pricing information is displayed in Binder No. 2 (Volumes 2 and 3, Past Performance and Technical Proposals).

1.1.7. Although the assessment of Past Performance as a specific evaluation factor is separate and distinct from the Determination of Responsibility required by FAR Part 9, Past Performance information obtained herein will be used during the Government’s responsibility determination. The Government also reserves the right to obtain additional information solely for the purpose of making a responsibility determination from all offerors after receipt of proposals. Requests for responsibility information do not constitute discussions.

1.1.8. ENFORCEABILITY OF PROPOSAL: The proposal must set forth full, accurate and complete information as required by this solicitation. The Government will rely on such information in the award of a contract. By submission of the offer, the Offeror agrees that all items proposed (if applicable, e.g., key personnel, subcontractors, plans, etc.) will be utilized for the duration of the contract and any substitutions will require prior Contracting Officer's approval.

1.1.9. The offeror shall be held responsible for the validity of all information supplied in his/her proposal, including that provided by potential subcontractors. Should subsequent investigation disclose that the facts and conditions were not as stated, the proposal may be rejected.

1.1.10. The Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals at any time prior to award if such action is in the Government's best interest; negotiate with any or all offerors; award a contract to other than the offeror submitting the lowest price(s) or highest technically rated; and award contracts to offerors submitting a proposal determined by the Government to be the most advantageous to the Government.

1.1.11. Upon conclusion of evaluations the names of the apparent successful offerors, who are being considered for future task orders as an 8(a) set-aside will be provided to the , US Small Business Administration (SBA), Columbus District Office, Two Nationwide Plaza, STE 1400, Columbus Ohio 43215 for an eligibility determination unless adequate documentation is provided with the proposal. The SBA must approve the joint venture agreement prior to award of an 8(a) contract to the Joint Venture.

1.1.12. Joint Venture Requirements - Parties wishing to propose as a joint venture must submit, with the Pro Forma documents, an executed copy of the joint venture agreement. The joint venture agreement shall be executed in accordance with FAR 4.102(d). Each joint venture partner shall submit evidence satisfactory to the Contracting Officer that its Board of Directors has approved its participation in the joint venture or by an instrument of similarly binding character in the case of an unincorporated entity. Offerors are reminded that to obtain an award the awardee, to include a joint venture, must be registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database.

Applicable to set-aside solicitations: Joint Ventures must meet applicable size standards (See FAR Subpart 19.1).

Submit with the proposal any size determination for the Joint Venture entity received from the Small Business Administration. A Joint Venture where-in one party is not a small business may be referred to the Small Business Administration (IAW FAR 19.302 (b)) to determine eligibility. Note that there were significant changes in 2011 to the SBA requirements for a Joint venture Agreement in a small business set-aside. Ensure that you have the most up to date regulations from the Small Business Administration. All questions regarding this must be directed the Small Business Administration and not the Contracting Officer.

1.1.13. The Government reserves the right to contact the SBA at anytime during the evaluation process to determine eligibility of an offeror. An offeror found ineligible by the SBA will be eliminated for award under the set-aside.

1.1.14. All Joint Ventures must be registered in CCR as a joint Venture, prior to award. Given this solicitation is a 100% Small Business set-aside, in the event there is a question as to the Joint Venture size the Contracting Officer will refer the Joint Venture to the SBA for a size determination as necessary.

1.1.15. All Joint Ventures are advised to avoid a potential conflict of interest Joint Venture (JV) partners WILL NOT be eligible for individual MATOC awards in addition to an award to the JV entity.

Proposals received for individual MATOC consideration from a JV partner will be found non-compliant and not evaluated.

2. EVALUATION FACTORS AND BASIS FOR AWARD:

2.1. Evaluation factors are Past performance and Technical considerations, which are of equal weight, but when combined are significantly more important than cost or Price. The evaluation process is as follows:

2.1.1. The Government will evaluate and rate an offeror's Past Performance using descriptive adjectives that most accurately define the evaluators confidence of offeror's performance risk considering each sub-factor identified in this section.

2.1.2. The Government will evaluate and rate an offeror's Technical proposal using a color rating that combines technical merit and proposal risk.

2.1.3. The Government will evaluate the reasonableness and realism of the total proposed price for the prototypical project and assign a reasonable or unreasonable rating to the price of the Prototypical Project.

2.2. PROCESS: The following process will be used to determine the best value for selection of the MATOC basic contract award.

2.2.1. The risk assessment of Past Performance and color rating of Technical will be evaluated in conjunction with the price proposed for the Prototypical Task Order. To arrive at a Best Value decision, the Source Selection Authority will integrate the evaluation of Past Performance, Technical and Price; Past Performance and Technical, when combined, are significantly more important than Price. The firms that represent the best value to the Government will be selected for award of a MATOC basic contract. If in the Government’s interest an award may be made to a contractor receiving an “unreasonable” in the prototypical price.

3. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION:

3.1. The Past Performance proposal evaluation will consider such things as an offeror's business practices, customer relationship, and ability to successfully perform as proposed and other considerations considering currency, relevancy, sources, context, and trends. Past Performance includes current on-going (present) performance.

3.2. The Government will conduct a performance risk assessment based upon the Past Performance of the offeror as it relates to the probability of successful accomplishment of the work required by the solicitation.

3.3. The Government will rate an offeror's Past Performance at the factor level using descriptive adjectives that most accurately defines the Government’s confidence of successful performance considering all potential evaluation criteria identified in this section. Relevance will be considered in the overall Past Performance rating.

Ratings will consider the offeror's Past Performance considering currency, relevancy, sources, context, and trends.

The Past Performance evaluation will include, but is not limited, to the following listed in descending order of importance:

Quality- Management and Workmanship Timeliness and adherence to schedule Specification compliance Subcontractor Management Offeror’s business practices Customer relationship Overall customer satisfaction Safety Adequacy of safety programs Compliance with Government small business concerns requirements Adequate Utilization of Small Business Concerns clause (52.219-8) requirements (applicable to all offerors) Reference FAR 19.702

3.4. To conduct the performance confidence assessment, the Government may use data provided by the offeror, and data obtained from other sources. The Government may do but is not limited to the following: evaluate present and past performance information through the use of questionnaires completed by the offeror's references;

use data independently obtained from other Government or commercial sources, including, but not limited to, Government databases; rely upon personal business experience with the offeror; and use the information provided in the Offeror’s Past Performance Relevancy Questionnaires (Exhibit A).

3.5. The evaluation will also consider information provided relative to corrective actions taken to resolve problems on past or existing contracts and trends in performance.

3.6. The evaluation may take into account Past Performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to this acquisition. If multiple subcontractors are provided for the same discipline, the government will use the lowest rated subcontractor in the evaluation.

3.7. Past Performance information on contracts not listed by the offeror, or that of planned subcontractors, may also be evaluated. The Government may contact references and contact parties other than those identified by the offeror, and information received may be used in the evaluation of the offeror’s Past Performance. While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing current accurate and complete Past Performance information rests with the offeror. The Government reserves the right to obtain and evaluate Past Performance information from any source it deems appropriate.

3.8. An offeror with no Past Performance may receive a rating based on the evaluation of its predecessor companies, key personnel, and/or subcontractors, provided an Exhibit B has been executed and included in the proposal for proposed subcontractors and/or potential key personnel not employed by the contractor. These ratings may not have the same weight as the ratings of the proposing company. If such information is not applicable (i.e., the offeror does not have a predecessor company, key personnel or subcontractors with relevant experience), the offeror shall be evaluated as “unknown” (Neutral). However, the proposal of an offeror with no relevant Past Performance history, while rated “Unknown” (Neutral) in Past Performance, may not represent the most advantageous proposal to the Government and thus, may be an unsuccessful proposal when compared to the proposal of other offerors. Offerors without previous Government contracts shall be rated “unknown” (neutral) in the area of compliance with small business concerns requirements.

3.9. Currency, Relevancy, Trends: The Government will consider the currency, relevancy and trends of the performance information while conducting its performance evaluation. Exhibit As may be used for this purpose.

3.9.1. For the purpose of this solicitation, currency is performance occurring within the last five years through the solicitation release date. Within this period, performance occurring later in the period may have greater significance than work occurring earlier in the period. For example, performance information for work occurring during 2011 may have greater importance than performance information for work occurring during 2008.

3.9.1.1. In assessing relevancy, the Government may evaluate an offeror's references for similarity of the construction methods to the scope of this solicitation, multi-discipline, scope/type of contracts/projects, cost magnitude of projects as it relates to price, area of consideration requested, client type and location of work performed as it relates to the location(s) of work to be performed under this contract. Performance on managing multiple projects at one time may also be considered.

3.9.1.2. The Government may consider an offeror’s previous contracts in the aggregate in determining relevancy, should the offeror’s present and past performance lend itself to this approach. For example, an offeror’s work experience on three contracts may, by definition, represent only a somewhat-relevant effort when each contract is considered as a stand-alone effort. However, when these contracts are performed concurrently (in part or in whole) and are assessed in the aggregate, the work may more accurately reflect a relevant or very relevant effort.

3.9.1.3. The following weighting apply to relevancy considering all the elements listed above;

3.9.1.3.1. VERY RELEVANT - Past/present performance efforts involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires;

3.9.1.3.2. RELEVANT - Past/present performance efforts involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires;

3.9.1.3.3. SOMEWHAT RELEVANT - Past/present performance efforts involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities, this solicitation requires;

3.9.1.3.4. NOT RELEVANT - Past/present performance efforts involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities, this solicitation requires.

3.10. In accordance with FAR 15.306(a)(2), if award will be made without conducting discussions, offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their proposals, e.g., the relevance of an offeror's Past Performance information and adverse Past Performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond, or to resolve minor clerical errors.

3.11. Performance Confidence Assessment: In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings as it applies to performance confidence assessment.

3.11.1. 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.

3.11.2. Satisfactory Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government…