Inactive Total Small Business Set-Aside (FAR 19.5)

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, HONOLULU DISTRICT, CONTRACTING DIVISION, BUILDING 252, ATTN: CEPOH-CT-B, FORT SHAFTER, HAWAII 96858-5440 Architect-Engineer Services, Indefinite Delivery (Mechanical and ... U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, HONOLULU DISTRICT, CONTRACTING DIVISION, BUILDING 252, ATTN: CEPOH-CT-B, FORT SHAFTER, HAWAII 96858-5440 Architect-Engineer Services, Indefinite Delivery (Mechanical and Fuel Systems) for the Design of Miscellaneous Projects in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Pacific Ocean Honolulu (POH) Area of Responsibility (AOR) CONTRACT INFORMATION: Architect-Engineer (Mechanical and Fuel Systems) service procured in accordance with PL 92-582 (Brooks A-E Act) and FAR Part 36, as required for design support primarily for projects within or assigned to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Pacific Ocean Honolulu (POH) Area of Responsibility (AOR). The POH AOR includes the State of Hawaii, Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), American Samoa, Kwajalein Atoll, and the Republic of the Marshall Islands. The indefinite delivery contracts (IDCs) will be negotiated and awarded with a base period of five (5) years with no option periods. The amount will not exceed a cumulative total of $9,900,000 for all contracts awarded under the solicitation over the five (5) year period. It is the Government’s intent to award at least three (3) AE single award indefinite delivery task order contracts with a not-to-exceed shared capacity of $9,900,000. The Government obligates itself to obtain no less than $2,500 in services. The contracts are anticipated to be awarded in November 2022. After contracts are awarded, work will be issued by negotiated firm fixed-price task orders. When deciding which indefinite delivery contract will be selected to negotiate an order, the Contracting Officer will notify all A-E firms within the MATOC pool of the task order requirement. The Task Order Requirement Notice (TORN) will include a short summary of the scope of work and the selection criteria, and if appropriate, a Request for Supplemental Information tailored to the specific task order requirement. The task order specific selection criteria will be listed in the order of importance. Using the evaluation criteria specified in the TORN, the selection board will evaluate the SF330s on file and any responses to the TORN to determine the most highly qualified firms for the specific task order requirement. The board will consider the following: current capacity to accomplish the order in the required time, unique specialized experience, past performance, and quality of performance under the other task orders. The Government may also evaluate the qualifications of the key personnel and technical approach, depending on the requirement. [BMRCUC(1] Each A-E firm selected under this announcement will be required to update their SF330s annually in accordance with FAR 36.603(d). The North American Industry Classification (NAICS) code for this project is 541330, “Engineering Services.” The Small Business size standard for this NAICS code is $16.5M annual average revenue. This is a competitive procurement set aside for Small Business. To be eligible for contract award, a firm must be registered with the System for Award Management (SAM) database. For instruction on registering with SAM, see the SAM website at https://www.sam.gov/. PROJECT INFORMATION: Work primarily includes but is not limited to: Mechanical work may include plumbing, compressed air, industrial ventilation and HVAC design, energy and life cycle cost analysis, petroleum, oil, and lubricants (POL) design (UFC 3-460-01), process pumping and piping design, anti-terrorism and force protection design associated with mechanical systems, seismic design for mechanical systems, and DDC control design for various facilities. POL work may include fuel tank farm design, aircraft fueling facilities, transmission lines, tank truck loading and off-loading facilities, marine receiving and dispensing facilities, and natural and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) gas tank and gas distribution systems. Fire protection work may include fire suppression/extinguishing, fire alarm, mass notification, carbon monoxide detection, and smoke control system design; building code, life safety code, and water supply analyses; and a multi-discipline review of the entire project for various facilities. Fire suppression/extinguishing systems may include automatic sprinkler, water spray, foam, standpipe, dry chemical, wet chemical, clean agent, water mist, and carbon dioxide systems; portable fire extinguishers; and fire pumps. It is anticipated that task orders under this contract will primarily consist of military "Sustainment, Modernization and Repair" (SRM) type projects, and will also include historical civil, and environmental projects. In compliance with DFARS 219.502-1, because this requirement is set aside for small business entities, the total amount of AE Services that can be provided on this contract for military construction work (MILCON) or family housing projects, shall be no more than $400,000. Specifically, task orders may include, but is not limited to, any or all of the following range of Mechanical and Fuel Systems Engineering services for a broad variety of minor to major repair, modification, rehabilitation, and new construction projects primarily in support of the Department of Defense and associated Agencies. The work and type of services will consist primarily of preparation of design analyses and reports; plans and specifications for designs of predominantly vertical construction projects; horizontal construction projects may also be in the variety of work assigned. All design and other engineering-related services must be performed by or under the direct supervision of licensed professional Engineers. All services shall be performed in accordance with applicable Installation Design Guide, as well as all applicable codes and criteria required for Government work and all applicable laws, codes, and regulations pertinent to accessibility. The awarded contract will be in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) (https://www.acquisition.gov/FAR/). ProjNet (DrChecks) (https://www.projnet.org) will be used for comment resolution of all design reviews. SELECTION CRITERIA: The selection criteria for this solicitation are listed below in descending order of importance. Criteria (a) through (e) are considered primary. Secondary criteria, (f) and (g) will only be used as tiebreakers among firms ranked technically equal using the primary criteria. Specialized experience and technical competence The evaluation will consider the extent of the offeror's specialized experience and technical competence of the prime firm and sub-consultants for engineering services described in paragraph 2 "Project Information." SF330 requirement: Provide within SF 330, Part I, Section F examples of not more than 5 design projects completed within the last 5 years of the synopsis issuance date that best demonstrate specialized experience and technical competency in the areas listed above in section B, PROJECT INFORMATION. Project experience where the Prime was the lead, and projects where the prime and significant subcontractors proposed for this IDC requirement worked together, will be given more consideration. Project examples submitted should be of completed projects. All projects cited shall identify design start/complete dates, project size (cost and scope) along with specifically identifying the approximate amount of work (as a percentage of the total value) contributed by each entity of the firm regarding the total effort. (SF 330, Part I, Section F). The evaluation will consider the firm's management plan/structure and design quality control procedures. The Management plan and organizational structure will be evaluated to determine the sufficiency of oversight of how task orders will be managed to provide quality design products and meet project milestones. The firm shall list by name and position, all key personnel responsible for its execution. SF330 requirement: Provide management plan/structure and design quality control procedures within Part I, Section H (Additional Information) (b) Professional qualifications of the prime firm's staff and sub-consultants to be assigned to the projects. The evaluation will consider the extent of the education, training, registration, and overall relevant experience of the key personnel identified below. This criterion primarily focuses on the qualifications of the key personnel for the contract and not the quantity of personnel, which is addressed under the "capacity to accomplish the work" criterion. SF330 requirement: Provide a maximum of six (6) key personnel for the Mechanical Engineer and Fuel Systems disciplines. Provide a minimum of one (1) individual / up to a maximum of two (2) key personnel for the remaining disciplines identified below. The Government will not review any additional personnel beyond the maximum number of personnel identified above. Identified key personnel will be more highly evaluated if he or she participated in the firm's sample projects submitted in the SF 330 Section F. Use a separate Section E for each individual. Do not generalize professional registrations or certifications but provide specific details. The lead architect or engineer in each discipline must be registered in the appropriate professional field. For purposes of selection criteria, the use of the term "registered" means a Registered Architect or Professional Engineer registered to practice in the particular discipline in a State, the District of Columbia, or an outlying area of the United States. Key personnel are as follows: • PROJECT MANAGERS (U.S. Registered Architect or Engineer) • U.S. REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEERS • U.S. REGISTERED ARCHITECTS • U.S. REGISTERED STUCTURAL ENGINEERS • U.S. REGISTERED MECHANICAL ENGINEERS • FUEL/POL ENGINEERS (Degree in Engineering with at least ten (10) years of Fuels/POL experience. • U.S. REGISTERED FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEERS • U.S. REGISTERED ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS • U.S. REGISTERED COMMUNICATION DISTRIBUTION DESIGNERS (RCDD) accredited by Building Industry Consulting Service International (BICSI) and have a current active RCCD registration. • U.S. REGISTERED ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS • U.S. REGISTERED SURVEYORS Licensed Professional Land Surveyor (LPLS) • U.S. REGISTERED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS • COST ENGINEER (Degree in Engineering or Architecture with at least ten (10) years cost estimating experience and be a Certified Cost Consultant (CCC) or Certified Cost Professional (CCP) as certified by the AACE. Demonstrate prior experience in the use of MII software) • LEED Building Design and Construction (LEED BD+C) Accredited Professional (AP) (Worked on a minimum of two (2) LEED silver projects relating to the requirements of this acquisition, preferably USGBC registered or GBCI certified) • Commissioning Authority (CxA) (Certification as a CxA from either AABC, AEE, BCxA, NEBB, TABB, ASHRAE, or University of Wisconsin-Madison. Demonstrate having at least 5 years commissioning authority (CxA) experience. • CYBERSECURITY ENGINEER (IAM level II certified) Knowledge of the locality of the projects Firms will be evaluated on specific familiarity with the site conditions in Hawaii and the POH AOR. The intent is to demonstrate knowledge and understanding of local conditions, including the physical environment, local engineering criteria/codes/processes of local city/county/state/federal jurisdictions/authorities, local construction methods, and construction market conditions. The firm shall provide specific information on both the Prim firm’s or Joint Venture (JV) and sub-consultants’ local experience and knowledge. The Prime firm’s or JV’s knowledge of locality will be evaluated more favorably than sub-consultants. SF330 Requirement: The basis of evaluation for this criterion will focus on the information provided in SF330, Part I, Section E (Resume of Key Personnel), Section F (Example Projects), and Section H (Additional Information). Past Performance of the firm for similar work Firms will be evaluated on past performance for quality of work products, compliance to project schedules, and effectiveness of management. Past performance evaluations will be retrieved through the Government's Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) and managed through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). PPIRS is the primary source of information on past performance. Performance evaluations for the Prime firm is considered the most relevant criteria; however, past performance evaluations for any significant subconsultants may also be considered. The evaluation will consider past performance from other sources. The relevancy of past performance information will be considered. The more relevant the information, the more weight it carries (Mechanical and/or Fuels projects are considered of higher relevance). NOTE: if no relevant past performance information is available to evaluate, or if the record is so sparse such that no meaningful rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will be assigned a rating of neutral and shall not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably. SF330 requirement: Past performance data for example projects presented under Part I, Section F of the SF330 will be considered. Performance evaluations will be queried for all firms. Any credible, documented information on past performance may be submitted, but the Government is not required to seek other information on past performance if none is available through PPIRS. (Note: Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) can be submitted to provide or supplement a firm’s past performance with other than U.S. Governmental clients. Firms which choose to use the PPQ may obtain a PPQ standard form by submitting a request to the below referenced POC via email.). Capacity of the firm to accomplish work in the required time. Firms will be evaluated on their capacity to accomplish the work. Firms must clearly demonstrate adherence to project schedules for all projects that are critical to the Government. Completion within the schedule will require the engagement of sufficient and competent staff and subcontractors. Firms must demonstrate the capacity to accomplish multiple task orders in multiple locations simultaneously. Firms must demonstrate the ability and available capacity to take on unanticipated additional work. SF330 requirement: Provide narrative information within Part I, Section H (Additional Information) and the number of employees listed in Part II General Qualifications. SECONDARY selection criteria, to be used as quote mark tie-breakers quote mark among technically equal firms, are listed in descending order of importance as follows: (f) Geographic proximity in relation to the location of the work. Firms will be evaluated based on their main office's physical proximity to Hawaii. The Prime firm’s or JV’s Geographic proximity will be evaluated more favorably than sub-consultants. (g) Volume of recent DoD contract awards. The objective of this criteria is to affect an equitable distribution of DoD AE contracts among qualified firms. Specify the total volume of work awarded to the firm by a DoD agency within twelve (12) months of the closing of this announcement. When identifying the total volume of work, include all stand-alone or indefinite delivery contract (IDC) task orders, including modifications, issued by DoD agencies. DO NOT include the potential value of an IDC, nor options which have not been exercised. Information may be presented in SF330, Part I, Section H or the Government may obtain the information through other means. 3. SELECTION CRITERIA: An adjectival rating scale will be applied to each criteria with the highest possible rating first and in descending order: Excellent, Highly Acceptable, Acceptable, Marginal, Unacceptable. BASIS FOR ADJECTIVAL EVALUATION Excellent (E): The proposal is outstanding in that it clearly demonstrates a thorough understanding of the requirements and greatly exceeds the minimum level for the criterion. The Offeror’s capabilities are of the highest proficiency and are thoroughly illustrated or substantiated. The proposal is internally consistent throughout when addressing the criterion. The proposal has significant strengths in exceeding the minimum level of the criterion and contains no weaknesses. Highly Acceptable (HA): The proposal is very good, demonstrates good understanding of requirements, and exceeds the minimum level for the criterion. The Offeror’s capabilities are of high proficiency and are well justified or substantiated. The Proposal contains very minor or no inconsistencies with other portions of the proposal when addressing the criterion. The proposal has strengths in exceeding the minimum level for the criterion and is not significantly offset by weaknesses. Acceptable (A): The proposal is acceptable in that it meets the minimum level for the criterion. The proposal demonstrates an acceptable level of understanding of requirements. The Offeror’s capabilities are of an acceptable level of competency and are sufficiently illustrated or substantiated. The proposal contains minor or no inconsistencies or in compatibilities with other portions of the proposal when addressing the criterion. Proposal has strengths in meeting the minimum level for the criterion and is not significantly offset by weaknesses. Marginal (M): The proposal does not completely address the criterion to demonstrate an acceptable level of understanding the government’s minimum requirements. The proposal is weak in providing sufficient evidence to demonstrate or illustrate its capabilities to perform the anticipated work at an acceptable level of quality. The proposal may contain inconsistencies in addressing the criterion. The proposal may have strengths in meeting a portion of the criterion; however, it is offset by weaknesses and/or deficiencies. Unacceptable (U): The proposal is incomplete in that it does not satisfactorily address the criterion. There is no evidence to illustrate that the firm understands the government’s minimum requirements. The proposal lacks evidence to demonstrate or illustrate its capabilities to meet the criterion. The proposal contains inconsistencies, weaknesses, and significant deficiencies. Only applies to Past Performance Acceptable (A). The Offeror lacks past performance information in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). The intent of this neutral rating is not to penalize the Offeror for no past performance as a Prime A-E/contractor. It may have past performance serving as a sub-contractor/consultant. Therefore, the Government will determine the Offeror to have an “Unknown” past performance. In the context of acceptability / unacceptability for past performance, “Unknown” shall be considered “Acceptable.” SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Firms desiring consideration must submit a Standard Form 330 (one pdf file with searchable text on CD/DVD) no later than February 28, 2022 2:00 PM Hawaii Standard Time. Specific detail regarding the content of the SF330 is provided in the preceding paragraphs. SF330s will be sent to: U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, HONOLULU DISTRICT CONTRACTNG DIVISION (CEPOH-CTB) OTAKE STREET, BUILDING 252 FORT SHAFTER, HAWAII 96858-5440 Request for Proposal No. W9128A22R0007 shall be utilized to solicit a proposal from the firm selected. This is not a request for a proposal.