B.08 RFP Letter_PANHES-_ HNC Cost Book Survey 2025.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

HUNTSVILLE CENTER, CORPS OF ENGINEERS

P.O. BOX 1600

HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA

35807-4301

CEHNC-CT 15 September 2025

SUBJECT: Request for Proposal (RFP) PANHES-25-P-0000 003551, HNC Task Cost Book Survey 2025

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial products or commercial services prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested, and a written solicitation will not be issued.

The Government intends to award a firm fixed price contract for Cost Book 2025 Survey Update for US Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville Center.

This solicitation is 100% Small Business Set-Aside under NAICS 541330 - Engineering Services. The Small Business Size Standard is $25,500,000.00.

1. Submit a Firm Fixed Priced (FFP) proposal for the effort described in the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS). Failure to comply with ALL of the directions provided herein shall result in an unsatisfactory rating of the proposal. General proposal requirements include:

• Proposals shall consist of a cover letter and two volumes: Volume I (Technical), and Volume II (Cost/Price). No pricing information shall be included in the technical volume.

• All proposal documents shall be formatted to be legible when printed on 8 1/2 X 11.5-inch paper to include spreadsheets (with appropriate page breaks, headers and footers). All documents and spreadsheets shall include the Contractor Name, PWS Title, and Date. The Technical proposal shall be submitted in Adobe PDF.

• Spreadsheets shall be submitted as unlocked Microsoft Excel documents and include all formulas, function, macros, computations, or equations used to compute the proposed amounts. For each workbook, all Rows, Columns, Cells, and Worksheets must be visible. Zero height and zero width rows and columns in Worksheets are not acceptable. Worksheet cells formatted with the font color equal to the fill color are not acceptable. Print image files or pictures or files containing only values are not acceptable. Failure to provide fully functional excel spreadsheets in the proposal may result in your proposal being rejected.

2. The cover letter shall include the following:

• Company name, address, cage code, and System for Award Management (SAM) Unique Entity Identifier (UEI).

• Solicitation number.

• Identify the primary and alternate project point of contacts (POCs) for this effort. Include the following POC information: Name, office telephone numbers, mobile telephone numbers, and e-mail address.

• Exclusions, assumptions, and clarifications. Any assumptions shall also be listed with the TECHNICAL PROPOSAL in the same format as the cover letter.

• Total Proposed Price and proposal expiration date.

• No hard copy documents are being requested. All submittals shall be electronic.

Basis of Award:

The contract will be awarded on a “Best Value” basis. This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost or price evaluation factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal or other than the highest technically rated proposal to obtain objective (versus threshold) performance, lower risk, or innovative and technologically superior solutions.

In a best value selection, a tradeoff may occur. The Government may award a contract to a higher-priced offeror, if the Contracting Officer determines the higher-priced proposal offers more value to the Government than a lower-priced proposal. If all offerors are rated equal, the Government may award to the lower-priced proposal, and a trade-off will not be conducted. All non-price evaluation factors, when combined, are significantly more important than price. Factor 1 (Technical) is more important than Factor 2 (Past performance). Factor 2 is more important than Factor 3 (Price). The following criteria / evaluation factors are listed in order of relative importance.

The Government will award a contract to the offeror whose proposal provides the “best value” to the government. The Government intends to award without discussions; however, it reserves the right to enter into discussions with the vendors, if it determines that doing so is in its own best interest. The Government also reserves the right to make no award at all, if a fair and reasonable price cannot be obtained.

EVALUATION CRITERIA:

FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH

The contractor's proposal shall provide its technical approach that describes the methodology of performing all work required in the PWS. The technical volume shall include detailed narratives and supporting documentation (as applicable) describing the Offeror’s Unique Technical Approach for accomplishing the requirements of the PWS shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims in the Offeror’s proposal for the requirements outlined in the

PWS.

The technical proposal must include a labor category proposed and number of hours to accomplish the requirements of the PWS. The proposal must include both regular hours and overtime hours. Do not include pricing information in the technical proposal.

The contractor shall provide resumes for any proposed key personnel who will work on the proposed contract. Key personnel must meet the minimum requirements for the labor category for which they will perform work on the contract, Senior Cost Engineer must have a minimum of 5 years of appropriate experience and Project Manager (Contractor Lead) must have a minimum of 10 years of appropriate experience. Include key personnel resumes with the technical proposal.

Adjectival Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant 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 is un-awardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

The past performance assessment will assess the confidence in the offeror’s/joint venture member’s ability (which includes, if applicable, the extent of its critical subcontractors’ involvement) to successfully accomplish the proposed effort based on the offeror’s demonstrated present and past work record. The recency and relevancy of the information, the source of the information, context of the data and general trends in the contractor’s performance will be considered. More recent and more relevant performance usually has a greater impact in the confidence assessment than less recent and less relevant performance. For purposes of this evaluation, recency is defined as active or completed efforts performed within the past (5) years from the issuance date of this solicitation. The offeror shall submit at least one (1) and no more than three (3) projects for evaluation. The Government will perform an independent determination of relevancy of the data provided or obtained.

In assessing present and past performance, the Government will employ several approaches, including but not limited to:

The Past Performance evaluation is not limited to review of the information provided in the offeror’s Present/Past Performance volume. Present/Past performance information may be obtained from the Government’s Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) and the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). Data from previous source selections may be used if the data is recent and relevant.

As a result of the recency, relevancy and quality assessments of the contracts evaluated, one confidence assessment rating as described in the DoD Source Selection Procedures will be assigned to the Past Performance factor.

The four levels of relevancy are defined in the table below:

Very Relevant Present/Past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities that this solicitation requires.

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

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

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

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s relevant Previous Experience and Past Performance as follows:

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 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.

Note: In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance information is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorable or unfavorable on the factor of past performance, in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv). In this case, the offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a past performance confidence rating of Neutral.

FACTOR 3 – PRICE

The contractor shall submit a separate price proposal that includes pricing for labor hours for both regular hours and overtime hours for all work proposed on the contract. The proposed price will be evaluated for reasonableness. A proposal found to be unreasonable may be rejected on that basis. The Government will only award a contract if a fair and reasonable price can be obtained. It is the Government’s intent to award without discussions, however the Government may conduct negotiations in an effort to obtain a fair and reasonable price.

CLIN / Pricing Format:

CLIN Description Price 0001 Task 1: Develop a Work and Quality Control Plan $ 0002 Task 2: Provide Updated Quote List Table $ 0003 Task 3: Provide Updated Vendor List Table $ 0004 Task 4: Provide Updated Material List Table $ 0005 Task 5: Provide Updated SubBid List Table $ 0006 Task 6: Provide Updated Task List Table $ 0007 Task 7: Development of the Task Item X-ref Spreadsheet from

CB 2016 and 2023 to CB 2024

0008 Task 8: Monthly Status Reports, MS Project File, & Milestone Invoices $ 0009 Task 9: Meetings, Meeting Minutes, and Conference Calls $ 0010 Task 10: Administrative & Other Considerations - Anti-terrorism

& Operations Security Description

Options: None.

PROVISIONS & CLAUSES: See attachment.

WAGE DETERMINATION:

The Service Contract Act (SCA) is applicable and is available at https://sam.gov/content/home.

CONTACTS:

The contractor shall NOT engage into any form of contact with installation personnel regarding this requirement prior to submission of proposal and contract award. Contact regarding the requirements set forth in this RFP must only occur with the Contracting Officer. Discussions or information obtained via other sources could make you ineligible for award if deemed a conflict of interest or a violation of the Procurement Integrity Act.

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION:

Contractor questions are due 5:00 P.M. (Central Time), Wednesday, 17 September 2024, and shall be submitted to Contract Specialist, Coronica L. Maehew, at coronica.l.maehew@usace.army.mil and CEHNC- CT-SpecialProjectsBranch@usace.army.mil. Questions received after that date will be considered but no guarantee exists than an answer will be made. It is the Government’s intent to award without discussions;

however, this request for proposal may result in discussions, if necessary, prior to award.

Provide your proposal in a digital format (Adobe PDF or Microsoft Office) by 3:00 P.M. (Central Time), Thursday, 25 September 2025, via email to the Contract Specialist, Coronica L. Maehew, at coronica.l.maehew@usace.army.mil and CEHNC-CT-SpecialProjectsBranch@usace.army.mil. All information will be protected as procurement sensitive.

https://sam.gov/content/home mailto:coronica.l.maehew@usace.army.mil mailto:CEHNC-CT-SpecialProjectsBranch@usace.army.mil mailto:CEHNC-CT-SpecialProjectsBranch@usace.army.mil mailto:coronica.l.maehew@usace.army.mil mailto:CEHNC-CT-SpecialProjectsBranch@usace.army.mil

Offerors shall follow the procedures found in FAR 15.208 for the submission of proposals. Offerors are cautioned that due to file size limitations (20mb per email) and email security protocols, there is a risk that not all correspondence will be received by this office. It is the offeror’s responsibility to ensure receipt of all email correspondence on time. If receipt has not been acknowledged prior to the due date/time please contact contract specialist, Ms. Coronica L. Maehew by phone at (256) 895-1198 or email at coronica.l.maehew@usace.army.mil for confirmation.

Sincerely, Wendy D. Fields Contracting Officer

Attachments:

(1) Performance Work Statement (PWS)

(2) CDRLs A01-A0018

(3) Applicable Provisions and Clauses