Indefinite Delivery Architect-Engineer (A-E) Services Contract (Architectural) Not-To-Exceed $190M for the Design of Miscellaneous Projects in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Honolulu District Area of Responsibility

Active

Contract Opportunity

1. CONTRACT INFORMATION: Architect-Engineer (A-E) services procured in accordance with PL 92-582 (Brooks A-E Act) and FAR Part 36, are required for various military and civil works projects within the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Honolulu District (POH) Area of Responsibility (AOR). The POH AOR includes State of Hawaii, territories of Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), Federal States of Micronesia (FSM), American Samoa, and Kwajalein Atoll, and Republic of the Marshall Islands.

Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDCs) will be negotiated and awarded with a base period of five (5) years with a six (6) month option to extend services. It is the Government’s intent to award at least four (4) unrestricted A-E IDCs and a small business (SB) reserve of at least four (4) SB A-E IDCs with a not-to-exceed shared capacity of $190,000,000. The Government obligates itself to obtain no less than $1,000.00 in services. The criteria set forth in FAR 36.602-1 will be utilized for the selection of A-E firms rather than competitive bidding procedures, with the contracts anticipated to be awarded in June 2024.

After contracts are awarded, work will be issued by negotiated firm-fixed-price task orders. The Government anticipates future task orders will be in a range between $25K and $20M. Task order selection procedures will be consistent with the Memorandum for Acquisition Community CECT-ZA (715e) “Updated Procedures for the Selection of Task Orders on A-E IDCs” dated 9 March 2023. When the Government awards a task order under this MATOC, 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, selection criteria, and may include a request for supplemental information tailored to the specific task order requirement. Alternatively, the Government may feel that they have enough information to make the selection, in which case no request for supplemental information will be made. Using the selection criteria specified in the TORN, the selection board will evaluate the SF-330s on file and responses to the Task Order Questionnaire to determine the three most highly qualified firms for the specific task order requirement. The board will submit a report to the Selection Board Authority who will then make the selection in accordance with AFARS 5136.602-4 and 5136.602-5 and USACE implementation guidance.

Each A-E firm selected under this announcement will be asked if they would like to update their SF330s on an annual basis in accordance with FAR 36.603(d). Labor and Overhead rates will be negotiated for each 12-month period of the contract. Work will be issued by negotiated firm-fixed-price task orders. All interested Other Than Small Business (OTSB) A-E firms are reminded that, in accordance with the provisions of PL 95-507, they will be expected to place subcontracts to the maximum practicable extent consistent with the efficient performance of the contract with small and small disadvantaged firms. OTSB A-E firms selected for this contract must comply with FAR 52.219-9 regarding the requirement for a subcontracting plan for that part of the work it intends to subcontract. OTSB A-E firms selected for this contract will be required to submit a detailed subcontracting plan during contract negotiation. North American Industry Classification System Code (NAICS) is 541310 – Architectural Services, which has a size standard of $12.5M million in average annual receipts.

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/.

2. PROJECT INFORMATION: Work includes A-E services for the preparation of plans, specifications, design analysis, design and review services, estimates for repair, alteration, renovation, and/or new construction projects for installation support. Work may also include charrettes, parametric designs, and site/facility condition studies.

a. The firm shall have primary capability in architectural engineering and design services, including, but not limited to: work that will support US Military Construction (MILCON) and Sustainment, Restoration, & Modernization (SRM) construction, Civil Works, and DoD service components and support agencies. Representative types of facilities may include, but not limited to, renovation or new construction of barracks, company operations facilities, tactical equipment maintenance facilities, aircraft maintenance facilities, administrative facilities, family and unaccompanied housing, warehouses, schools, medical facilities, and recreational facilities. Design considerations include historical preservation, antiterrorism/force protection, and sustainable design development (SDD). Other work may include site development/ installation utility design, topographic surveys, geotechnical, structural, electrical, mechanical, communications, corrosion protection, landscape, and cybersecurity. Computer-aided drafting (CAD), format of CAD products, understanding and compliance with A/E/C standards will be required. 3D Civil Information Modeling (CIM), Geographic Information Systems (GIS), and Building Information Modeling (BIM) will be required. Designs will be prepared using US Standard English units of measure; however, selected projects may require metric units.

b. The Prime contractor must have capability in Architectural design and engineering services. Collectively as a team, the prime contractor and/or its sub-consultants must have capability in the following disciplines:

Architecture

Civil Engineer

Structural Engineer

Mechanical Engineer

Fire Protection/Life Safety

Electrical Engineer

Telecommunications

Geotechnical Engineer

Topographic Surveying

Environmental Engineer

Commissioning Authority

Corrosion Engineer

Cybersecurity

Cost Estimating

Specification Writing/Typist

3. SELECTION CRITERIA: The primary selection criteria are listed in descending order of importance. Criteria “a.” through “e.” are considered primary. Criteria “f.” through “g.” are considered secondary and will only be used as tie-breakers among highly qualified firms that are ranked technically equal using the primary criteria. Content provided by the Offeror beyond the stated maximums will not be evaluated.

a. Specialized Experience and Technical Qualifications:

1. The evaluation will consider the extent of the offeror’s experience of the prime firm and sub-consultants for the services described in paragraph 2 "Project Information."

SF330 requirement(s): A maximum of eight (8) example projects may be submitted for consideration under SF330, Part I, Section F. Example projects should be completed designs within seven (7) years of solicitation closing date. Incomplete design projects (less than 100% ready-to-advertise) will not be evaluated. All design projects shall clearly state the start and completion dates as well as project size (construction cost and scope). The Offeror shall specifically identify the approximate amount of work (as a percentage of the total value) contributed by the Prime and each sub-consultant in regards to the total effort. Additional information demonstrating a firm's qualifications may be presented under SF330, Part I, Section H (Additional Information).

2. Experience. Demonstrate experience in accomplishing comprehensive designs as the Designer of Record (DOR) for Design-Bid- Build or Design-Build projects as described in section 2 (Project Information) of this solicitation. Projects of greater scope/complexity and requiring participation of multiple disciplines, including sub-consultants, will be evaluated more favorably. For example, past experience for preparation of complete design-bid-build documents for new facilities and infrastructure projects will be evaluated more favorably than preparing Design-Build RFP documents for a sidewalk/bikeway project. Project experience where the Offeror was the lead will be evaluated more favorably. Demonstration of prior working relationships between the Prime and sub-consultants, with direct involvement of the Prime firm on past projects, will be evaluated more favorably. The basis of evaluation will be the example project(s) presented in SF330, Part I, Section F.

3. Management Plan/Structure. Management plan and organizational structure will be evaluated to determine the sufficiency of oversight of how task orders will be managed to meet project milestones. Provide specific management plan/structure and quality control procedures within SF330, Part I, Section H (Additional Information).

4. Quality Management. Design quality control procedures will be evaluated. Firms will be evaluated on their approach to ensure technical quality and accuracy of work products. A firm's approach to resolve issues of quality will be analyzed to determine the ability to provide quality design products. Describe and define the processes of the firm's quality control plan and list, by name and position, all key personnel responsible for its execution. Information describing Quality Management may be presented in SF330, Part I, Section H (Additional Information).

5. Computer-Aided Design (CAD). Ability to prepare A/E/C CAD Standard compliant design drawings in 2D and 3D Civil Information Modeling (CIM) and Building Information Modeling (BIM) with the latest versions of software from Bentley Microstation and Autodesk. Example projects shall state if CIM/BIM was employed in the preparation of drawings. Firms shall narratively describe the firm's team implementation and compliance with A/E/C CAD Standards on previous projects. Information may be presented in Section H (Additional Information).

b. Professional qualifications:

The evaluation will consider the education, training, registration, and overall relevant experience of the offeror's key personnel.

Provide a minimum of one (1) individual / up to a maximum of two (2) individuals per discipline for each of the Key Personnel disciplines identified below with the exception of the Architecture discipline, in which a maximum of (4) individuals each may be provided. Identified key personnel will be more highly evaluated if the individual demonstrates longevity with the firm and participated in the Example projects submitted in SF 330 Section F. Use a separate Section E for each individual. Do not generalize professional registrations or certifications, rather provide specific details. All architect/engineer disciplines must be registered in the appropriate professional field. For the purposes of this selection criteria, the use of the term "registered" is defined as 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. The Government will evaluate, as appropriate, the registration, education, certifications, overall and relevant project experience, and longevity with the firm. This criterion 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.

Provide key personnel resumes for the following disciplines:

1. PROJECT MANAGERS (U.S. Registered Architect or Engineer, or Project Management Professional (PMP), or American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP))


2. U.S. REGISTERED ARCHITECTS


3. U.S. REGISTERED STUCTURAL ENGINEERS


4. U.S. REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER


5. U.S. REGISTERED MECHANICAL ENGINEER


6. U.S. REGISTERED FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEER


7. U.S. REGISTERED ELECTRICAL ENGINEER


8. U.S. REGISTERED COMMUNICATION DISTRIBUTION DESIGNER (RCDD) accredited by Building Industry Consulting Service International (BICSI) and have current active RCCD registration.


9. U.S. REGISTERED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER


10. U.S. REGISTERED ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER


11. U.S. REGISTERED SURVEYOR. Licensed Professional Land Surveyor (LPLS)


12. COST ENGINEER (At least ten (10) years cost estimating experience and be a Certified Estimating Professional (CEP), Certified Cost Consultant (CCC) or Certified Cost Professional (CCP) as certified by the AACE or Certified Professional Construction Estimator (CPCE) from the Professional Construction Estimators Association of America. Demonstrate experience in use of MII software)


13. CAD OPERATORS/TECHNICIANS with experience in CAD and 3D Civil Information Modeling (CIM) and Building Information Modeling (BIM)


14. COMMISSIONING AUTHORITY (CxA) (CxA certification from AABC, AEE, BCxA, NEBB, TABB, ASHRAE, or University of Wisconsin- Madison. Minimum 5 years CxA experience.


15. CYBERSECURITY ENGINEER


16. CORROSION ENGINEER certification from NACE, SSPC


17. CERTIFIED VALUE SPECIALIST (CVS certified)

c. Knowledge of Locality:

Firms will be evaluated on specific familiarity with the site conditions in Hawaii and the USACE POH AOR. Knowledge of the local conditions, including physical environment, local and applicable engineering criteria/codes/processes of local city/county/state/federal jurisdictions/authorities, and construction market conditions and methods will be evaluated. The following key personnel resumes shall be evaluated for knowledge of locality: Project Manager, Architect, Civil, Structural, Mechanical, and Electrical. The A-E shall provide specific information on both the Prime firm’s or Joint Venture’s (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. The basis of evaluation for this criterion will focus on the information provided in SF330, Part I, Section E (Resume of Key Personnel), and Section H (Additional Information).

Also considered is the firm’s 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.

d. Past Performance:

The evaluation will consider all past performance of the prime A-E contractor as documented in the Government's Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) managed through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). Firms will be evaluated on past performance for quality of work products, compliance to project schedules, and effectiveness of management. Performance evaluations for the Prime firm is considered the most relevant criteria; however, past performance for any significant subconsultants may also be considered. Performance evaluations on completed designs within seven (7) years of solicitation closing date and/or SF 330 Section F example projects is also considered more relevant.

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. An Offeror may use Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) to provide or supplement a firm's past performance. Firms choosing to use the PPQ may obtain a PPQ standard form by submitting a request to POCs indicated in this solicitation.

e. ​​Capacity to accomplish the work:

Demonstrate the firm's experience in completing projects indicated in this solicitation and capacity to perform at least two (2) simultaneous task orders within the Government's required schedule. Demonstrate ability and available capacity to take on unanticipated additional work. Firms will be evaluated on their capability to perform work based on the information provided in SF330, Part I, Section H (Additional Information) on a narrative addressing above requirements, and the number of employees listed in Part II General Qualifications.

SECONDARY selection criteria, to be used as “tie-breakers” among technically equal firms, are listed in descending order of importance as follows:

f. Volume of recent DoD contract awards:

Specify the total volume of work awarded to the Offeror within the previous twelve (12) months of this solicitation’s closing date. 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. Present information for this criterion in SF330, Part I, Section H (Additional Information).

g. Small Business Participation:

Extent of participation of Small Business (SB), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Women-Owned Small Businesses (WOSB), HUBZone Small Businesses, Veteran Owned Small Businesses, and Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Businesses will be measured as a percentage of the total anticipated contract effort. Both Small Business and OTSB Offerors will be evaluated on the extent of participation of small business community (SBC) members in the performance of the acquisition. Offerors are required to meet the minimum mandatory total small business participation suggested objective/target percentages of,

• Small Business: 25.00%


• Small Disadvantaged Business: 20.00%


• Women Owned Small Business: 2.00%


• Service Disabled Veteran Owned SB: .30%


• HUBZone Small Business: .30%

The greater the participation, the greater the consideration. SBC members can propose work they will self-perform toward small business participation objectives. The small business subcontracting goals for this acquisition will be calculated based on the apparent successful Offeror(s)' proposed small business participation objective (i.e. target percentage) of total acquisition value. (SF 330, Part I, Section H, Item 4).

4. BASIS OF EVALUATION: An adjectival rating scale will be applied to each selection criteria with the highest possible rating first and in descending order: Excellent, Highly Acceptable, Acceptable, Marginal, Unacceptable.

Excellent (E): The submittal 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 submittal is internally consistent throughout when addressing the criterion. The submittal has significant strengths in exceeding the minimum level of the criterion and contains no weaknesses.

Highly Acceptable (HA): The submittal 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 Submittal contains very minor or no inconsistencies with other portions of the submittal when addressing the criterion. The submittal has strengths in exceeding the minimum level for the criterion and is not significantly offset by weaknesses.

Acceptable (A): The submittal is acceptable in that it meets the minimum level for the criterion. The submittal 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 submittal contains minor or no inconsistencies or in compatibilities with other portions of the submittal when addressing the criterion. Submittal has strengths in meeting the minimum level for the criterion and is not significantly offset by weaknesses.

Applicable to Past Performance selection criteria: In the case of an Offeror without a record of past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (See FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have an Unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability / unacceptability, “Unknown” shall be considered “Acceptable”.

Marginal (M): The submittal does not completely address the criterion to demonstrate an acceptable level of understanding the government’s minimum requirements. The submittal is weak in providing sufficient evidence to demonstrate or illustrate its capabilities to perform the anticipated work at an acceptable level of quality. The submittal may contain inconsistencies in addressing the criterion. The submittal may have strengths in meeting a portion of the criterion; however, it is offset by weaknesses and/or deficiencies.

Unacceptable (U): The submittal 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 submittal lacks evidence to demonstrate or illustrate its capabilities to meet the criterion. The submittal contains inconsistencies, weaknesses, and significant deficiencies.

5. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Interested firms having the capabilities to perform this work must submit the following no later than April 5, 2024, 2:00 PM Hawaii Standard Time.

1. One (1) electronic copy (PDF) of SF 330 Part I


2. One (1) electronic copy (PDF) of SF 330 Part II for the prime firm and all consultants / subcontractors

The SF 330 package must be submitted through the Department of Defense (DoD) Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE) system. Please see “Electronic Submittal Instructions” file attached to this notice for instructions for submitting the SF 330 submittal electronically and requesting a DoD SAFE Drop-Off Link. The submittal must clearly identify the announcement number. Facsimile and email submissions will not be accepted. Solicitation packages are not provided and no additional project information will be given to firms during the announcement period. This is not a request for proposal.

Regulation requires that the Selection Board not consider any submittals received after the specified time and date. Late submittal rules in FAR 15.208 will be followed for submittals received after 2:00pm Hawaii Standard Time (HST) on the closing date specified in this announcement.

The SF 330, 7/2021 edition, must be used, and may be obtained from the following web site: https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms/architectengineer-qualifications.

The SF330 submittal must meet the following requirements:

1. Include UEI number and CAGE code in SF330 Part I, Section B, Block 5.


2. The UEI number and CAGE code should be identified in SF 330 Part I, Section C, Block 9, for EACH TEAM MEMBER.


3. The submittal shall have a page limit of 100 pages (total of 100 pages allowed for complete copy of the submittal, ALL-INCLUSIVE). The selection board will not evaluate beyond 100 pages. A page is one side of a sheet. Past performance records, Joint Venture Agreement, blank sheets, divider sheets with section identifiers, and/or tabs with section identifiers separating the sections within the SF 330 will not count against the maximum page count.


4. All fonts shall be at least 10 pitch or larger.


5. Pages shall be 8-1/2 inches by 11 inches. Organizational charts may be presented on a sheet up to 11 inches by 17 inches. If an 11-inch by 17-inch sheet is used it shall be neatly folded to 8-1/2 inches by 11 inches, bound in the SF 330 at the proper location, and counted as one page.


6. A Part II is required for each branch office of the prime firm and any consultants/subcontractors that will have a key role in the proposed contract (i.e. a Part II is required for all entities identified in SF 330 Part I, Section C of the submittal).


7. Cover letters, company literature and extraneous materials are not desired and will not be considered.


8. Sections E and G of SF 330 Part I must include only individuals proposed to perform the anticipated work, including all consultants/subcontractors.


9. In SF 330 Part I, Section G, Block 26, along with the name, include the firm with which the person is associated.


10. A maximum of eight (8) projects including the prime and consultants/subcontractors will be reviewed for SF 330 Part I, Section F. If more than 8 projects are submitted, only the first 8 projects will be evaluated. Use no more than two (2) pages per project.


11. When listing projects in SF 330 Part 1, Section F, an Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC) with multiple Task Orders as examples is not considered a project. A task order executed under an IDC contract is a project.


12. Past Performance evaluations (CPARS/ACASS, PPQ - reference Paragraph 3.d. above) shall be submitted for each project provided in SF 330, Part I, Section F.


13. SF 330, Part I, Section H (Additional Information) shall contain the following information.
    
    
    
    • Item 1 - Capacity. Reference Paragraph 3.e. above. Provide a 1-2 page narrative discussing the capacity of the design firm to perform nationwide and to meet schedules, including adequacy of qualified personnel available and past experience in meeting tight design schedules.
    
    
    • Item 2 - Management Plan - Include the information requested in Paragraph 3.a(3) above.
    
    
    • Item 3 - Volume of DOD Contract Awards - Reference Paragraph 3.f. above. Provide a complete listing of all DOD A-E awards within the last 12 months. For IDCs, include total value of task orders actually issued by agencies in the last 12 months, not the potential value of the IDCs. For all types of contracts, do not include for consideration options that have not been exercised.
    
    
    
    

Joint ventures shall submit the following additional documentation of the evidence of a joint venture entity:

1. Firms shall provide a copy of a legally binding joint venture agreement.


2. Identification of the party who can legally bind the joint venture.

SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (only required from Large Business Concerns)

a. If the Offeror is a large business concern, the Offeror shall submit a subcontracting plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 (see Small Business Subcontracting Plan Sample attached to this announcement) NO LATER THAN five (5) calendar days after a notification request from the Contracting Officer or the Contract Specialist. The Offeror may e-mail its small business subcontracting plan to Christie Lee (christie.s.lee@usace.army.mil) and Tristin Suetsugu (tristin.n.suetsugu@usace.army.mil).

b. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan Sample format (see attachment) shall be utilized. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan requires offerors to “Submit the total combined dollar value and percentage of work to be performed by both large and small businesses (include the percentage of work to be performed both by Prime, joint venture, teaming arrangement, and Subcontractors). When combined, Large and Small Business totals must equal 100%. ”The plan shall include a description of the types of services the firm proposes to subcontract with large business and small business (SB), small disadvantaged business (SDB) (to include historically black colleges and universities/minority institutions (HBCU/MI)), woman-owned small business (WOSB), HUBZone business, veteran-owned small business (VOSB) and service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB), along with the proposed dollar amounts and percentages of their participation, to demonstrate a plan to meet the subcontracting goals (up to $190,000,000 total in Task Orders per Offeror).

c. Subcontracting Plan Assessment: The Government will assess the Plan in accordance with the DoD checklist (see attachment) and with the requirements of FAR Clause 52.219-9. Offerors are encouraged to review the DoD checklist to obtain a detailed understanding of how their subcontracting plan will be assessed. The acceptable Subcontracting Plan, after approval, will be incorporated into the base IDC award, as a material part of the contract.

6. TECHNICAL INQUIRIES AND QUESTIONS: Inquiries related to this announcement may be submitted via email to Ms. Christie Lee, at Christie.S.Lee@usace.army.mil, AND to Ms. Tristin Suetsugu, at Tristin.N.Suetsugu@usace.army.mil, no later than March 13, 2024, 2:00 PM Hawaii Standard Time.

Attachments/Links