E_Revised_Solicitation_SECTION_M_0004.pdf

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1. Basis for Contract Award

This is a competitive best value source selection using Lowest Price Technically Acceptable procedures. The Government intends to award a single contract as a result of this solicitation.

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the offeror(s) who provides the best overall value to the Bureau of Indian Affairs as determined by an integrated assessment.

Award will be made to the offeror who is deemed responsible according to FAR Part 9, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements and is judged, based on the evaluation factors, provides the best value to the Government.

M.2. Evaluation Procedures

M.2.1. Proposals will be evaluated on the basis of the evaluation factors listed below using the Economical Lowest Price Technically Acceptable method. That is, price will be evaluated first. Only the lowest price offer will be examined for technical acceptability. If the lowest price offer is technically acceptable, award will be made to that offeror and no other offers will be reviewed for technical acceptability. If the lowest price offer is not technically acceptable, the second lowest offer will be reviewed for technically acceptability.

The government will proceed in this fashion until an offer is determined to be technically acceptable. Therefore, some offers that do not present the lowest price may not be reviewed for technical acceptability.

The following areas will be evaluated:

M.2.1.1. Total price reasonableness and completeness. The Government reserves its right to evaluate for price realism.

M.2.1.2. Technical – (Acceptable/Unacceptable)

M.2.1.2.1. Technical Approach

M.2.1.2.2. Key Project Management/Technical Support

M.2.2. VOLUME I – PRICE

M.2.2.1. Total Price: This criterion evaluates the overall price to the Government and determines if the proposed price is realistic, reasonable, and complete. The Price Proposal will also be evaluated to determine the offeror's understanding of contract requirements as expressed by the solicitation. Any inconsistencies between proposed performance and price must clearly be justified. For example, if unique and innovative approaches are the basis for an abnormally low proposed price, the nature of these approaches and their impact to the proposed price, must be completely documented. The burden of credibility of price rests solely with the offeror. The following evaluation criteria shall apply:

M.2.2.1.1. Reasonableness: The offeror's proposal will be reviewed to determine if the proposed price is reasonable (see FAR 15.404-1(b)).

M.2.2.1.2. Completeness: Price proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror provided sufficient data as required by the solicitation and the Contracting Officer during the evaluation.

M.2.2.2. The lowest priced technically acceptable offer whose price is determined to be realistic, reasonable and complete based on the above criteria will be determined the best value to the Government for award.

M.2.3. VOLUME II – TECHNICAL EVALUATION

M.2.3.3. The technical proposal will be evaluated on a “acceptable” or “unacceptable" basis.

M.2.3.3.1. The Government will rate any technical proposals that are evaluated according to the chart listed.

M.2.3.3.2. The lowest priced, technically acceptable offer will be selected for award.

M.2.3.3.3. If the lowest priced, technically acceptable offer has a price that is not reasonable or complete the Government may find that offer un-awardable and may conduct discussions or cancel the solicitation.

M.2.3.4. Technical Standards:

M.2.3.4.1. Technical Approach: The minimum standard is met by a narrative that addresses all of the elements listed below with a realistic and achievable approach that will effectively accomplish the work described in the Statement of Work. Logical inconsistencies, discrepancies between the approach and the Statement of Work, unrealistic or unachievable strategies, and factual errors will result in an unacceptable rating.

The proposal shall contain a detailed narrative of the Contractor’s planned approach to the project. The narrative shall include a detailed schedule including all work elements that complies with contract requirements. Specific items that are required to be addressed include:

DEFINITION RATING

Passes (or meets) minimum standard requirements Acceptable Fails to meet minimum standard requirements Unacceptable

1. Plans for the diversion and care of water, dewatering and unwatering as necessary

2. Plans for excavation, including the planned approached for phased construction

3. Plans for import and stockpiling of required aggregates, cement, rip rap and other necessary materials.

4. Plans for foundation preparation, including sequencing, final clean-up, and protection prior to fill or RCC placement.

5. Plans for winter work, winter shutdown and/or post shutdown as applicable

6. Plans for onsite batching of Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC), Mass

Concrete and Structural Concrete.

7. Plans for delivery of RCC to the service spillway.

8. Placement plan for the RCC spillway, including sequencing of both RCC, Structural and Mass Concrete

9. Placement plan for the intake tower

10. Plans for embankment placement, filter and drainage placement and acceptance testing of such

11. Plans for installation of Deep Soil Mixing stabilization.

12. Plans for installation of the Cement Bentonite cutoff wall

13. Plans for installation of the auxiliary spillway grade control structure

14. Plans for procurement and installation of new housing units.

M.2.3.4.2. Key Project Management/Technical Support: The standard is met when the proposal addresses all of the elements listed below with a qualified team of key personnel, teaming partners, and/or subcontractors that collectively can accomplish the work described in the Statement of Work. Proposal of unqualified personnel, illogical teaming structures, or insufficient resources to accomplish the work will result in an unacceptable rating.

The proposal shall demonstrate experience by the proposed team in successful execution of the following project aspects within the past 5 years:

1. Demolition of the existing concrete spillway, including ogee weir, training walls, chute and stilling basin. Demolition of the existing concrete outlet works. Required experience includes demonstration of at least one concrete demolition of at least 2,000 CY within the past 5 years.

2. Installation of Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC) for dam spillways.

Required experience includes installation of at least 1 (one) RCC gravity structure within the previous 5 years of at least 10,000 CY.

3. Replacement of a portion of the earthen embankment, including installation of sand and gravel filters and drains. Required experience includes at least two successful installations of zoned earthfill embankments for dams of at least 20,000 CY each within the past 5 years.

4. Diversion and care of water and dewatering. Required experience includes successful execution of diversion of a least 20 cfs and dewatering of silt and clay earthen materials within the past 5 years.

5. Soil-Cement-Bentonite (SCB) Cutoff. Required experience includes installation of at least 30,000 SY of SCB at least 40 feet tall within the past 5 years.

6. Deep Mixing Method (DMM). Required experience includes successful installation of at least 3,000 vertical feet of soil improved with DMM methods using auger sizes at least 3 feet in diameter within the past 5 years.

In addition to submission of required team experience as described above, the contractor shall submit resumes for Key Personnel as described below. Contract personnel shall be required to meet or exceed those of the submittal during construction.

Superintendent: The Superintendent shall have at least 15 years of experience in the construction of dams. The Superintendent shall have successfully completed at least 3 dam projects with value of each equal to or greater than $10 million.

Quality Control Manager (QCM): The QCM shall have no less than 15 years of experience as a Quality Control Manager for large civil construction. The QCM shall have completed at lease 3 dam projects in the past 10 years, at least one of which includes at least 10,000 CY of RCC installation. Alternatively, the contractor may propose an additional RCC QCM with the required RCC experience above. The QCM shall be certified to perform these duties for either the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or Bureau of Reclamation.

Roller Compacted Concrete Foreman: The RCC Foreman shall have installed no less than, 50,000 CY of RCC for dams within the past 10 years.

SCB Cutoff Wall Foreman: The SCB Cutoff Wall Foreman shall have installed no less than 5 years-experience in installation of SCB or similar cutoff walls with at least 3 projects installed to depths of 50 feet or greater.

DMM Foreman: The DMM Foreman shall have at least 10 years-experience in DMM soil improvements and shall have completed at least 3 projects with similar installation depths and methods within the past 5 years.

END OF SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

END OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL