Recommended NAICS: 221122, Electric Power Distribution 1100 Place of Performance: FEMA Region 6, 800 North Loop 288, Denton, Texas Period of Performance: 90 days from Notice to Proceed Acquisition Type: Firm-Fixed-Price

Evaluation Factors - Region 6 Electric Motor Control Center Replacement The recommended basis for award is Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA).

Under LPTA, proposals will be evaluated for technical acceptability under the non-price factors listed below. Award will be made to the lowest-priced offeror whose proposal is rated technically acceptable under all non-price factors and whose price is determined fair and reasonable.

Evaluation Ratings Each non-price factor may be evaluated using the following ratings:

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and demonstrates an adequate approach with no worse than moderate risk.

Unacceptable Proposal fails to meet one or more material requirements or presents unacceptable performance risk.

Neutral If offeror does not have any ratings since they have not done business with the government, this will not be held against the offeror

Factor 1: Technical Approach Evaluation Standard The Government will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach to determine whether the proposed approach demonstrates a clear understanding of the work required to remove and replace the existing Electric Motor Control Center and restore full operational capability of the facility’s electrical distribution and motor control systems.

Acceptability Criteria To be rated Acceptable, the proposal shall demonstrate all the following:

1. A clear approach for conducting a site survey and verifying existing field conditions.

2. A sound method for removing the existing deteriorated electrical main panel and associated components.

3. A clear approach for furnishing and installing a new motor control center, including panels, wiring, breakers, switches, mounting hardware, replacement parts, and associated components.

4. A plan for integrating the new system with existing facility infrastructure.

5. A process for testing, inspection, commissioning, and confirming operational capability.

6. Identification of key technical risks and proposed mitigation measures.

7. Understanding of applicable standards, including OSHA, NFPA 70E, and applicable federal, state, and local requirements.

Unacceptable Proposal Indicators A proposal may be rated Unacceptable if it:

• Fails to address removal and replacement of the MCC;

• Does not describe integration with existing facility systems;

• Omits testing, inspection, or commissioning;

• Provides only generic information not specific to the requirement;

• Fails to address applicable electrical safety standards; or

• Presents an approach that would create unacceptable risk to facility operations.

Subfactor 1: Operational Continuity and Phasing

Evaluation Standard

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s approach to minimizing disruption to FEMA facility operations and maintaining electrical service to critical areas during performance.

To be rated Acceptable, the proposal shall demonstrate all the following:

1. A proposed phasing plan for demolition, installation, and transition activities.

2. A plan to coordinate outages or service interruptions with facility management and the COR.

3. A method for maintaining uninterrupted electrical service to critical areas wherever possible.

4. Identification of temporary power requirements and proposed temporary power solutions, if needed.

5. Procedures for advance notice, coordination, and communication during work affecting facility operations.

6. A plan for contingency response in the event of unplanned outage, equipment delay, or installation issue.

• Does not address continuity of operations;

• Does not include an outage coordination approach;

• Fails to address temporary power needs;

• Assumes prolonged or unmanaged service interruption; or

• Does not include a contingency approach for critical electrical service impacts.

Subfactor 2: Project Schedule and Management Approach

The Government will evaluate whether the offeror’s project management approach and schedule are realistic, complete, and capable of meeting the required 90-day period of performance.

To be rated Acceptable, the proposal shall include:

1. A project schedule showing major activities, milestones, and deliverable dates.

2. Completion of all work within 90 days from Notice to Proceed.

3. Incorporation of the SOO deliverable milestones, including:

o Roster submission within 2 days after award;

o Planning and preparation deliverables within 14 days after award;

o Demolition/removal;

o Installation;

o Cleanup;

o Review and inspection;

o Final closeout documentation.

4. Identification of the project manager, foreman, or site supervisor responsible for daily coordination.

5. A plan for regular progress meetings and status reporting.

6. A quality assurance/quality control process for inspections, deficiency tracking, and correction.

7. A plan for timely submission of as-built drawings, O&M manuals, warranty certificates, training materials, and closeout reports.

• Does not provide a project schedule;

• Proposes completion beyond the 90-day period of performance without

Government authorization;

• Fails to identify responsible management personnel;

• Does not address required deliverables;

• Provides an unrealistic sequence of work; or

• Omits quality control procedures.

Subfactor 3: Staffing, Qualifications, and Licensing

The Government will evaluate whether the offeror proposes qualified, experienced, and properly credentialed personnel sufficient to perform the work safely, efficiently, and in compliance with applicable requirements.

To be rated Acceptable, the proposal shall demonstrate:

1. Use of skilled, licensed journeymen electricians for electrical work.

2. A dedicated foreman or site supervisor for oversight, coordination, and quality assurance.

3. Personnel with experience performing similar electrical panel, switchgear, or motor control center replacement work.

4. Adequate staffing levels to meet the project schedule.

5. Identification of required licenses, certifications, or credentials.

6. Ability to comply with FEMA facility access, background investigation, citizenship or lawful permanent resident requirements, and training requirements.

7. A plan for subcontractor management, if subcontractors are proposed.

• Does not propose licensed electrical personnel;

• Does not identify a dedicated foreman or supervisor;

• Provides insufficient staffing for the required schedule;

• Fails to address facility access and background investigation requirements;

• Relies on unqualified personnel for energized electrical work; or

• Does not address subcontractor oversight, if applicable.

Subfactor 4: Safety, Quality Control, and Environmental Compliance

Evaluation Standard

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s approach to safety, hazardous energy control, hazardous material handling, environmental compliance, and incident reporting.

To be rated Acceptable, the proposal shall include:

1. A commitment to develop and implement a site-specific safety plan prior to commencement of work.

2. Procedures for compliance with OSHA 29 CFR 1910, OSHA 29 CFR 1926, NFPA 70E, DHS/FEMA safety requirements, and applicable local safety standards.

3. Lockout/tagout procedures for control of hazardous energy.

4. PPE requirements for contractor and subcontractor personnel.

5. Procedures for Safety Data Sheet submission and approval of hazardous materials prior to use.

6. Process for reporting accidents, injuries, near-misses, and unsafe conditions to the COR and Safety Officer.

7. Training and recordkeeping procedures for safety compliance.

8. A plan for safe removal, recycling, and disposal of obsolete electrical components and hazardous materials, including PCB-containing equipment, lead, mercury, or other regulated materials if encountered.

9. A process for completing required environmental reporting and disposal documentation.

• Fails to address safety planning;

• Omits lockout/tagout procedures;

• Does not address NFPA 70E or OSHA compliance;

• Does not address hazardous material identification, handling, disposal, or reporting;

• Fails to address incident reporting; or

• Proposes unsafe work practices.

Sub-Factor 5: Geographical Area The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR 52.212-2 and the evaluation factors stated in the solicitation. Due to the mission-critical nature of this requirement and the need for timely response and completion of work, the Government requires the contractor to demonstrate the ability to perform within a 150-mile radius of FEMA Regional Center, 800 N. Loop 288, Denton, Texas, 76209. The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR 52.212-2 and the evaluation factors stated in the solicitation.

Sub-Factor 7: Past Performance / Relevant Experience

Evaluation Standard

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s recent and relevant experience and past performance to assess confidence in successful performance of the requirement.

Acceptability Criteria

To be rated Acceptable, the offeror shall provide recent and relevant project examples that demonstrate successful performance of work similar in size, scope, and complexity.

Relevant experience may include:

1. Electrical main panel replacement;

2. Motor control center replacement;

3. Switchgear or electrical distribution upgrades;

4. Work in occupied federal, commercial, industrial, or mission-critical facilities;

5. Projects requiring outage coordination or temporary power;

6. Projects involving OSHA/NFPA 70E compliance and hazardous energy control;

7. Projects requiring as-built drawings, O&M manuals, commissioning, and closeout documentation.

The Government may consider customer references, CPARS records, or other available past performance information.

Submission Requirement

Offerors should submit at least three recent and relevant projects completed within the last five years, including:

• Customer name;

• Contract or project number, if applicable;

• Project location;

• Period of performance;

• Dollar value;

• Description of work performed;

• Relevance to the SOO;

• Points of contact name, phone number, and email;

• Summary of performance outcomes, including schedule, safety, and quality.

• Provides no relevant experience;

• Provides projects unrelated to electrical or MCC replacement work;

• Shows a pattern of poor performance without adequate corrective explanation;

• Does not provide enough information to assess relevance; or

• Indicates performance risk that the offeror has not adequately mitigated.

Factor 3: Price

The Government will evaluate price for fairness, reasonableness, and completeness.

Price will not be assigned to an adjectival rating.

Price Submission Requirements

The offeror’s price proposal should include sufficient detail to determine whether the proposed price is complete and reasonable, including, as applicable:

1. Labor;

2. Materials;

3. Equipment;

4. Demolition and disposal;

5. Temporary power;

6. Testing and commissioning;

7. Safety and environmental compliance;

8. Project management and supervision;

9. Training;

10. Closeout documentation;

11. Warranty coverage;

12. Subcontractor costs, if applicable.

Factors 1 through 3 are non-price factors and will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. To be eligible for award, a proposal must receive an Acceptable rating for each non-price factor. Price will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness. Award will be made to the lowest-priced responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation and is technically acceptable.