Inactive Total Small Business Set-Aside (FAR 19.5)

Amendment 02, issued 12 May 2025, is hereby issued to incorporate the Questions received pertaining to this contract opportunity and the Government responses (Answers); refer to the attached Q&A docum... Amendment 02, issued 12 May 2025, is hereby issued to incorporate the Questions received pertaining to this contract opportunity and the Government responses (Answers); refer to the attached Q&A document "243207_RFQ Q and As". Amendment 02 also hereby incorporates a revised Statement of Work dated 09 May 2025, replacing the previous version dated 14 Jan 2025; refer to document "Atch 1 243207_Revised SOW_20250509". Amendment 02 hereby incorporates the Supplimental Information document associated with this project; refer to "Atch 3 243207_Supplemental Information". Amendment 02 hereby extends the RFQ response deadline from 19 May 2025 by 3:00PM PDT to 23 May 2025 by 3:00PM PDT. All other provisions and requirements of the RFQ remain unchanged and in effect. Amendment 01, issued 24 April 2025, is hereby issued to add additional language to RFQ Evaluation Factor 4 - Past Performance regarding the PPQ template, shown underlined within Evaluation Factor 4. All other provisions and requirements of the RFQ remain unchanged and in effect. Project Number: XUMU 243207 Engineering Study, Study Launch Facilities (LF) 9 and 10 at Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB), CA Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Architectural and Engineering Services Vandenberg Space Force Base, California The Architect-Engineer (A-E) shall conduct a thorough field investigation to provide a complete and usable Engineering Study that evaluates the condition of the concrete structures that make up the launch tube and surrounding area to include the identification of underground utilities supporting the launch facilities (LF 9 & LF 10) at VSFB. The Study should also capture information on groundwater levels and how water is penetrating the silos. The facility numbers associated with these two launch sites are 1993 and 1963 respectively. This Statement of Work (SOW) sets forth the requirements for a full and complete delivery method for a concrete and groundwater study at two LFs at VSFB, CA. The A-E is to provide the government with engineering documentation capturing the current state of the concrete structure and groundwater infiltration, to include a solution for repairing any deficiencies uncovered during the investigative study following all applicable codes, standards, laws, and regulations, that pertain to this project. The 30th Contracting Squadron (30 CONS) intends to issue a Request for Proposal to one (1) AE firm for project XUMU 243207, Engineering Study, Study Launch Facilities (LFs) 9 and 10 at Vandenberg SFB, on or about 09 July 2025. The award is contemplated as a Total Small Business Set-Aside. The contract will be a negotiated, firm fixed-price contract. The following North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code applies to this RFQ: 541330, Engineering Services. The size standard for this NAICS code is $25.5M. Drawings, cost estimates, specifications, calculations, and all other deliverables required under this acquisition shall be completed within 349 calendar days after date of Award, unless otherwise agreed upon with the Government project manager and contracting officer. This acquisition will be procured pursuant to the requirements in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation and FAR Part 36, Construction and Architect - Engineer Contracts. All potential respondents are reminded that in accordance with FAR 52.204-7, System for Award Management (SAM), lack of registration in the SAM will make a respondent ineligible for contract award. Request for Qualifications: This Request for Qualifications (RFQ) shall not be mistaken for a Request for Proposal. In accordance with FAR Part 36.702, interested A-E firms shall submit an SF330, Architect-Engineer Qualifications, for Government evaluation by the RFQ deadline. SF330 information shall be provided per the latest format from the GSA Library located at https://www.gsa.gov/forms-library/architect-engineer-qualifications. All sections of the SF330 must be completed. All completed SF330s received by the RFQ deadline will be evaluated by the Government. Failure to provide requested data may negatively impact a respondent 's rating or determine the respondent non-responsive. In accordance with FAR Part 36.6, Architect-Engineer Services, and based on the SF330s and responses to RFQ evaluations, only the one (1) A-E firm considered to be the most highly qualified after review and discussions of the minimum requirements/evaluation factors will be eligible to receive the RFP. Evaluation Factors: In accordance with FAR Part 36.602-1, Selection Criteria, potential A-E firms will be evaluated based on the following selection criteria: (1) Professional qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services. Complete this evaluation factor using Section E and Section G of the SF330. Submit personal resumes and relevant information for key and responsible personnel. Section E shall be not more than one (1) page in length per individual. Evaluation of professional qualifications will include but is not limited to an assessment of the A-E firm’s individual personnel resumes. The recommended professional qualifications for satisfactory performance of the required services are defined as professional qualifications in (but not limited to): Program Manager, Project Manager, Mechanical Engineer, Civil Engineer, Electrical Engineer, Geotechnical Engineer, Structural Engineer, Geographic Information System (GIS) Analyst, Planner, Draftsman, Technical/Specifications Writer, Cost Estimator, Contract Admin/Procurement Analyst, and Clerical. Anticipated project tasks for the referenced disciplines are similar to those listed at https://www.wbdg.org/design-disciplines/planning. The professional qualifications recommended above are not the required team composition, it is a team composition that the Government considers an adequate composition for the subject requirement. Equivalent positions will be considered equally. Respondents must submit personnel resumes for all professional disciplines necessary for satisfactory performance of required services. The term “necessary” denotes that the proposed team composition exemplifies that each proposed team member, through his/her personal resume, demonstrates the qualifications/competency in that discipline through experience, training, and/or certifications in their respective field. The proposed team composition must be captured in Section C and Section D of the SF330, no page limit. Note: Resumes for Draftsman, Technical/Specifications Writer, Contract Admin/Procurement Analyst, and Clerical are not required. The A-E firm shall ensure that only qualified, competent personnel carry out the tasks outlined in this SOW. Qualified, competent personnel is defined as a registered professional or, where registration is not applicable, trained, and/or certified in their respective field. Primary technical services shall be performed by individuals who are licensed in California and credentialed members of architectural, planning, science, and engineering professions or under the direct supervision of a credentialed professional in the discipline being performed. Generally, a credentialed professional (a) is licensed (e.g., registered professional engineer) to practice in the state where a facility is located and (b) commands the necessary expertise, in terms of knowledge and experience, to undertake the specified task to be identified within the contract. Failure to provide sufficient data supporting professional qualifications may negatively impact an A-E firm’s rating. (2) Specialized experience and technical competence, within the past six (6) years, in the type of work required, including, where appropriate, experience in energy conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, and the use of recovered materials. Complete this evaluation factor by providing five (5) example projects using Section F of the SF330, limited to two (2) pages per project. Both Prime and Subconsultant experience is acceptable. Respondents must identify their firm’s role (prime or subcontract) for each example project. Narratives shall, when possible, be supported with illustrations or photographs of completed projects, with no more than three (3) additional pages of supporting illustrations or photographs per project. Specialized experience pertains to the types, size, volume, budget, and complexity of work previously or currently being performed by the A-E firm that is comparable to the work to be performed under this project’s scope of work. Specialized experience may also include unique conditions, considerations, or circumstances encountered that are relevant to this RFQ. Specialized experience does not include overseas offices for projects outside the United States, its territories, or possessions; nor does it include subsidiaries that are not normally subject to management decisions, accounting, and policies, or a holding or parent company or an incorporated subsidiary that operates under a firm name different from the parent company. Technical competence includes construction and design projects similar in project scope, size, construction features, dollar value, and complexity of that listed in this RFQ. Similar complexity is considered projects of an operational, construction, or design likeness to the work outlined in this SOW. Specific emphasis of experience and technical competence shall be geared toward engineering studies for launch facilities, or similar. A-E firms unable to demonstrate proven specialized experience and technical competence may be considered non-responsive or scored negatively. (3) Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time. Complete this evaluation factor using Section H of the SF330. Provide a narrative that describes the A-E firm’s work capacity. Narrative shall be no more than one (1) page in length. The A-E firm shall provide a brief summary of its past, present and projected future workload over the previous 12 months, through Fiscal Year 2026. The A-E firm shall describe the capacity to incorporate this project’s scope of work while meeting prescribed dates for current workload. (4) Past performance, within the past six (6) years, on contracts with Government agencies and/or private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work, compliance with performance schedules, communication, satisfactory project management, and subcontract management, if applicable. Complete this evaluation factor using Section H of the SF330 describing the A-E firm’s past performance on the five (5) example projects identified in Section (2) of this RFQ. The summary sheet shall be no more than two (2) pages in length per example project. Submit past performance data of example projects in narrative format that highlight cost control, quality of work, compliance with performance schedules, and satisfactory project management. Past performance data submitted as a subconsultant must be identified as such on the PPQ and must be completed by the Prime contractor. The narratives of example projects must show contract number, issuing agency, project name, a current point of contact (including telephone and email information); project scope, size, and location; design fees, total number of modifications or change orders issued during performance of project; date of project completion, construction cost estimate, principal design elements and features; complexity of the job, challenges faced and actions taken; and the resolution and results of any challenges faced. If known, list the construction contract award price, and the total number of construction contract modifications/change orders and their total value. CPARS data or Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) must be provided for all example projects submitted under this Section. Respondents without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is unavailable will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance, however, respondents who provide past performance data may be evaluated higher for this factor. If relevant CPARS evaluation(s) are available, report(s) shall be submitted with the completed SF330 package. CPARS reports and PPQs are not considered part of the page limitations for this Section. If there is not a completed CPARS evaluation, the PPQ included with this notice is provided for the respondent or its team members to submit for each project included in criterion (2). Official CPARS evaluation(s) found in in government databases will take precedence. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your SF330. Note: The provided PPQ template is not a required template for use; the Respondent may submit an alternative PPQ template as part of the response to Evaluation Factor 4 - Past Performance so long as the submitted PPQ addresses all the information required in Section 1 of the provided PPQ template (Attachment 2) and, at a minimum, provides an evaluation of all six (6) performance factors plus the Summary questions in Section 2 of the provided PPQ template. The adjectival ratings and definitions used to reflect the evaluation of performance must match those on the provided PPQ template. Respondents are notified that the Government may use sources of information such as, but not limited to the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) to determine a respondent’s relevant experience and past performance as part of this evaluation. The evaluation of past performance will include but is not limited to: The customer’s assessment of the respondent 's quality of work; record of conforming to contract requirements and applicable codes, standards, laws, and regulations; history of satisfactory project management and collaboration with the customer; addressing design errors/omissions timely; and adherence to approved schedules. Evaluating past performance and experience may include information provided by the firm, customer inquiries, Government databases, and Contracting Officer knowledge of current project performance. Failure to demonstrate proven competence to perform design services similar in scope and complexity to this acquisition may be considered ineligible for award. (5) Location in the general geographical area of the project and knowledge of the locality of the project. Complete this evaluation factor using Section H of the SF330. Provide a narrative that describes the respondent’s experience with developing engineering studies for launch facilities, or similar, located in California. Narrative shall be no more than one (1) page in length. Respondents will be objectively evaluated based on their knowledge and familiarity (and the knowledge of subcontractors) with applicable codes, standards, laws, and regulations, that pertain to this project. If prior experience in California is minimal or unavailable, describe how the design team plans to obtain specific knowledge of local conditions or project features required for a compliant design. Data from other projects and locations are acceptable to highlight knowledge of applicable codes, standards, laws, and regulations, that pertain to this project. Higher ratings may be given for prior experience working on Vandenberg Space Force Base. Evaluation Factors Page Limitations: Factor 1: Professional Qualifications SF330 Section: E, G Page Limit: E: 1 page per individual, no maximum page limit, G: no limit Factor 2: Specialized Experience SF330 Section: F Page Limit: 2 pages per project, plus 3 pages of supplementary illustrations and photographs per project Factor 3: Capacity SF330 Section: H Page Limit: 1 page Factor 4: Past Performance SF330 Section: H Page Limit: 2 pages per project (no page limit on CPARS or PPQs) Factor 5: Location SF330 Section: H Page Limit: 1 page *Note: There is no cumulative page limit Notice to potential respondent(s): Funds are not presently available for this effort. No award will be made for this effort until funds are available. The Government reserves the right to cancel this acquisition, either before or after the deadline for receipt of SF330s. In the event the Government cancels this acquisition, the Government has no obligation to reimburse a respondent of any cost. Questions and Answers: Questions regarding this post are due no later than 28 April 2025 by 3:00PM PDT, responses to all questions received will be added to the SAM.gov post on or about 05 May 2025. Only questions related to the RFQ and project requirements will be addressed; questions regarding details of the resulting RFP will not be answered. RFQ Response Due Date: Responses to this RFQ are due no later than 23 May 2025 by 3:00PM PDT. Late responses will not be considered for further elevation. NOTE: It is the responsibility of all potential respondents to monitor these sites for release of any future notices and/or release of amendments. General inquiries regarding this notice may be emailed to the Contracting Officer, Meghann Applebay at meghann.applebay@spaceforce.mil and the Contract Specialist, David Coatney at david.coatney@spaceforce.mil. Please note that due to increased firewall protections, some emails may be blocked; therefore, a follow-up via telephone at 805-605-2465 (if an acknowledgement is not received via email) is strongly recommended to ensure receipt of your submission by the Government.