This is a service / maintenance or supply contract in Warwick, Rhode Island. Contact the soliciting agency for additional information.

Award Details Contract Award Date: Oct 25, 2022 Contract Award Number: 70Z0G123DABCD0001 Task/Delivery Order Number: Contractor Awarded Unique Entity ID: Contractor Awarded Name: Colby Company, LLC Contractor Awarded Address: Portland, ME 04101 USA Base and All Options Value (Total Contract Value): $9975000.00 Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contract to provide professional architectengineering services, five total contracts awarded: Colby Company, LLC 47A York St. Portland, ME 04101 70Z0G123DABCD0001 DuBois & King, Inc. 28 North Main St. Randolph, VT 05060 70Z0G123DABCD0002 EDM Architecture & Engineering, P.C. 100 West St., Suite 210 Pittsfield, MA 01201 70Z0G123DABCD0003 M. J. Engineering & Land Surveying, PC 1533 Crescent Rd. Clifton Park, NY 12065 70Z0G123DABCD0004 Oak Point Associates 231 Main St. Biddeford, ME 04005 70Z0G123DABCD0005 1. SET-ASIDE: This opportunity is 100% set-aside for small business concerns. The NAICS Code is 541330. The size standard is $16,500,000. FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting (DEVIATION 19-01) (August 2020) is applicable to this acquisition. At least 50 percent of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the concern. If a firm is competing for this contract as a joint venture, the firm must submit legal documentation along with their SF330 documenting their status as a joint venture. The joint venture must also be registered in www.sam.gov at the time of SF330 submission. The legal documentation verifying the joint venture will not be considered part of the page limit for SF 330 submission. 2. DESCRIPTION OF WORK: The U.S. Coast Guard has a requirement for a multiple award Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contract to provide professional architect-engineering services to support the civil engineering program in the CG District One AOR (includes Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, eastern New York and Northern New Jersey). Most work will consist of, but will not be limited to: (a) Develop contract ready documentation for Design-Bid-Build, including but not limited to services described in (c), below; (b) Develop contract ready documentation Design-Build contracts, including but not limited to services described in (c), below; (c) Engineering Support Services: Provide services in a wide range of technical areas to include but not limited to: Site investigations and site analysis, project planning and development, cost estimating, fire protection and life safety, energy/building envelope services, data management and technical services, project related environmental permits, plans, site surveys, facility condition assessments, hazardous material surveys, and interior design and space configuration analysis. Provide analysis and recommendations regarding engineering approach, design, and alternatives; (d) Providing retro-commissioning and commissioning services; (e) Field Services: Provide a full range of field work, including construction management, inspection, and construction contract support services / field support services. The A/E firm shall provide all necessary personnel, facilities, equipment, materials, and subcontractor services to simultaneously execute multiple task orders issued under this scope of services. The A/E firm shall ensure that all activities performed by its personnel, subcontractors and suppliers are executed as required in compliance with all applicable environmental and safety laws and regulations and shall meet all relevant, appropriate, and applicable professional standards. Services will be detailed on each specific Task Order. 3. SELECTION PROCESS AND CRITERIA: Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 36.6 ("The Brooks Act") selection procedures apply. Evaluation and selection will be based on the criteria stated herein and selection will be made according to the two-step process described below. The USCG is authorized to use a preselection board as outlined in FAR 36.602-2 and HSAM 3036.602.2. The term "preselection board" is synonymous with the term "slate" in a "Slate Selection Board." The USCG will use one group of USCG employees comprised of technical experts in the field for the Slate Selection Board. The Contracting Officer will advise the Slate Selection Board. The "Slate Selection" process is a two-step process where step one (slate) consists of the Slate Selection Board reviewing the SF 330s submitted in response to the synopsis and developing a list of those firms that are considered "most highly qualified" with which to hold discussions in accordance with FAR 36.602-3(c). The number of firms that are considered most highly qualified will be sufficient such that the intended number of awards can be made. Step two (selection) consists of the Slate Selection Board conducting discussions with the most highly qualified firms and then using the information gathered from the discussions and the SF330s to establish a ranking of the most highly qualified firms. The highest ranked firms are then "selected" and sent a solicitation including a request for rate proposals. For the purposes of conducting debriefs, this is considered the "final selection" in FAR 36.607. Negotiations are then conducted with those selected firms until a mutually agreeable contract with negotiated labor rates is established. Should a mutually agreeable contract with negotiated rates not be established, the next highest ranked firm or firms would be contacted. Firms will be notified in writing after step one has been completed as to whether or not they are being invited for discussions. After the "final selection" has occurred, firms will be notified in writing as to which firms were selected for negotiations. Firms may then request a debrief which will be provided as soon as reasonably possible. In all cases, the USCG will make a best attempt to debrief firms as outlined in FAR 36.607. Note that the A-E debriefing requirements are based on a limited subset of the FAR 15.506 requirements, and it is the USCG's interpretation that FAR 15.506(d)(2) through (d)(5) do not apply. Firms will be debriefed from the written records of the Slate Selection Board. Debriefs will be provided in writing. Firms will also have the option of requesting an optional follow-up telephone conference to discuss the written debrief materials. The telephone conference option must be elected within two business days of receiving the written debrief materials. Step One (Slate) Review of the SF330 will begin with the Professional Qualifications Selection Criteria (Paragraph 3.1 below). A SF330 submission that does not meet the Professional Qualifications Selection Criteria will not be reviewed any further. SF330s that meet or exceed criteria for the Professional Qualifications will then be carefully and completely evaluated by the Slate Selection Board using the remaining evaluation criteria. The SF330 will be assigned a rating of Exceeds, Meets, or Does Not Meet for each of the evaluation criteria. Those SF330s that receive the greatest number of highest ratings for the evaluation criteria, taking into account the relative order of importance of the evaluation criteria, will be considered most highly qualified. A ranking of all offerors that submitted SF330s will not be developed. Exceeds, Meets and Does Not Meet criteria ratings are defined as follows: Exceeds Criteria (E) - The SF330 addresses all aspects of the criteria in detail. The SF330 provides clear and compelling evidence to support statements made addressing the criteria. The SF330 demonstrates fulfillment of the required qualifications and it exceeds the qualifications in a manner that offers distinct advantages to the Government. Meets Criteria (M) - The SF330 addresses all aspects of the criteria. The SF330 provides evidence to support statements made addressing the criteria. The SF330 demonstrates appropriate fulfillment of the required qualifications. Does Not Meet Criteria (NM) - The SF330 does not address all aspects of the criteria. The SF330 does not provide sufficient evidence to support statements made addressing the criteria. The SF330 does not demonstrate appropriate fulfillment of the required qualifications. Neutral (N) (Past Performance only) - SF330, Part I Section F projects do not have a performance record identifiable upon which to base a meaningful performance rating. A search was unable to identify any relevant past performance for the offeror. This is neither a negative or positive assessment. Step Two (Selection) The most highly qualified firms will then be invited to discussions. The number of firms invited for discussions will be sufficient to ensure a minimum of three (3) and maximum of five (5) may be awarded. A firm will not be invited to a discussion if it cannot be determined most highly qualified by the evaluation board. Upon completion of discussions, the Slate Selection Board will determine a final ranking of the most highly qualified firms. The Slate Selection Board will first establish a numerical ranking accompanied by a narrative justification for each evaluation criterion. Both the information gathered from the discussions and the SF330s will be used in the ranking process. The highest ranked firm in a criterion will be given a ranking of one. The second highest ranked firm in a criterion will be given a ranking of two and so on for all of those firms that were considered most highly qualified and invited for discussions. In the case of a tie, all firms that the Slate Selection Board has determined tied for a ranking in a certain criterion will be given the same ranking. Once all firms are ranked for individual criterion, the Slate Selection Board will evaluate these rankings to determine an overall ranking of all firms. The Slate Selection Board will consider the numerical rankings for each criterion, the relative order of importance of the evaluation criteria, and underlying facts that resulted in rankings. Firms cannot tie in the overall ranking. The highest ranked firms will be selected for negotiation of a mutually agreeable contract award. Selection Criteria Each firm and its proposed team must demonstrate its qualifications with respect to the selection criteria which are listed below in descending order of importance. 3.1 Professional Qualifications (a) Provide evidence that your firm is permitted by law to practice the professions of architecture or engineering, for projects in the CG District One Area (states identified above), i.e., Business License or other documentation. (b) Provide affirmative statement that the firm has in-house resources/capability, or ability to obtain resources/capability through sub-consultants: Professional Licensing in Structural Engineering, Fire Protection Engineering, and Geotechnical Engineering (Civil Engineering with foundation/geotechnical experience). At least three of the Key Personnel listed below, including the Principal/Program Manager and Project Manager, must be provided by the prime. (c) Submit One (1) resume for each of the positions and disciplines identified below, within Section E of the SF330. Submit no more than nine resumes, each no greater than two (2) pages in length. In Part I, Section E, Block 13, under ROLE IN THIS CONTRACT, the same position titles as listed below must be used. If an individual will serve in more than one position, then those positions shall be clearly indicated in Part I, Section E, Block 13. In Part I, Section E, Block 19, under RELEVANT PROJECTS, include only projects in USCG District One Area of Responsibility having the final project deliverable (design or report, does pertain to construction support services) complete within the past seven (7) years of the posting date of this synopsis Key Personnel: Program Manager* Project Manager* Structural Engineer** Fire Protection Engineer** Foundation/Geotechnical Engineer** Mechanical Engineer** Civil Engineer** Electrical Engineer** Architect** * Qualifications per Statement of Work Section C.5, A-E Project Management, Coordination, and Quality Control ** Professional engineering license or Registration Evaluation Methodology: The Slate Selection Board will review the resumes submitted along with the additional supporting information required and determine whether or not the firm and its proposed team meets or does not meet this required criterion. In order to meet this criterion, the firm's proposed team members must demonstrate that each person proposed for each discipline meets the minimum years of experience and professional licenses, registrations, or certifications required above. One resume may cover more than one discipline. In instances where one individual's resume is used to cover more than one discipline, 2 pages may be allotted for each of the disciplines. A firm with more in-house disciplines/capabilities is more highly desirable than one that relies on sub-consultants. The Slate Selection Board will determine whether the firm and its proposed team exceeds, meets or does not meet the criterion based on how effectively the criterion is addressed. (Note: A SF330 submission that does not meet the Professional Qualifications Selection Criteria will not be reviewed any further.) 3.2 Specialized Experience and Technical Competence In Part I, Section F, of the SF330, submit no more than six architect-engineering projects with design fee valued between $5,000.00 and $1,000,000.00 in the CG District One Area of Responsibility that include summaries/descriptions that address the Description of Work above. Projects must have the final project deliverable (design or report, does not pertain to construction support services) completed within seven (7) years of the date of this synopsis. A minimum of three projects shall be from the prime firm. In the instance of JVs, projects may be submitted from each partner and counted as the three projects from the prime firm. At least one project must be submitted from each JV partner. Provide at least 2 projects for developing contract ready documentation for Design-Bid-Build contracts. Provide at least 1 project for developing contract ready bridging documentation for Design-Build contracts. Provide at least 2 projects for Engineering Support Services. Project: A project is defined as one contract or one task order for which one Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation would be assigned. Multiple task orders or contracts for either a public or private entity shall not be combined under one Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). An IDIQ contract is not considered one project. If one contract has multiple option years and has only one CPARS evaluation, it will be considered one project. Multiple task orders for the same site are not considered one project. Multiple contracts for the same site are not considered one project. In Part I, Section H, of the SF330, include a narrative/charts/graphs or other supporting information detailing the firm and its proposed team's ability to address the Description of Work above, including experience in the following: (a) Design of Government and/or commercial facilities, both vertical and horizontal; (b) Design of industrial facilities; (c) Design of waterfront facilities; (d) Preparation of cost estimates and/or value engineering studies; (e) Design of high performance and sustainable buildings and/or building features; (f) Preparation of permit applications relating to construction projects; (g) Topographical surveys; (h) Geotechnical and/or subsurface utility investigations; (i) Hazardous materials surveys and/or abatement/remediation planning; (j) Coordination with State and Federal Environmental Regulatory and Permitting agencies. (k) Facility assessments and engineering studies Evaluation Methodology: Evaluation will be based on the Slate Selection Board's assessment of the firm's and its proposed team's specialized experience and technical competencies as described above. A firm and its proposed team that more effectively addresses the required specialized experience and technical competencies will be considered more highly qualified than one that does not. A firm and its proposed team that demonstrates a greater diversity of specialized experience across the aspects of the Description of Work in the submitted projects and supporting information in Section H will be considered more highly qualified. The Slate Selection Board will determine whether the firm and its proposed team exceeds, meets or does not meet the criterion based on how effectively the criterion is addressed. 3.3 Capacity In Part I, Section H, of the SF 330, provide: (a) An organizational chart describing lines of authority and location of personnel, for Prime contractor, Key Personnel, and any sub-consultants. (b) The firm's management plan, including quality assurance processes, coordination between disciplines, and coordination of in-house work with sub-consultants. Describe prior experience of the prime firm with any significant sub-consultant(s), or in the case of a partnership, teaming arrangement or JV, prior experience working together in addition to working with sub-consultant(s). Describe the firm's business model to retain highly qualified staff and the key personnel proposed. (c) Describe the firm's and its proposed team's capacity to accomplish multiple simultaneous task orders in various architectural-engineering phases at disparate locations. Evaluation Methodology: An assessment will be completed of the firm's and its proposed team's capacity as described above. Section G of the SF330 will be evaluated as part of this criterion. A firm and its proposed team that demonstrates greater participation of Key Personnel in the quality assurance process and coordination of projects provided in Part I, Section F will be considered more highly qualified than one that does not. Part II may be used to assess this criterion in terms of the firm and its proposed team's capacity to accomplish the scope of this contract. The Slate Selection Board will determine whether the firm and its proposed team exceeds, meets or does not meet the criterion based on how effectively the criterion is addressed. 3.4 Past Performance. A past performance record (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System [CPARS)] or past performance questionnaires) must be submitted for each project included in the SF330 submission, Part I, Section F. DO NOT submit past performance records for projects not included in Section F. Past performance records may be dated within the last seven (7) years to correspond with the projects submitted under Part I, Section F. Evaluation Methodology: The Past performance factor will be evaluated using the criteria of 1) cost control, 2) quality of work, and 3) compliance with performance schedules. The Slate Selection Board will evaluate each instance of past performance and determine whether the firm and its proposed team exceeds, meets or does not meet these criteria. Evaluation will be performed after the Slate Selection Board's assessment of the relevance of the past performance information submitted or obtained. Only relevant past performance information will be evaluated. Evaluating past performance will also include reviewing the information available in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS.gov) for DUNS numbers provided for the prime firm or for any JV partners. A Neutral (N) rating will be given if a firm does not have a past performance record identifiable upon which to base a meaningful past performance rating. This is neither a negative or positive assessment. To establish whether past performance information is relevant, the board will consider the following comparison of submitted or obtained past performance information, relative to the proposed contract: (a) work that is similar in terms of complexity and scope; and (b) work where performance by the team member was in a similar role 3.5 Location and Geographical Knowledge. In Part I, Section H, of the SF 330, demonstrate your firm is located within the general geographic area of CG District One AOR, and has experience conducting multiple different types of architect-engineering projects throughout the USCG District One Area of Responsibility. Demonstrate knowledge of and expertise in different challenges throughout the CG District One Area, including but not limited to consideration for high wind, seismic, marine environment, precipitation, and local cost factors. Evaluation Methodology: Based on the projects submitted, the Slate Selection Board will assess the firm's location and its proposed team's ability to effectively address the knowledge of locality as described above. A firm and its proposed team that more effectively addresses knowledge of locality will be considered more highly qualified than one that does not. The Slate Selection Board will determine whether the firm and its proposed team exceeds, meets or does not meet the criterion based on how effectively the criterion is addressed. 4. CONTRACT STRUCTURE The Government may make award to a minimum of three (3) and maximum of five (5) A-E firms, on an IDIQ, Multiple Award Contract. The work will be required on an as-needed basis during the life of the contract. Firms must have a 3rd party audit of indirect rates prepared prior to submission of rate proposals (Defense Contract Audit Agency [DCAA] or other 3rd party). The audit provided must support the indirect rates being proposed. The contract will include a five year ordering period. Labor and indirect rates will be negotiated prior to award of the contract. Escalation rates for the ordering periods will be negotiated prior to award of each contract. There will be no total per contract limit or annual contract limit, but when all IDIQ contracts are combined, the total aggregate value will not exceed $9,975,000 over the life of the contract. Estimated date of contract award is on or before June 30, 2021. Award of task orders under this IDIQ contract are anticipated to vary from a minimum of $3,000 to a maximum of $1M per task. The task order maximum may be exceeded with agreement between the Contractor and the Government. A minimum guarantee of $5,000 for the contract will be funded at award. Should the firm be selected for a task order, the minimum guarantee will be applied to that task order. Each task order will have a project-specific period of performance. The task orders issued under the awarded contracts will be competed under Fair Opportunity, FAR 16.505 (b), and will be awarded based upon the qualifications of the firm as required to best meet the requirements of the task order. When Fair Opportunity is provided, all firms awarded an IDIQ contract may compete for selection as the most highly qualified firm for that task order. The Government will determine the contract task order amount using the negotiated contract rates for each ordering period and negotiate the effort to perform the particular project/task order. 5. REQUIRED REGISTRATIONS All A-E firms are advised that registration in the System for Award Management is required prior to contract award. For more information, check the website at https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/. 6. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS A-E Firms that meet the requirements described in this announcement are invited to submit a completed SF330. Responses shall not exceed 50 pages single-sided print or 25 pages double-sided print. Include page numbers on pages that will be counted toward the page limitation. Pages not counted toward the page limitation need not have page numbers, but additional pages that are determined to be not applicable will be removed from the submission by the Contracting Officer and will not be evaluated. Resumes submitted under Part I, Section E, are limited to those positions listed in the evaluation criteria above. Resumes will be considered as part of the page limitation. Each resume under Section E shall be no more than two pages per discipline. Resumes for other positions will not be considered and should not be submitted. Should a firm be selected for contract award, additional positions, labor categories and their associated rates will be subject to negotiation. Substitutions of Key Personnel for task orders shall be approved by the Contracting Officer. Responses must be presented using standard page size (8.5-in. by 11-in.), standard page margins (not less than included on the SF330), and standard font size (11 pt. for all content added by the firm; default font size as included in the SF330 forms available from GSA is acceptable) other than headers, footers, tables, spreadsheets, figures, and graphics which can be provided at not less than 8 pt. font. Up to five (5) pages of the total page count may be presented on 11-in. by 17-in. page size as long as it is strictly limited to the presentation of tables, spreadsheets, figures, or graphics. All pages submitted will be considered as part of the page count with the exceptions of cover letter (limited to 1 page), Part II - General Qualifications, JV paperwork, front cover, back cover and divider pages/tabs (must not contain information related to selection criteria), pages defining acronyms, and past performance submissions. If no CPARS past performance is available, submit the attached past performance questionnaire (PPQ) filled out by the client. As an alternative to the prescribed PPQ form, information previously completed by a client may be submitted as long as the information contained is substantially the same information in the attached PPQ form. Past performance submissions shall be submitted under a separate tab labeled "Past Performance". Include DUNS number for prime firm or JV partners in Part I. Part II - General Qualifications Special Instructions: Please include a separate Part II for each branch office and each sub-consultant as applicable to this announcement that the offeror intends to use for this contract. Responses shall be submitted in hard copy format in a three ring binder (NO SPIRAL BOUND) with one (1) original and four (4) copies, and one (1) electronic copy on a CD/DVD (offerors shall ensure that proposal disks are virus free, and free of password protection) to the Contract Specialist, Simon W. Leung at: U.S. Coast Guard Civil Engineering Unit - Providence ATTN: Simon W. Leung 475 Kilvert Street, Suite 100 Warwick, RI 02886 The Government will issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) requesting discipline labor rates to the highest ranked A-E firms. The list of discipline labor rates must at least include those positions listed above in the evaluation criteria. The Government has established a 21-day turnaround for the A-E firm's proposal after receipt of the RFP. Responses shall include a detailed breakdown of overhead rates and an audit (DCAA audit or one by another 3rd party) of the proposed rates. THIS SYNOPSIS IS NOT A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. Electronic (e-mail, facsimile, etc.) submissions of SF330s are not authorized. Firms responding to this notice by 4:00 PM Eastern Standard Time on December 02, 2020 will be considered. Inquiries concerning this project should include solicitation number, title, and point of contact and should be sent electronically to simon.w.leung@uscg.mil and sean.e.waldron@uscg.mil. The cutoff date for submitting inquiries is November 18, 2020. Firms are encouraged to submit any questions as soon as possible. Responses to questions will be posted via amendment to this notice. The method of contractor selection has not been determined at this time.