Att B - Section M DOE-M-2012 Basis for Award.pdf

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following text will appear in Provision DOE-M-2012 Basis for Award of the solicitation to advise all offerors of the basis for evaluating offers and selecting the awardee.

M-1 SOURCE SELECTION

(a) Basis for Contract Award

All offers received will be initially screened to ensure that the offeror is qualified, its proposal conforms to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition of the solicitation (reference: Attachment 1, Section L – Instructions to Offerors), and the proposal is complete and timely. A proposal may be eliminated from further consideration before a detailed evaluation is performed if it does not meet the proposal submission requirements, does not conform to solicitation requirements, or is considered so grossly and obviously deficient as to be totally unacceptable on its face value. For example, a proposal shall be deemed unacceptable if it does not represent a reasonable initial effort to address the essential requirements of the solicitation, or if it demonstrates that the offeror does not understand the requirements of the solicitation. In the event a proposal is rejected, a notice will be sent to the offeror stating the reason(s) the proposal will not be considered for further evaluation. The CO will consider a late proposal only if the consideration would not unduly delay the acquisition and if it meets one of the conditions stated in FAR 52.215-1(c)(3)(ii)(1) through (3).

This is a competitive best value source selection conducted in accordance with FAR Subpart

15.3. Proposals will be evaluated for technical, past performance, and cost/price. The non-price factors, when combined, are significantly more important than price. This process allows the Source Selection Authority (SSA) to award to a higher rated offeror over a lower rated offeror if the price differential is warranted and considered best value. However, price is important. The Government will not make an award at a price premium disproportionate to the benefits associated with the evaluated superiority of one offeror’s non-price factors.

By submission of its offer, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations, certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

(b) Number of Contracts to be Awarded

The Government anticipates making a single award from this solicitation.

(c) Clarifications and Discussions

The Government intends to make an award without discussions in accordance with FAR 15.306.

However, the Government reserves the right to establish a competitive range and conduct discussions, if deemed necessary, following the evaluation of the proposals.

Attachment B

M-2 EVALUATION FACTORS

(a) Evaluation Factors

(1) The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal. Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is the most advantageous to the Government, based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

• Factor 1: Technical

• Performance Narrative and Construction Schedule

• Safety Plan Overview

• Factor 2: Past Performance

• Past Performance and Past Performance Questionnaires

• Safety Record

• Factor 3: Cost/Price

(2) Relative Importance. The relative importance of each factor is as follows per the following order: 1) Technical, 2) Past Performance and 3) Cost/Price. These factors will be evaluated to assess which offer represents the best value to the Government. Factor 1 (Technical) and Factor 2 (Past Performance), when combined, are significantly more important than Factor 3 (Cost/Price) in accordance with FAR 15.304(e). Factor 1 (Technical) is more important than Factor 2 (Past Performance).

(3) Each evaluation factor applicable to this solicitation is identified and described in this and other provisions of Section M. The descriptive elements of each evaluation factor will be considered collectively in arriving at the evaluated rating of the offeror’s proposal for that evaluation factor. Areas within an evaluation factor are not subfactors and will not be individually rated but will be considered in the overall evaluation for that evaluation factor.

(b) Proposal Evaluation Approach

Proposals and supplemental information received in response to this RFP will be evaluated in accordance with the FAR, Department of Energy Acquisition Regulation (DEAR), and the evaluation criteria stipulated in this solicitation. The purpose of the evaluation is to select for award the proposal representing the best value to the Government in accordance with the above stated evaluation factors.

On or before the RFP closing/response date, offerors will submit all required written proposal documentation. Proposal submittals will be screened to ensure they are received timely and are complete, in accordance with Provision Addendum to FAR 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors- Competitive Offerors of the solicitation.

Offerors’ technical submissions along with any supplemental information will be distributed to the SEB for evaluation. Factors 1 and 2 will be evaluated using a rating system. A confidence rating will be assigned to the Technical (Factor 1) and a risk rating to the Past Performance (Factor 2) according to the extent to which the proposal meets the stated requirements of that factor.

For purposes of this evaluation, "Offeror" is defined as a single contractor or a contractor combined with any proposed subcontractor(s), as applicable. Each SEB member will independently review and rate all proposals based on the offeror's proposed Technical and Past Performance before meeting as a group to establish consensus. If possible, ratings may be established without discussions with offerors, but information required to enhance the Government's understanding of proposals or facilitate the evaluation process may be obtained consistent with FAR 15.306.

(c) Technical Factor

Performance Narrative / Construction Schedule The Government will evaluate the offeror’s written narrative and construction schedule based on the following:

(1) Performance Narrative. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s performance narrative to determine how well the offeror understands the project, by determining whether the offeror describes realistic methods to successfully accomplish the work within the allowable time while also avoiding harm or mitigating impact to environmentally sensitive areas, such as those containing cultural and biological resources.

(2) Construction Schedule. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s Construction Schedule to determine how well the offeror demonstrates an understanding of the scope of work and the ability to schedule construction work by developing a critical path schedule for this project. The Government will also evaluate if the offeror incorporated the specification milestones and outages within the schedule in a logical sequence.

The Government will further evaluate the Performance Narrative and Construction Schedule based on the following:

i. Understanding of the scope of the project.

ii. How and when the offeror will accomplish the project.

iii. Means and methods including any special technology offeror plans to use when completing the project.

iv. Knowledge of activities to be performed between the time the contract notice to proceed is provided and the start of onsite construction work.

v. Understanding of how to perform construction work in areas containing sensitive environmental resources such as those of cultural and biological significance.

Safety Plan Overview The Government will evaluate the offeror’s narrative description of its Safety Plan Overview for this project that addresses the following considerations:

i. Provide safety goals.

ii. Provide employee bonus sharing related to safety.

iii. Provide discipline policy related to safety.

iv. Detail safety training activities.

v. Detail accident prevention activities.

(d) Past Performance Factor

Past Performance and Past Performance Questionnaires The Government will assess recent and relevant past performance information for the offeror performing work similar in scope, size, and complexity to this project. For purposes of this evaluation – (1) a recent project is defined as one that was performed within the past ten (10) years and (2) a relevant project is defined as a construction project valued at $50 million or more, involving construction of high voltage, double circuit transmission line (230kV or higher) with directly embedded steel monopoles and base plated steel monopoles on concrete foundations.

The Government may contact references other than those identified by the offeror and use information from these references in the past performance evaluation. For instance, the Government may also review Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) for documentation of prior performance on Federal Contracts. Outdated or incorrect information may be noted for clarification with the offeror, as appropriate, however the accuracy of the information is the responsibility of the offeror. Results of all reference checks conducted will be documented by the SEB in developing the consensus risk rating during the evaluation. If the offeror does not have any past performance information, the offeror will be given a neutral rating and will neither be evaluated favorably or unfavorably for this factor. Offerors will send the past performance questionnaires attached to this RFP to their past performance references.

Safety Record The Government will consider the offeror’s Accident Incident Rate for the past 5-years for the prime contractor and each major subcontractor in the evaluation of Past Performance according to the following calculation:

TI x 200,000 ÷ H = IR

TI = total number of injuries. (This is Column H + Column I from OSHA Form 300A).

H = number of hours worked by all employees.

IR = Accident Incident Rate.

See: OSHA Forms for Recording Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses for instructions on calculating incidence rate.

https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/OSHA-RK-Forms-Package.pdf

(e) Cost or Price Factor

The Government will evaluate the proposed price in order to determine which offeror’s total price represents the best value to the Government. The Contracting Officer will use the techniques and procedures described under FAR 15.404 to determine whether an offeror’s pricing is fair and reasonable. This may include a comparison of price proposals with each offeror as well as to the Independent Government Estimate (IGE). Pursuant to FAR 36.214 the CO reserves the right to notify offerors to submit certified cost and pricing data if required, when submission of certified cost or pricing data is not required, and any element of proposed costs differs significantly from the Government estimate.

The evaluated price required by Provision 52.215-1 of the solicitation will be the total price of each price schedule line item. There is no Confidence or Risk Rating for cost or price.