A.07.23 Solicitation Document (SF 1442)- W9127S20R0004.pdf

Intake Gate Machinery Rehabilitation, Norfork Lake, Dam, & Pow er Plant, White River Basin, Baxter County, Arkansas

Project Number: 461488

Magnitude of Construction: Betw een $1,000,000.00 and $5,000,000.00

Set-Aside: Unrestricted

NAICS: 811310

Bidder Inquiry: A Request for Information (RFI) Review has been set up at w w w .projnet.org for this solicitation. The Projnet Inquiry Key is UG5QTH-ZFFIMD. The review is open from July 27, 2020 until August 12, 2020.

A site visit is scheduled for August 5, 2020 at 10:00 AM CDT. See clause FAR 52.236-27 Alt I for complete details.

JONATHAN J SAWRIE 501-340-1045

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

27-Jul-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 ________730 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________00 72 00

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 __________0 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________26 Aug 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 X is, 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 _______90 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

CONTRACTING DIVISION

USACE, LITTLE ROCK (W9127S)

700 W. CAPITOL AVE, RM 7315

LITTLE ROCK AR 72201-3225

W9127S

PAGE OF PAGES

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

01:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

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

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

(501) 324-5196FAX:TEL: (501) 340-5720 TEL: FAX:

W9127S20R0004 1 OF 51

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

W9127S20R0004

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

PRICING SCHEDULE

Line Item No. Description

Estimated Quantity

Unit of Measure Unit Price Amount

BASE BID

0001 Provide Intake Gate Machinery on Unit 1 1 Job XXX $__________ 0002 Provide Intake Gate Machinery on Unit 2 1 Job XXX $__________ 0003 Provide Erection Support Equipment 1 Job XXX $__________ 0004 Clean and Paint Hatch Covers 1 Job XXX $__________

TOTAL BASE BID $____________

OPTIONS

0005 Flood Demobilization 2 Each $__________ $__________ 0006 Dive Operations 2 Each $__________ $__________

TOTAL OPTION BID $____________

MISCELLANEOUS BID ITEMS

0007 Electrical Hire 5 EST Man Hour $__________ $__________ 0008 Skilled Craftman Hire 10 EST Man Hour $__________ $__________ 0009 Welding Services Hire 10 EST Man Hour $__________ $__________ 0010 Transportation, Services, Equipment, Rental, and Parts and Materials 8 EST Each $2,500.00 $20,000.00

TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS BID $____________

TOTAL BASE BID PLUS OPTIONS & MISCELLANEOUS $___________

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

0001 730 dys. ADC 1 NORFORK POWERHOUSE

1487 HIGHWAY 177

SALESVILLE AR 72653

FOB: Destination

96721H

0002 730 dys. ADC 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0003 730 dys. ADC 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0004 730 dys. ADC 1 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0005 730 dys. ADC 2 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0006 730 dys. ADC 2 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0007 730 dys. ADC 5 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0008 730 dys. ADC 10 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0009 730 dys. ADC 10 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0010 730 dys. ADC 8 (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.209-7 Information Regarding Responsibility Matters OCT 2018 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

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

MAY 2014

52.232-13 Notice Of Progress Payments APR 1984 52.236-28 Preparation of Proposals--Construction OCT 1997 252.215-7010 Requirements for Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data

Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data

JUL 2019

252.215-7011 Requirements for Submission of Proposals to the Administrative Contracting Officer and Contract Auditor.

JAN 2018

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

The Government contemplates award of a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract resulting from this solicitation.

(End of provision)

52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST (SEP 2006)

(a) Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from

Jonathan J. Sawrie Contracting Officer Post Office Box 867 700 West Capitol, Room 7315 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203

(b) The copy of any protest shall be received in the office designated above within one day of filing a protest with the

GAO.

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):

https://www.acquisition.gov/

52.252-5 AUTHORIZED DEVIATIONS IN PROVISIONS (APR 1984)

(a) The use in this solicitation of any Federal Acquisition Regulation (48 CFR Chapter 1) provision with an authorized deviation is indicated by the addition of"(DEVIATION)" after the date of the provision.

(b) The use in this solicitation of any Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (48 CFR Chapter 2) provision with an authorized deviation is indicated by the addition of "(DEVIATION)" after the name of the regulation.

Section 00 22 16 - Supplementary Instructions to Proposers

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

SECTION 00 2 2 16 - PROPOSAL SUBM ISS ION RE QUIREMENTS, EVAL UA TION CRITERIA , AND BAS IS

OF A WARD

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

The proposal shall describe the capability of the Offeror to perform the requirements of the Specifications. The proposal should be specific and complete in every detail; and should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the requirements. The proposal should be practical, legible, clear, and coherent.

In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information containing sufficient detail to allow review and evaluation by the Government. Proposal clarity, organization, and cross-referencing are mandatory. Failure to submit and organize proposals as requested may adversely affects an Offeror's evaluation.

Proposals shall not exceed the page limits described. Provide all information in bookmarked sections. Appendices and/or attachments are not permitted and will not be evaluated.

SUBMISSION FORMAT

METHOD OF SUBMISSION. Offerors shall submit one (1) electronic copy of their proposal in Compact Disc (CD) format.

Each disc shall be externally labeled with the solicitation number, date, and the offeror’s name. Zip disks and USB thumb drives are not permitted.

FILE FORMAT. Files on each CD shall be in Portable Document Format, filename extension: “.pdf” and suitable for viewing in Adobe Reader. There shall only be two files on each offerors’ submitted CD: ‘Volume I, Technical Submission’ and ‘Volume II, Price Submission.’

FONT SIZE. Shall not be less than 10 point. Each page shall be identified with the appropriate page number centered at the bottom of the page.

SHEET SIZE. Shall be 8-1/2 inches x 11 inches; however, if drawings, charts, or other graphics are submitted, sheets no larger than 11 inches x 17 inches shall be used. Sheets that are 11 x 17 inch will be counted as two 8-1/2 inch x 11-inch sheets. All sheets shall be dated and numbered.

COVER SHEET & TABLE OF CONTENTS. Proposals shall consist of two (2) volumes. A cover sheet identifying the Offeror (name, address, point of contact) and solicitation number shall be provided. The second sheet shall be a table of contents. The proposal shall contain a detailed table of contents. Offers that violate these rules unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and may be rejected by the Government after the initial evaluation without receiving any further consideration. Neither the cover sheet nor the table of contents count toward the page limitations.

BOOKMARKS. Proposals shall be bookmarked and labeled as specified in a manner to afford easy identification from the Table of Contents. Additional bookmarks may be provided, but shall be nested under the appropriate tab bookmark.

HYPERLINKS. Hyperlinks are not permitted. This includes hyperlinks within the document, such as Figure or Table references to the page containing that content, and hyperlinks to websites.

ATTACHMENTS. Attachments/appendices are not permitted.

PAGE LIMITS. The proposal shall not exceed the specified page limits. The Government will not review any information in excess of the page limits or information submitted in an appendix or attachment to the proposal. The Offeror shall not submit verbatim sections of this solicitation as part of their proposal. Offers that do not meet these requirements may be subject to rejection.

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Offerors shall submit their proposals in accordance with the following:

VOLUME 1:

BOOKMARK A— Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Data Sheet. (See the format provided as Attachment A.) Proposal must include offeror’s telephone number, FAX number, email address, and DUNS number. DUNS number will be used to access CPARS Data.

BOOKMARK B— Factor 1— Experience BOOKMARK C— Factor 2— Technical Work Plan BOOKMARK D— Factor 3— Past Performance

BOOKMARK E— Factor 4— Small Business Participation Plan BOOKMARK F – Factor 5 – Subcontracting Plan (Large Business Firms Only)

VOLUME 2:

BOOKMARK A— Price Schedule BOOKMARK B— Offer Guarantee

FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE (VOL 1, BOOKMARK B)

Offerors shall provide project information on relevant projects that best demonstrate the breadth and depth of an Offeror’s or Subcontractor’s relevant intake gate hoist replacement experience. A maximum of five projects may be submitted that demonstrate past experience. Projects submitted should demonstrate experience in design, manufacture, and installation of new hoists and removal of old hoists. Offerors may include photographs or drawings for each project submission to provide a visual basis for the written description. If the offeror submits more than five projects, only the first five, as ordered in the proposal, will be evaluated.

Projects should have been completed within 10 years from the date of the RFP, or be substantially complete. To be considered substantially complete, projects should be 50% complete by the date that proposals are due. If an Offeror submits a project that it represents is “substantially complete,” the Offeror must reasonably explain why the project is considered at least 50% complete. The Government will not evaluate projects that have been completed more than ten years prior to the date of the RFP.

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Page Limit - Six (6) Pages. For each project submitted, include the following information, at a minimum:

1. Project title

2. Project location

3. Role of Offeror and/or Subcontractor

4. A narrative description of the work performed

5. Point of contact for the agency, firm, or company for which the work was performed – Include name, title, current telephone number and email address.

Offerors shall identify the party or firm that will perform each phase of the project (design, manufacture, installation, and removal). If the Offeror proposes to use a Subcontractor for any phase of the project, the Offeror must submit a signed Letter of Commitment from the subcontractor, which includes the identification of the role of the subcontractor, with the proposal. If the Offeror and the Subcontractor have worked together in the past, include a list of projects or other evidence that the two firms have successfully worked together.

If the Offeror proposes a joint venture for a specific phase of the project, the Offeror must submit a joint venture agreement signed by all participating firms. The agreement must identify the role of each party. If the firms participating in the joint venture have worked together in the past, include a list of projects or other evidence that the two firms have successfully worked together.

EVALUATION CRITERIA – The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which it:

-Demonstrates the extent of the Offeror’s, and/or their sub-contractor’s experience replacing intake gate hoists (design, manufacture, installation, and removal).

-Demonstrates the extent of the successful completion of relevant projects the offeror and subcontractor have worked on together (if applicable).

-Demonstrates the extent of the successful completion of relevant projects the proposed joint venture has worked on (if applicable).

NOTE: If a letter of commitment is not submitted, the experience will not be considered.

FACTOR 2 –WORK PLAN (VOL 1, BOOKMARK C)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Page Limit – The Work Plan must not exceed thirty (30) single-sided pages. If the Work Plan exceeds the page limit, the Government will only evaluate the information contained in the first thirty (30) pages of the plan.

Offerors shall submit a detailed schedule for this project that shall include a Gantt chart showing all critical tasks needed to complete the project, duration for each work task, and work task sequencing. The detailed schedule must include no more than 50 tasks. At a minimum, the schedule must address the major tasks of work listed in the Technical Work Plan/Project Management Plan, and the following additional elements:

Milestones: Notice to Proceed; Hoist out of service date; hoist return to service date

Offerors shall submit a Technical Work Plan that includes a detailed narrative of the offeror’s plan for completing the following major tasks of work required by this RFP:

1. Design of the new hoists

2. Fabrication of new hoist components

3. Assembly of the new hoists

4. Shop testing of the new hoists

5. Transportation of the new hoists to the Norfork Dam project site

6. Method of removal of the existing hoists

7. Installation and assembly of the new hoists

8. Inspection and load testing of the new hoists

The plan must:

1. Include a detailed discussion of the steps necessary to complete the major tasks of work, to include identification of the work that the offeror will complete on-site, and the work that the offeror will complete off-site.

2. Include a discussion of the technical risks and site constraints associated with the required work in the technical work plan.

3. Discuss how work to complete one of the major tasks may impact or be impacted by work to complete another major task.

4. Include critical assumptions made and uncertainties that the Offeror believes will impact the completion of the work and plan to deal with each.

Offerors shall submit a Project Management Plan that shall include:

1. A supporting discussion of the schedule and a detailed narrative for each major project phase (design, manufacture, installation, and removal).

2. The risks and risk management for potential issues and unforeseen delays. For example, identify the risk associated with the manufacture and delivery of long lead items, and describe the Offeror’s plan to mitigate the risk, or identify how you plan to install the new hoists and remove the existing hoists while minimizing the time no hoists are available.

3. If major subcontractors will be used to perform the design, manufacturing, installation or removal portion of the work, identify the subcontractors proposed to be used and the Offeror’s plan for managing those subcontractors.

EVALUATION CRITERIA – The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which it:

-Demonstrates the Offeror’s stated schedule is realistic considering the schedule constraint specified in FAR Clause 52.211-10, Commencement, Prosecution, and Completion of Work.

-Demonstrates the Offeror’s overall understanding of the Scope of Work by clearly identifying the major tasks in a logical sequence and identifying critical path items.

-Demonstrates the Offeror’s understanding of and approach for managing the requirements and the technical risks and site constraints associated with the required work.

-Demonstrates the Offeror’s understanding of how major work tasks impact other major work tasks needed to accomplish the work.

FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE (VOL 1, BOOKMARK D)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Page Limit - Eighteen (18) Pages. Submit completed Past Performance Questionnaires (Form PPQ-O) (Attachment B) from each customer for projects listed in Factor 1: Past Experience; demonstrating past performance completed within the past five (5) years. The Government will use the information to determine the Offeror’s probability of successfully performing the scope of work described in this solicitation. Offeror’s should not submit a PPQ-0 when a completed CPARS evaluation is available.

NOTE: Teaming arrangements and Joint Ventures. Provide a copy of the teaming/joint venture agreement.

Offerors may submit experience of an affiliated entity where that affiliated entity has made a firm commitment to participate meaningfully in the performance of the contract. If required, JV approval must be obtained in accordance with Small Business Administration policy.

EVALUATION CRITERIA:

The Government will evaluate how well the contractor performed on these contracts (See Past Performance Relevancy Ratings and Rating and Performance Confidence Assessments below). The Government may contact sources other than those provided by the Offeror for information with respect to past performance. These other sources may include, but are not limited to, Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), or other databases; telephone interviews with organizations familiar with the Offeror’s performance, and Government personnel with personal knowledge of the Offeror’s performance capability.

FACTOR 4 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION (VOL 1, BOOKMARK E)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: The purpose of this criterion is to evaluate the amount of work to be performed by small businesses as a prime contractor or subcontractors in relation to the total value of the project, as well as the types of work small businesses will be performing, and the offeror’s past performance complying with contract requirements contained in clauses FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns and FAR.52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

1. All offerors (both large and small businesses) shall submit a Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP, Attachment C) to identify the extent to which small businesses will participate in the performance of the proposed acquisition.

a. Large businesses may achieve the small business participation goals through subcontracting to small businesses.

b. Small business prime contractors may achieve small business participation goals through their own performance/participation as a prime contractor and also through subcontracting to other small businesses.

A mandatory minimum Total Small Business Participation goal of 29% of the total contract value (through small business participation from small, small disadvantaged, HUBZone, Service Disabled Veteran Owned, Veteran Owned, or Woman Owned small businesses) is required based on the nature of the work for this project. The offeror should articulate how small businesses will participate through performance as either a small business prime contractor or as a subcontractor, as well as demonstrating their past performance in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns and 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

2. Submit information on up to three (no less than one) project(s) that demonstrates the degree (both by dollar and by percent of total contract value) to which the contractor utilized small business firms in performing the project.

For small business offerors, consideration will be given to self-performance if a small business for that project, as well as for providing subcontracting opportunities to small businesses—as is the policy of the Government.

For large business offerors, in addition to the submitted project information, consideration may also include review of ISRs (Individual Subcontract Reports) and SSRs (Summary Subcontract Reports) from the eSRS (Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System).

The project information submitted for the small business participation plan evaluation does not have to be the same as those listed in the Experience and Past Performance factors.

EVALUATION CRITERIA: Using the information completed in the required small business participation plan template, the government will evaluate offerors on the extent of the planned participation of U.S. small businesses in the performance of this acquisition as follows:

1. The extent of participation of small business prime offerors and small business subcontractors in terms of the percentage of the value of the total acquisition vs. the large business participation percentage.

2. The extent to which the offeror meets or exceeds the suggested socioeconomic category goals. These goals are a percentage of the total value of the acquisition. A mandatory minimum Total Small Business Participation Plan goal of 29% of the total contract value is assigned to this acquisition.

In addition to the mandatory Small Business goal, the following goals are suggested for the individual socioeconomic categories and determined to be reasonable based on market research for this requirement:

{19%} Small Disadvantaged Business {3%} Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB) {3%} Historically Underutilized Zone (HUBZone) Small Business {5%} Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB)

Goals are based on percentage of TOTAL contract value.

3. The extent to which small businesses are identified, as defined in FAR Part 19 (small, small disadvantaged, HUBZone, Service Disabled Veteran Owned, Veteran Owned, or Woman-Owned small businesses) in the proposal by name (note: for large business offerors, this also includes verification of those small businesses in the offeror’s subcontracting plan (see DFARS 215.304(c)(i)(C)), and the identification of the complexity and variety of the work (work requiring specific certifications, e.g., welding, mechanical, electrical, fabrication, supply, etc.) to be performed by small businesses.

4. The extent of demonstrated commitment (i.e., length of and formality considerations) to use such firms.

Enforceable commitments (e.g., JV, MP or written teaming agreements) will be considered more favorably than non-enforceable commitments (see DFARS PGI 215.304(c)(1)(A)).

5. The extent to which the offeror has demonstrated past small business participation.

NOTE: For large businesses only. No award will be made to an offeror until an approved subcontracting plan is in place.

The subcontracting plan’s goals must conform to the goals provided in the Small Business Participation Plan (taking into account total dollars subcontracted vs. total contract value as basis for development of the goals) and must contain the mandatory plan requirements outlined in FAR 19.704.

FACTOR 5 – SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (VOL 1, BOOKMARK F)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Separate from the Small Business Participation Plan, large business offerors must also submit a Subcontracting Plan (Individual Contract Plan), as required by FAR 52.219-9. The Subcontracting Plan shall reflect and be consistent with the commitments offered in the Small Business Participation Plan. In accordance with DFARs 215.304(c), when an evaluation assesses the extent that small businesses are specifically identified in proposals, the small businesses considered in the evaluation shall be listed in any subcontracting plan submitted.

EVALUATION CRITERIA: Large businesses will not be eligible for award if they fail to submit an acceptable Subcontracting Plan. Subcontracting Plans will be evaluated on an ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE basis:

(a) Does the Subcontracting Plan adequately respond to each of the required elements of FAR 52.219-9 (d) paragraphs

(1) through (11)?

(b) Are the commitments in the Subcontracting Plan comparative to the commitments in the Small Business Participation Plan?

PRICE SCHEDULE (VOL 2, BOOKMARK A)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Submit the required Price/Bid Schedule (SF 1442); submit a detailed description of the types of costs included in the proposed coefficient factors; provide aggregate construction bonding capacity.

EVALUATION CRITERIA: The Government will perform a price analysis after completion of technical evaluations. Price analysis will be performed in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, to determine completeness, reasonableness, and understanding of the work. The evaluation will determine the adequacy of the offer in fulfilling the requirements of the proposal. Completeness addresses the extent to which the elements of the price proposal are consistent with the requirements of the RFP. Reasonableness will be established using historical price information, price competition information, the IGE, and any other pricing tools necessary. A clear audit trail must be evident as to the conversion of costs to the coefficients to accomplish the tasks described herein. Price will not be rated, but will be a factor in making the final best value determination for award.

OFFER GUARANTEE (VOL 2, BOOKMARK B)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Submit Standard Form 24. The guarantee shall be submitted in accordance with Contract Clause 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee.

EVALUATION CRITERIA: This item is not rated. The Government will review the Bid Bond for legal sufficiency. The Bond must be legally sufficient. Failure to submit a bid bond may make the Offeror’s proposal ineligible for award.

RATING A DJECTIVES AND DEF IN IT IONS

DEFINITIONS

Clarifications. Limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated.

Communications. Exchanges, between the Government and offerors, after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range.

a. Offerors whose past performance information is the determining factor preventing them from being included in the competitive range. Such communications will address adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not had a prior opportunity to respond; and

b. Offerors (other than those discussed above) whose exclusion from or inclusion in the competitive range is uncertain.

c. Communications may be conducted to enhance Government understanding of proposals; allow reasonable interpretation of the proposal; or facilitate the Government’s evaluation process. Communications cannot be used to cure proposal deficiencies or material omissions, materially alter the technical or price elements of the proposal, and/or otherwise revise the technical or price elements of the proposal. Such communications may be considered in rating proposals for the purpose of establishing the competitive range, if required. Communications shall not provide an opportunity for the Offeror to revise their proposal, but may address ambiguities in the proposal or other concerns (e.g. perceived deficiencies, weaknesses, errors, omissions, or mistakes and information relating to relevant past performance).

Discussions. Negotiations conducted in a competitive acquisition. Discussions take place after establishment of the competitive range.

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.

Strength - An aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Significant Strength - A significant strength appreciably enhances the merit of a proposal or appreciably increases the probability of successful contract performance.

Weakness - A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

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

Uncertainty - Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission or mistake).

RATING ADJECTIVES

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

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.

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

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

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.

SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION RATING ADJECTIVES

Outstanding - Offeror is a large or small business (SB). SB firm(s) are specifically identified in the proposal;

demonstrates substantive commitment to SB firm(s), for example enforceable commitment with 1 or more firms;

identifies the complexity and variety of work small businesses are to perform; demonstrates commitment to far exceed the 30% SB Participation goal (offering 32% or more); meets or exceeds 2 or more subcategory small business goals.

Good - Offeror is a large or small business. SB firm(s) are specifically identified in the proposal; demonstrates substantive commitment to SB firm(s), for example enforceable commitment with 1 or more firms; identifies the complexity and variety of work small businesses are to perform; demonstrates commitment to exceed the 30% SB Participation goal; and meets or exceeds 1 or more subcategory small business goals. For large business prime – displays past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9.

Acceptable - Offeror is a large or small business. SB firm(s) are specifically identified in the proposal; demonstrates a commitment to SB firm(s); identifies the complexity and variety of work small businesses are to perform; and demonstrates commitment to meet the 30% SB Participation goal. Does not meet any of the subcategory small business goals. For large business prime – displays past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8 and 52.219-9.

Unacceptable - Offeror is a large or small business, and does not demonstrate commitment to meet the 30% SB participation goal or does not identify SBs in the proposal; or does not demonstrate a commitment to use SB firms;

or does not identify the work small businesses are to perform; or for large business prime – does not display past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8 or 52.219-9 (does not explain or provide justification for failure or show substantive effort.

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVENCY RATINGS

In performing the past performance evaluation, evaluators will apply the following relevance levels to assess the relevance of the prior contract effort(s) of offerors.

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.

RATING AND PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

The government will evaluate past performance information to determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment. Each offeror will be assigned one of the ratings below for past performance.

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.

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

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)— 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.

TECHNICAL EVALUATION WE IGHTS

For the purpose of this evaluation, the following terms will be used to establish the relative importance of the technical factors:

More Important: The criterion is greater in value than another criterion.

Equal in Importance: The criterion is of the same value or nearly the same as another criterion.

Less Important: The criterion is less in value than another criterion.

Weight among technical factors:

Factor/Subfactor Description Relative Importance

FACTOR 1 Experience Equal in importance to Factor 3;

more important than Factors 2, 4, 5, and Price

FACTOR 2 Work Plan Less important than Factor 1 and Factor 3; more important than Factors 4, 5, and Price

FACTOR 3 Past Performance Equal in importance to Factor 1;

more important than Factors 2, 4, 5, and Price

FACTOR 4 Small Business Participation Less important than Factors 1, 2, and 3; and Price

FACTOR 5 Subcontracting Plan Less important than Factors 1, 2, 3, and 4; and Price

EVALUATION

Each member of the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will independently consider all information provided in the technical proposal. Once these individual analyses are completed, the team will meet and determine a rating for each of the evaluation factors by consensus decision. The evaluation team will document strengths (e.g., advantages), weaknesses (e.g., disadvantages), and other comments (e.g., deficiency and/or clarification) to support the rating for each factor, as well as the overall rating. The ratings for Technical Factors will be expressed in an adjectival assessment of Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal and Unacceptable. Documentation and comments are required for all ratings. This consensus rating will be provided to the Source Selection Authority.

BAS IS OF A WARD

Proposals must meet the criteria stated in the RFP in order to be eligible for award, to include responsiveness, technical acceptability and responsibility.

The Government intends to award without discussions based on initial proposals received; therefore, the proposals shall contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions in accordance with FAR 52.215-1. The Government reserves the right to address any pertinent issues in the proposals.

The Government will award a firm fixed-price contract to the responsible Offeror(s) whose proposal the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the request for proposal, is fair and reasonable with regard to pricing, and whose proposal offers the best overall value to the Government. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers.

The combination of all technical (non-price) evaluation factors are significantly more important than the price. As technical ratings and relative advantages and disadvantages become less distinct, differences in price between proposals are of increased importance in determining the most advantageous proposal. Conversely, as differences in price become less distinct, differences in rating and relative advantages and disadvantages between proposals are of increased importance to the determination.

ATTACHMENT A

PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

1. Name of Firm:

2. Address:

3. Phone:

4. Fax:

5. E-mail:

6. DUNS # (used for accessing CCASS)

7. If a joint venture or contractor-subcontractor association of firms, list the individual firms and briefly describe the nature of the association.

Firm 1:

Firm 2:

Firm 3:

Nature of Association:

8. AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATORS. FAR 52.215-11

The Offeror represents that the following persons are authorized to negotiate on its behalf with the

Government in connection with this Request for Proposals (RFP).

9. Name of Person Authorized to

Negotiate:

10. Negotiator's Address:

ATTACHMENT B

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0)

CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND

SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED

QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY

ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER,

QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO USACE. PLEASE CONTACT THE

OFFEROR FOR USACE POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO

VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory

Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not Applicable

No information or did not apply to your contract

Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts

E VG S M U

N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E VG S M U

N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)

E VG S M U

N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

E VG S M U

N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

E VG S M U

N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project?

E VG S M U

N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes;

responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

E VG S M U

N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

E VG S M U

N

d) Overall customer satisfaction

E VG S M U

N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines

E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes

E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)

E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client

E VG S M U N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E VG S M U N

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section.

Yes No

e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.

Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues? (Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

E VG S M U N