1of2_W9128F21R0003_FP Digital Governors Install Solicitation.pdf

The offeror hereby agrees to do all w ork described in the documents entitled:

Fort Peck Digital Dovernor Install, Ft. Peck, MT

RETURN WITH OFFER: INFORMATION REQUIRED BY SECTION 00 10 00 (SF1442), SECTION 00 22 00, AND SECTION 00 45 00.

ELECTRONIC COPIES OF OFFER ARE ACCEPTABLE

THIS SOLICIATION IS UNRESTRICTED AND IS OPEN TO BOTH LARGE AND SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION

NADINE L CATANIA 402-995-2056

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

06-Nov-2020

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______10 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________285 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________1 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________08 Dec 2020 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time of fers are due.

B. An offer guarantee is, X is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______60 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DIST

CONTRACTING OFFICE

1616 CAPITOL AVENUE

OMAHA NE 68102-4901

W9128F

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

02:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

W9128F21R0003 59

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

W9128F21R0003

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

PRICING SCHEDULE

CLIN DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

BASE ITEMS

Site Visit to Measure Distributing Valve Spares

1 JOB XXX $_______________

0002 Mobilization and Demobilization 1 JOB XXX $_______________

Install New Governor Controls and Accessories – 5 Each

1 JOB XXX $_______________

Disassemble, Clean, Measure and Re-assemble Distributing Valves with New Components - 5 Each

1 JOB XXX $_______________

0005 Furnish Distributing Valve Parts Set 8 EA $__________ $_______________

TOTAL BASE (Items 0001 thru 0005) $_______________

1. See SECTION 00 21 00, INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, & NOTICES TO BIDDERS for evaluation of options.

2. Prices must be entered for all items of the schedule. Total amounts submitted without prices being entered on individual items will be rejected. Additions will be subject to verification by the Government.

3. A modification to a proposal which provides for a single adjustment to the total amount submitted, should state the application of the adjustment to each respective lump-sum price affected. If the modification is not so apportioned, the single adjustment will be applied to Item Nos. 0001 thru 0004.

4. See Section 01 22 00.00 26 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT for more information.

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 1 Job Site Visit

FFP

Site Visit to Measure Distributing Valve Spares FOB: Destination

PSC CD: Z1MD

NET AMT

0002 1 Job Mobilization and Demobilization

FFP

Mobilization and Demobilization

0003 5 Each Install New Governor Controls and Access

FFP

Install New Governor Controls and Accessories

0004 5 Each Disassemble,Clean, Measure and Reassem

FFP

Disassemble, Clean, Measure and Re-assemble Distributing Valves with New Components

0005 8 Each Furnish Distributing Valve Parts Set

FFP

Furnish Distributing Valve Parts Set

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

0001 556 dys. ANP 1 COE HYDROPOWER OPS & MAINT. SEC.

TIM ZABROCKI

USAED, OMAHACENWO-OD-F

PO BOX 208

FORT PECK MT 59223-0208

406-526-3431 EXT 3004

968607

0002 556 dys. ANP 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0003 556 dys. ANP 5 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0004 556 dys. ANP 5 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0005 556 dys. ANP 8 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.204-7 System for Award Management OCT 2018 52.204-16 Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting JUL 2016 52.211-2 Availability of Specifications, Standards, and Data Item

Descriptions Listed in the Acquisition Streamlining and Standardization Information System (ASSIST)

APR 2014

52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition JAN 2017 52.215-20 Requirements for Certified Cost or Pricing Data or

Information Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data

OCT 2010

52.222-5 Construction Wage Rate Requirements--Secondary Site of the Work

MAY 2014

52.225-10 Notice of Buy American Requirement--Construction Materials

MAY 2014

52.232-18 Availability Of Funds APR 1984 252.204-7008 Compliance With Safeguarding Covered Defense Information

Controls

OCT 2016

252.215-7008 Only One Offer JUL 2019

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

The Government contemplates award of a firm-fixed price construction contract resulting from this solicitation.

(End of provision)

52.236-27 SITE VISIT (CONSTRUCTION) (FEB 1995)

(a) The clauses at 52.236-2, Differing Site Conditions, and 52.236-3, Site Investigations and Conditions Affecting the Work, will be included in any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation. Accordingly, offerors or quoters are urged and expected to inspect the site where the work will be performed.

(b) A site visit is scheduled for Thursday, 19 November 2020 at 9:00am (MST).

Contractors interested in attending the site must notify Tim Zabrocki by 4:00pm (MST) on 17 November 2020 by e-mail at Timothy.Z.Zabrocki@usace.army.mil. Contractors are to meet at the Powerhouse at 215 Yellowstone Road Fort Peck, MT 59223 on the day of the site visit.

52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es):

http://acquisition.gov/comp/far/index.html http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/

Section 00 22 00 - Supplementary Instructions

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION 00 22 00

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS,

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, EVALUATION, AND BASIS FOR AWARD

1. WHO MAY SUBMIT

2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

3. BIDDER INQUIRY

4. FORMAT SIZE OF SUBMISSIONS

5. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS

5.1. Table 1 - Proposal Submittals

6. SUBMISSION DEADLINE

7. PROPOSAL CRITERIA

8. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

8.1. Evaluation Definitions

9. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

9.1. VOLUME 1 - PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

9.2. VOLUME 2 - PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

10. FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE

10.1. Submission Requirements

10.2. Evaluation

11. FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

11.1. Submission Requirements

11.2. Evaluation Method

12. FACTOR 3 - TECHNICAL APPROACH

12.1. Submission Requirements

12.2. Evaluation

13. FACTOR 4- PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE

13.1. Submission Requirements

13.2. Evaluation

14. FACTOR 5 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION

15. VOLUME 2 - PRICE

15.1. Submission Requirements

16. EVALUATION OF PRICE

16.1. Evaluated Price

16.2. Price Reasonableness

16.3. Unbalanced Pricing

17. COMPETITIVE RANGE

18. CLARIFICATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS

19. FINAL PROPOSAL REVISIONS

20. DEBRIEFING

ATTACHMENT 1

ATTACHMENT 2

SECTION 00 22 00

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS,

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION

1. WHO MAY SUBMIT

This solicitation is for Full and Open competition.

All Offerors, including joint ventures, must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM).

There will be no public opening. All proposals submitted will become, upon receipt, the property of the U.S.

Government and will not be returned. After evaluation of proposals, they will be retained for the official contract file.

Electronic copies of the awardees’ proposal will be submitted to the Field and Area Offices in support of their contract administration functions.

2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information sufficiently detailed to clearly indicate compliance with the proposal submission requirements.

3. BIDDER INQUIRY

Reference Section 00 21 00, paragraph 1.20.1, BIDDER INQUIRY for bidder question instructions and procedures.

4. FORMAT SIZE OF SUBMISSIONS

All portions (other than an organization chart, Gantt charts or drawings (if provided)) shall be in 8-1/2" x 11" format.

5. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS

In an effort to reduce paperwork and cost, all proposals shall be submitted electronically via email directly to:

Tim Boyte: Timothy.B.Boyte@usace.army.mil Nadine Catania: Nadine.L.Catania@usace.army.mil All submissions shall be in Adobe PDF format with Optical Character Recognition (OCR) applied to all documents that will enable word searches to be conducted using Adobe-compatible PDF software. The two (2) volumes listed below shall be submitted as “SEPARATE” single files. Offerors may use compression utilities such as 7-Zip, WinZip or PKZip to reduce file size and facilitate transmission.

Offerors are encouraged to send both files in the same email, if possible.

5.1. Table 1 - Proposal Submittals

Each submittal must contain Volume 1 and Volume 2 files named and structured as outlined below. Note the company name may be abbreviated.

5.1.1. Volume 1: Technical Proposal and Past Performance Information FILE NAME: W9128F21R0003_Company Name_Volume_1_Technical_Proposal

CONTENTS:

Location Description Vol. 1. TAB A FACTOR 1 - EXPERIENCE Vol. 1. TAB B FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE Vol. 1. TAB C FACTOR 3 - TECHNICAL APPROACH Vol. 1. TAB D FACTOR 4 - PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE Vol.1. TAB E FACTOR 5 - SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION

5.1.2. Volume 2: Price Proposal, Cost Information and Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors FILE NAME: W9128F21R0003_Company Name_Volume_2_Price_Proposal

CONTENTS:

Location Description Vol. 2 TAB A FACTOR 6 - PRICE (Standard Form 1442, Proposal Data Sheet And

Contract Line Item Schedule) Vol. 2 TAB B Evidence of Bondability

Vol. 2 TAB C Required Pre-Award Information

5.2 Late Submissions

For the purposes of determining whether the proposal was received “late”, in accordance with FAR 15.208, the date and time the file(s) are received via email by the Contract Specialist(s) will be the time and date the Government received the proposal.

6. SUBMISSION DEADLINE

Electronic proposals shall be received by the USACE Contracting Activity no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442. Offers will NOT be publicly opened. Information concerning the status of the evaluation and/or award will NOT be available after receipt of proposals.

7. PROPOSAL CRITERIA

Offerors shall submit a proposal that meets or exceeds the minimum requirements of these Specifications through the replacement, modification or refurbishment of components identified in 00 10 00 of this solicitation.

8. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

All proposals and documentation which have been properly submitted will be evaluated. Proposals will be evaluated on the basis of the factors stated in the solicitation to select the responsible Offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government. Because of the number of proposals anticipated, uniformity of all proposals is essential to assure fair and accurate evaluation. All proposals must comply with the instructions in the solicitation.

Proposals that do not generally conform to the RFP requirements may be considered to have a “deficiency”, i.e. a defect that cannot be remedied by exchanges and/or permitted proposal revisions. If a proposal is suspected of having a deficiency, it will be brought to the immediate attention of the appropriate authority who will determine if there is a deficiency. If the determination is made that a deficiency exists, the proposal will not be evaluated further and will be eliminated from further consideration. The affected Offeror shall be promptly notified of the decision.

Properly conforming proposals will be forwarded to the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) for evaluation.

If, after award, the key personnel or sub-contractors identified in the proposal are replaced, replacement personnel or sub-contractors with similar skills and experience equal to those presented in the proposal shall be presented to the Contracting Officer for approval. The Contractor shall obtain the Contracting Officer’s written consent before making any substitutions for these designated personnel or sub-contractors.

Information obtained from owners, contract administrators, or other points of contact provided by the Offeror may affect the evaluation rating given for the factors being evaluated by those discussions.

Evaluations will be conducted in accordance with the Tradeoff Process, FAR 15.101-1. Factors 1, 3, 4 & 5 will be rated using an adjectival methodology with a narrative assessment, Factor 2 will be a rated IAW paragraph 7.4.9 of this section, and Volume 2 (Price) will be evaluated after consensus scoring Factors 1 through 5. Proposal evaluation is an assessment of the proposal and the Offeror's ability to perform the resultant contract successfully.

Proposals will be evaluated to determine ratings supported by narratives, and to identify strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies of the proposed approach in each proposal.

8.1. Evaluation Definitions.

8.1.1. Strength. A substantive aspect, attribute, or specific item in the proposal that exceeds the solicitation requirements and enhances the probability of successful contract performance.

8.1.2. Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. A significant weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk.

8.1.3. Deficiency. A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

8.1.4. Omission. A failure to provide information required by the solicitation and depending on the nature and extent of the omission it may be evaluated as a weakness, a significant weakness or a deficiency.

8.1.5. Clarification. Clarifications are limited exchanges between the Government and Offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. If award without discussions is anticipated, Offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their proposals or to resolve minor or clerical errors.

8.1.6. Communications. Communications are exchanges between the Government and Offerors after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range.

8.1.7. Discussions. Discussions are negotiations conducted in a competitive acquisition and take place after establishment of the competitive range. Discussions are tailored to each Offeror's proposal, and shall be conducted by the Contracting Officer with each Offeror within the competitive range.

8.1.8. Combined Technical/Risk Rating. The application of a scale of colors and adjectival description will be used in conjunction with narrative to denote the degree to which the proposal has met the standard for a non-cost factor. Ratings will be applied at the factor and subfactor level. If, at any factor or subfactor level, an Offeror’s proposal is evaluated as not meeting a minimum requirement (that is, below the level of “Satisfactory”), this fact must be included in the rating and narrative assessment at that level and at the factor level. Therefore, an unsatisfactory rating at any level may be carried to the factor level.

The following ratings will be used to evaluate Factors 1, 3, 4 & 5:

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

Color Rating Description Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

8.1.9. Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. There are two aspects of the past performance evaluation. The first aspect is relevancy. The past performance evaluation considers each Offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. The Offeror’s past performance will be evaluated to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. Consideration shall be given to those aspects of an Offeror’s contract history that would give the greatest ability to measure whether the Offeror will satisfy the current procurement. Common aspects of relevancy include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming. There are four levels of relevancy as shown below. With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

Rating Definition Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts and give a performance confidence assessment. The past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the Offeror performed those past contracts. Past performance information may be provided by the Offeror, as solicited. Past performance information may also be obtained from questionnaires. Past performance information shall be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency. The Source Selection Evaluation Board will review this past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to the performance confidence assessment. In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each Offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings as indicated below.

Rating Description Substantial Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

For Volume 1, Factor 2, Past Performance, an Unknown Confidence (Neutral) rating will be awarded when no past performance records are otherwise unavailable. Per Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.305(a)(2)(iv), “In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Offeror may not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance."

9. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The areas to be evaluated include Evaluation Factors which will be evaluated based on the color and adjectival method of evaluation. The requirements specified in the solicitation are considered to be minimum requirements. A more favorable evaluation rating may be given for exceeding the minimum requirements. Note: Volume 1 Factors level of importance are noted below. Technical Factors 1 – 5, when combined, are significantly more important than Factor 6 - Price.

Basis for Award – Volume 1 Technical Factors 1 – 5 when combined are significantly more important that Volume 2 Factor 6, Price.

VOLUME 1 – TECHNICAL FACTORS

Factor Location Description Relative Importance FACTOR 1 Vol. 1. TAB A EXPERIENCE Most Important Factor

FACTOR 2 Vol. 1. TAB B PAST PERFORMANCE Equal to Factor 1 FACTOR 3 Vol. 1. TAB C TECHNICAL APPROACH 2nd Most Important Factor (less important than Factors 1 & 2)

FACTOR 4 Vol. 1 TAB D PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS

AND EXPERIENCE

Equal to Factor 3

FACTOR 5 Vol.1 TAB E SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION Significantly less important than Factors 1-4

VOLUME 2 – PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

Factor Location Description Relative Importance FACTOR 6 Vol. 2 TAB A PRICE (Standard Form 1442, Proposal

Data Sheet And Contract Line Item Schedule)

All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are considered significantly more important than price.

N/A Vol. 2 TAB B Evidence of Bondability Not Rated

N/A Vol. 2 TAB C Required Pre-Award Information Not Rated Note: An “Unsatisfactory” evaluation rating for any factor, or combination of different factors, may cause the proposal to be evaluated as “Unsatisfactory”. Volume 2 - Price will be evaluated in accordance the requirements listed in paragraph 15, EVALUATION OF PRICE.

9.1. VOLUME 1 - PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

Offerors shall submit Volume 1 file containing Factors 1-5.

Factor 1 – Experience Factor 2 – Past Performance Factor 3 – Technical Approach Factor 4 – Personnel Qualifications and Experience Factor 5 – Small Business Participation

9.2. VOLUME 2 - PRICE AND PRO FORMA INFORMATION

Offerors shall submit the price proposal, along with the other information requested below, in their Volume 2 file.

Volume 2 shall include a cover letter stating that the proposal complies completely with all terms, conditions, and specifications contained in the solicitation. A proposal that does not comply with all terms, conditions, and specifications in the solicitation will be automatically rejected and not considered for award.

Volume 2 shall contain the Solicitation/Contract Form and Pricing Schedule (Section 00 10 00), Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors (Section 00 45 00), Pre-Award Survey Information and Small Business Information.

Please Note: The Government will not pay for the provision of any information nor compensate any Offeror for the development of the required information outlined in the solicitation required for inclusion in the Offeror’s proposal.

All proposals shall contain the information stated herein. Proposal clarity, organization (as defined in this solicitation) and cross-referencing is mandatory. No material (information not part of the proposal) shall be incorporated by reference.

Note: Offerors that do not want the data submitted below disclosed by the Government must follow the procedure specified in Section 00 21 00 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS, paragraph: INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS— COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION. Please note, portions of the winning proposal will be incorporated into the contract and are subject to disclosure notwithstanding restrictive markings.

10. FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE

10.1. Submission Requirements

Offeror shall submit three (3) examples of construction projects performed in the past six (6) years which best illustrate the experience of the construction contractor on projects of similar function, scope, complexity, and size as this project. Each project summary should consist of a one or two page narrative of the example project, discussing the project and providing specifics as noted herein. For evaluation purposes, “similar” is defined as work performed in a powerhouse or industrial facility removing and installing the following items:

a. Electrical installations at a powerhouse or similar industrial facility; and

b. Experience creating or modifying electrical design drawings; and

c. Instrumentation and control cabling; and

d. Enclosure; and

e. Modifications of existing hydraulic control systems of 200 psi or greater; and

f. Reverse engineering: measurement, creation of shop drawings, and fabrication of unique hydraulic control valve components. (Demonstrate effective implementation of components with tolerances equal to or smaller than 0.0001 inches.); and

g. Testing and rehabilitation of governor pump controls

This factor is designed to verify the experience of the Offeror having been regularly engaged in electrical and mechanical industrial installations. Emphasis should also be placed on demonstrating successful work history of planning and executing work on existing systems while minimizing outages and achieving consensus among customers (local power plant as well as transmission owners) on the development and execution of detailed and effective construction planning. “Project Narrative” on each project cited for experience shall include:

a. Contract number and Offeror’s and/or major subcontractor’s specific role in the project.

b. Project name.

c. Project cost.

d. Project description must include:

i. Location.

ii. Description of work performed demonstrating Electrical & Mechanical Industrial

Installation experience.

iii. Total contract value.

iv. Specific electrical installation experience relating to the project.

v. Specific hydraulic system engineering experience (or successful sub-contracted work).

vi. Date of completion.

vii. Name of customer, agency, or firm.

viii. Point of Contact (POC) information for the customer, agency, or firm, including name, title, email, and telephone number.

10.2. Evaluation

The Construction Contractor's experience in construction of facilities similar to this project will be evaluated. No more than three (3) projects should be submitted. If more than three projects are submitted, only the first three listed in the proposal will be evaluated. Evaluation will be based on the project summaries provided in the Offeror’s proposal. The proposal must meet all of the following minimum acceptability standards to receive an "acceptable" rating on this factor:

a. Submission of three (3) project narratives demonstrating Industrial Installation experience on projects as described in the bulleted items above. For this factor, each of the bulleted items listed above are not required to be contained in each project submitted; rather the Offeror must collectively demonstrate experience in each criteria over all projects submitted; and

b. The total cost of one of the projects must be valued at more than $250,000.00.

Higher evaluation ratings will be given for those project examples that are similar in function, scope, and size to this project, and clearly demonstrate a contractor’s capabilities to construct a project of this nature and execute the project successfully while containing costs and maintaining schedule. In addition, those offers that include Federal Government construction projects and design/build projects will be rated more favorably than those without such construction similarity. Projects that do not meet the similarity criteria identified in Paragraph 10.1 may be rated lower than those projects meeting the stated criteria. Further, such characteristics as size, complexity, number and types of trades employed, and whether the Federal Government was the customer may be indicative of similarity.

Projects that are not yet complete will be rated lower than completed projects. Projects showing significant cost and time growth will be rated less favorably than those that maintain the contract completion date and the original award amount. Projects cited which indicate the Offeror was not the prime contractor will be evaluated less favorably.

Omission of requested information will result in lower ratings than submissions containing all the information identified in the paragraph above.

11. FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

Submission Requirements

The Offeror shall provide contact information and questionnaires for the past performance of three projects within the past five years for projects of similar function, scope, complexity, and size as this project. The contact information will be used at the discretion of the source selection team to aid in the determining past performance.

11.1.1. Past Performance Rating Submission

All Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) ratings for all Corps of Engineer projects constructed by the Offeror in the past ten years should be submitted. In addition, a performance evaluation should be submitted for all projects listed in Factor 1. For projects cited in Factor 1 which were constructed for other Government or commercial entities, submit the performance appraisal sheets used by that Government entity.

For each project cited in Factor 1 that may be private industry work or other Government entity not covered in the CPARS database, submit Form PPQ-0 (a blank copy is attached to this section) completed by an owner or owner’s representative not affiliated with the Offeror’s firm. Offeror should explain any past performance resulting in significant cost and/or time growth. Firms are requested to retrieve their past performance information directly from the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) at http://www.cpars.gov. CPARS is an electronic repository of performance information collected by all the major Federal performance reporting systems.

Logging onto CPARS will require the following:

All Department of Defense (DoD) employees (military and civilian), including DoD Contractors that are working on site (military/government facilities) or contractors working offsite using Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) are required to use certificates from DoD Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) to access CPARS. If the contractor does not work on site or with GFE the contractor is encouraged to obtain and use a certificate from an External Certificate Authority (ECA). Contractors can use the PKI login category if they have PKI. External Certificate Authorities (ECAs) and Interim External Certificate Authorities (IECAs) provide digital certificates to the DoD's private industry partners, contractors using their own equipment or working in non-government facilities, allied partners, and other agencies. Additional information about the PKI certificate is at https://www.cpars.gov/pki_info.htm.

Contractors will also need their DUNS number and Marketing Partner Identification Number (MPIN) to log onto CPARS. The MPIN number was selected by whoever registered your firm in the System for Award Management (SAM) at https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/. If the contractors not know their MPIN number, they will need to contact the Federal Service Desk as indicated on link: https://www.fsd.gov/. Please be aware that the Federal Service Desk will only release the MPIN number to the person who originally registered the firm.

Offerors are reminded that both independent data and data provided by Offerors in their proposals may be used by the Government to evaluate Offeror past performance. Since the Government may not necessarily interview all the sources provided by the Offerors, it is incumbent upon the Offerors to explain the relevance of the data provided.

The Government does not assume the duty to search for data to rectify problems identified in the proposal. The burden of providing thorough and complete Past Performance information remains with the Offerors. Proposals that do not contain the information requested risk rejection or less than acceptable performance rating by the Government.

11.1.2. Past Performance Questionnaire

For any contract identified in Factor 1 for which no CPARS is available, a Past Performance Questionnaire, Form PPQ-0 (Attachment 1) should be completed and submitted with the proposal.

Offerors shall include in their proposal the written consent of the proposed subcontractors to allow the Government to discuss the subcontractors’ past performance evaluation with the Offerors during any discussions. The Government will verify/validate information on both prime and subcontractors that an Offeror provides in the proposal. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to contact each reference to: 1) obtain authorization to release the information identified in the past performance submission and 2) provide authorization to the references to release performance information to the Government.

11.1.3. New Corporate Entities

New corporate entities may submit data on prior relevant and recent contracts (within the last 3 calendar years) involving its officers and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the Offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Past performance information on work for state and local Governments, private sector clients, and subcontractors that are similar to the Government requirement will be evaluated equally with similar federal contracts. Offeror may submit information on key personnel, major subcontractors, and work performed as part of a team or joint venture and other previous reincarnation of its current organization.

If an Offeror has no relevant past performance history, the Offeror must affirmatively state that the firm possesses no relevant directly related or similar past performance.

11.2. Evaluation Method

The Government will evaluate only the information provided. The evaluation of past performance will examine how well Offerors have performed on previous projects considering such criteria as quality, timeliness, safety, responsiveness to customer concerns, and adherence to budget. Higher evaluation ratings may be awarded for excellent evaluations. In descending order, lower ratings may be given for past evaluations of Above Average, Average, Marginal, and Unacceptable. If an Offeror has no past performance ratings in CPARS, other Construction Performance Rating Systems, Performance Evaluation Worksheets including Form PPQ-0, or no other past performance is available, a neutral rating will be given. CPARS ratings will be given more weight than equivalent performance ratings for other types of evaluations. The Government may, at its discretion, contact references cited to verify the information contained therein. The Government will evaluate the relative merits of each Offeror's past performance. The Government reserves the right to consider all aspects of an Offeror's performance history, but will attribute more significance to work that was similar in nature, magnitude, and complexity to this project.

Omission of Rating Sheets for Factor 2 projects will result in lower ratings for this factor. If an evaluation is unattainable, a written explanation shall be provided to explain why.

Offerors will be evaluated on past performance by review of the past performance questionnaires, with the option of contacting end users using the contact information provided.

In addition, the Contractors Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) will be queried to determine the past performance of the Offerors for similar projects. The Government reserves the right to contact the evaluator on previous Government or Private Sector work to verify the Offeror’s past performance. Offerors without any evaluations in CPARS, or for which no Past Performance Questionnaires were returned will be assigned a neutral rating.

12. FACTOR 3 - Technical Approach Submission Requirements The Offeror shall provide a comprehensive Project Management Plan (PMP) developed specifically for this project for evaluation purposes only to verify Offeror’s experience in understanding in the project scope, submittal schedules, equipment procurement and delivery, offsite fabrication and repair, key milestones and contract required schedule constraints. For proposal evaluation purposes only, the Offeror should use an arbitrary, non-binding Notice to Proceed (NTP) date of February 18, 2021, with a non-work period from February 18, 2021 to June 18, 2021.

The PMP shall be limited to no more than 50 pages; therefore, any content beyond page 50 will not be evaluated.

The PMP should include an explanation of the management approach for the design/construction team, clearly showing how the prime contractor will manage both the design and construction of the project to insure a well-coordinated quality product, completed on time and with a minimum amount of contract modifications. The management approach should include an organizational chart and address the interaction between the designers, construction prime and subcontractors during the design phase and construction phases of the project, including controls and revisions to the accepted design, requests for information, and shop drawings/submittal reviews.

At a minimum, the PMP shall address the activities outlined below in the areas of Management Approach, Schedule Constraints and Major Activities.

12.1.1. Management Approach:

a. Include any special work restrictions or phasing identified in the solicitation documents

b. Organizational Chart

c. Sub-Contractor Management

d. Contract Close-out

12.1.2. Schedule Constraints:

a. Preliminary site visit for reverse engineering of valves shall take place far enough in advance for inspection, shop drawing creation, and fabrication of any possible needed distributing valve parts. Demonstrate understanding of typical machine shop fabrication time and required submittal coordination.

b. Pre-Construction Submittals submitted/approved within 85 calendar days after Notice To Proceed being issued

c. Total outage time for all units will not exceed 285 days. Outages will be within the outage window of 1 Jun 2021 through 12 Mar 2022.

d. Government dewatering of hydroelectric unit requires 1 calendar days

e. Government pre-operational testing requires 7 calendar days

f. Government and commissioning contractor operational testing requires 7 calendar days

g. The contractor shall commence work in accordance with SECTION 01 12 00, Paragraph 1.7, ORDER OF WORK. . Units may not be out of service concurrently during this project. Units must be turned back over to the government in time for the 14-day testing period to take place by the end of the outage period. Testing periods will not be concurrent.

12.1.3. Major Activities:

a. Pre-construction submittals

b. Preliminary distributing valve inspection

c. Government dewatering of hydroelectric unit

d. Demolition

e. Distributing valve removal, refurbishment, repair plan submittal, and installation

f. Surface preparation for encapsulation and repainting

g. Installation

h. Government pre-operational testing

i. Commissioning by the Government and others.

12.2. Evaluation

Proposal must meet all the following minimum standards to receive a “Satisfactory” on this factor:

a. Management Approach, including any special work restrictions or phasing identified in the solicitation document

b. Organizational Chart

c. The submitted schedule complies with and includes all of the listed Schedule Constraints and identifies all of the listed Major Features of Work above.

The quality of the Offeror's PMP will be evaluated. Higher evaluation ratings will be awarded for a PMP that addresses all requested items in a thorough and comprehensive manner, and demonstrates an effective plan for construction and project close-out.

13. FACTOR 4- PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE

13.1. Submission Requirements

The Offeror should submit the names and resumes for key design and construction personnel that will be assigned to this project. Each resume shall be limited to 2 pages. In addition, a summary must be provide that clearly indicates the separate duties and responsibilities for each individual. This factor should include data on the following personnel:

Electrical Designer Mechanical Designer Installation Supervisor Site Safety and Health Officer Quality Control Manager

The proposal should clearly present the credentials of each person and show that each meets the requirements listed below. Each resume shall include the following information:

Name, assignment for this project, and company employing the person.

Past project experience (including what role or capacity the individual served on each project), as well as the dates (month and year) employed on each project in that capacity, the monetary size of each project cited as experience, and a point of contact familiar with each project. Resumes should be listed in reverse chronological order, with the latest experience listed first, and all time gaps on each resume fully explained.

Prior experience on Federal construction projects and projects of this type and size is preferred and will be evaluated more favorably. The proposal should clearly present the credentials of each person, and show that each possesses the following qualifications. With the exception of the Site Safety and Health Officer and Quality Control Manager, no individual may be designated for more than one position. The Site Safety and Health Officer and the Quality Control Manager may be the same individual if they meet the qualifications for both positions.

Electrical Industrial Designer: Electrical Industrial Design experience shall be defined as experience to develop point to point removal and installation wiring diagrams based off of a control schematic at an industrial facility. Successful demonstration will include:

a. Resume of Proposed Electrical Industrial Designer demonstrating electrical industrial design experience for the past five (5) years. Information provided can be from the prime contractor and/or a key subcontractor.

b. Project Narratives with description of Electrical Industrial Design experience on at least three (3), but no more than five (5), prior projects for key or primary electrical designer in which they were directly involved with the electrical industrial design (as defined above) in the past six (6) years. All of the submitted “prior projects” must be designed and constructed prior to the time of proposal submission. “Project Narrative” on each project cited for experience shall include:

i. Name of the firm the designer worked for.

ii. Name of the prime contractor (if the designer worked for a subcontractor).

iii. Contract number and a description of the designer’s specific role on the project.

iv. Project name.

v. Project description shall include:

a) Location.

b) Description of work performed demonstrating Electrical Industrial Design experience.

c) Amount of the electrical industrial design fee of the project.

d) Total contract amount.

e) Specific electrical design experience aspects of the project.

f) Date of completion.

g) Name of customer, agency, or firm.

h) Point of Contact (POC) information for the customer, agency, or firm, including name, title, email, and telephone number.

Mechanical Industrial Design: Mechanical design experience shall be defined as experience in the modification of existing hydraulic control systems of 200 psi or greater. Successful demonstration will include:

a. Resume of Proposed Mechanical Designer demonstrating mechanical design experience for the past five (5) years. Information provided can be from the prime contractor and/or a key subcontractor.

b. Project Narratives with description of Mechanical Industrial Design experience on at least three (3), but no more than five (5), prior projects for key or primary mechanical designer in which they were directly involved with the mechanical industrial design (as defined above) in the past six (6) years. All of the submitted “prior projects” must be designed and constructed prior to the time of proposal submission. “Project Narrative” on each project cited for experience shall include:

i. Name of the firm the designer worked for.

ii. Name of the prime contractor (if the designer worked for a subcontractor).

iii. Contract number and a description of the designer’s specific role on the project.

iv. Project name.

v. Project description shall include:

a) Location.

b) Description of work performed demonstrating Mechanical Industrial Design experience.

c) Amount of the mechanical industrial design fee of the project.

d) Total contract amount.

e) Specific mechanical design experience aspects of the project.

f) Date of completion.

g) Name of customer, agency, or firm.

h) Point of Contact (POC) information for the customer, agency, or firm, including name, title, email, and telephone number.

Installation Supervisor: The Installation Supervisor must be technically qualified to supervise the disassembly and installation of digital governors.