B2_10_Section_M_Evaluation_Methodology_DRAFT.pdf

SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT

1. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

This award will be made based on lowest-price technically- acceptable price of proposal meeting the acceptability standards established in the Request of Proposal (RFP). SLAC will select the lowest-price technically acceptable offer or whose offer conforms to the requirements of solicitation including all the stated terms and conditions and technical requirements. All technically acceptable offers shall be treated equally except for their prices. Failure to meet a requirement or inclusion of unacceptable exceptions, assumptions, conditions, or clarifications may result in an offer being technically unacceptable. Award may be made with or without discussions.

A. Price Evaluation: Initially, offers will be ranked according to price, including any option prices if applicable. An offeror’s proposed prices will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified in Section B by the proposed unit price for each Contract Line-Item Number or Subcontract Line-Item Number to confirm the extended amount for each. The price evaluation will only be conducted on technically acceptable proposals, per paragraph B below. Price evaluation will be conducted for reasonableness and affordability of the proposed total evaluated prices.

B. Technical Acceptability: Technical proposals will be evaluated on a Meets/Does Not Meet basis; however, SLAC reserves the right to request clarifications of any element of a proposal.

2. EVALUATION

2.1 VOLUME I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Proposals shall be evaluated against the following Factors and Sub-factors:

Factor 1 – Technical Approach

• Sub-factor 1.1, Project Approach:

The Offeror’s technical approach shall be evaluated based on how the activities will be planned from start to finish. The Offeror’s technical approach should clearly demonstrate a technical understanding of the scope, and the planning required to successfully complete the project.

Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award

RFP 367094

Reactive Power Compensation Power Factor Correction Work Package 1 - DEMOLITION

• Sub-factor 1.2, Project Work Elements:

The Offeror shall be evaluated on the general approach to execute project work elements, including the following: coordination and communication with SLAC project personnel; pre-mobilization activities, demolition, lead abatement; removal of Synchronous Condenser out of Master Substation Yard; separation of materials identified for salvage and waste disposal; and demobilization.

• Sub-factor 1.3, Assumptions:

The Offeror’s Proposal shall be evaluated if it meets the technical requirements for the Offeror’s to describe the assumptions made in preparation of the Proposal. Do the assumptions affect the Offeror’s proposal in terms of meeting all the technical requirements in accordance with the Statement of Work (SOW) and specifications.

• Sub-factor 1.4, Sub-tier or Trade Partners: The Offeror’s proposal shall be evaluated on providing identification of sub-tier or trade partner subcontractors intended to be used on the project and the description of their roles and responsibilities in the demolition activities.

Factor 2 – Safety

• Sub-factor 2.1, Safety Plan: Offeror’s Preliminary safety plan will be evaluated for how well it demonstrates key planning has been thought through for high consequence activities, including but not limited to hoisting and rigging, lead abatement, general demolition, to meet the SOW deliverables.

• Sub-factor 2.2 Offeror’s ES&H program shall be evaluated for how well it meets the project’s requirements.

• Sub-factor 2.3 Information provided by Offeror on their environmental regulatory compliance status and enforcement history for the past 3 years will be validated and checked for non-compliance and/or criminal or civil enforcement activity.

• Sub-factor 2.4 Offeror will be required to submit and obtain SLAC’s approval for Offeror’s completed Subcontractor Construction Safety Qualification Form

(SQF):

o Using Offeror’s Experience Modification Rate (EMR), the Offeror will be evaluated on whether it’s EMR is equal to or below 1.0; and o If Offeror’s EMR is greater than 1.0, Offeror’s OSHA 300 logs for self-performed work performed over the past 3 years will be reviewed for any fatalities or serious injuries.

o The Offeror’s SQF submission/status will be reviewed to confirm compliance with the requirement.

Factor 3 – Schedule

• The Offeror shall be evaluated on how their submitted schedule meets project schedule as indicated in Statement of Work. The submitted schedule shall include proposed start and end dates and interdependencies.

Factor 4 – Project Management & Experience

• Sub-factor 4.1 The Offeror shall be evaluated on their team’s proposed methodologies for providing comprehensive project management services and project team coordination, and providing prompt, effective and safe demolition services.

• Sub-factor 4.2 The Offeror shall be evaluated on their Key Personnel. The evaluation will include:

o Review of the Offeror key personnel and sub-tier contractors qualification including percentage of time assigned and on-site presence. OSHA 30 is the minimum standard for the Site Safety Representative.

o Review of the identified previous projects they supported will occur to confirm relevancy.

o Review of the provided resume will occur to confirm consistency with the relevant experience for the identified role.

Factor 5 – Statement of Qualifications:

• Sub-factor 5.1 The Offeror shall be evaluated to confirm Offeror has a current and valid California Contractor’s license appropriate to Offeror’s trade.

• Sub-factor 5.2 Offeror’s written statement will be reviewed to ensure:

o Neither the Offeror’s firm, nor any of its owners or officers have been convicted of a crime involving the awarding of the contract of a government (U.S. Federal, State, and City) construction project, or the bidding or performance of a government contract.

o Offeror shall have a local office in the San Francisco Bay Area established a minimum of three years. The San Francisco Bay Area is defined as the following 10 counties: Santa Clara, San Mateo, San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, Sonoma, Solano and Santa Cruz Counties.

o Offeror’s experience in contracts with DOE’s National Laboratories, the Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Defense (DOD), and/or a federal facility.

2.2 VOLUME II – PRICE PROPOSAL

Business Documentation Clearly stamp all company financial documents as “Business Sensitive” if applicable, on any included documents.

• Bonding ability will be evaluated for the project and Offeror’s overall bonding capacity letter from the primary’s Surety.

• Dun and Bradstreet reports will be reviewed to verify a SER score of 6 or lower. Financial statements are not required with a SER score of 6 or below.

• For an Offeror with a Dun and Bradstreet SER score greater than 6, or if the

Offeror does not participate in Dun and Bradstreet, the Offeror must provide the three most current years of audited Financial Statements, which will be reviewed for risk.

• Offeror’s proposal must communicate acceptance to the SLAC Terms and Conditions, as indicated in the solicitation, including all attachments, and documents incorporated by reference. Requested exceptions to any of the solicitation documents must be communicated at the time of the proposal submission. Note that any exceptions to the SLAC Terms and Conditions will require SLAC Legal approval.

Price

• RFP Section A (Subcontract Form) will be reviewed for completeness;

acknowledgement of any issued solicitation amendments will be reviewed for signature.

• RFP Section B (Supplies or Services and Price Costs) will be reviewed for completeness.

• Section L, Attachment A, Proposal Breakdown Sheet will be reviewed for sufficient level of detail.

Contract Documentation:

• RFP Section H (Special Terms and Conditions) completed with Key Personnel.

• Section J, (IIPP Form) shall be completed and signed.

• Section K, (Representations & Certifications) all required documents shall be completed and signed.

2.3 EVALUATION METHDOLOGY

• The Technical Proposals which include Factor 1 (Technical Approach), Factor 2 (Safety), Factor 3 (Schedule), Factor 4 (Project Management & Experience), and Factor 5 (Statement of Qualifications) will be evaluated utilizing a rating based on “Meets” or “Does Not Meet” the requirements.

Meets Requirements

Offeror meets the requirements necessary for acceptable subcontract performance and provides low to moderate risk to SLAC.

Does Not Meet Requirements

Offeror fails to meet the requirements or provides unacceptable risk to

SLAC.

• The Pricing Proposals shall be evaluated utilizing a business rating based on “Meets” or

“Does Not Meet” the business requirements.

Meets Requirements

Acceptable Overall Proposal. The proposal meets the SLAC’s requirements for submission of complete and correct documentation, shows a satisfactory level of financial health.

Does Not Meet Requirements

Unacceptable Overall Proposal. The proposal does not meet SLAC’s requirements for submission of complete and correct documentation, shows an unsatisfactory level of financial health.

• Pricing of the highest ranked technical offeror will be evaluated based on completeness, realism, and reasonableness per the below table.

Completeness Price will be evaluated to determine whether the Offeror provided sufficient data as required by the solicitation and/or SLAC during the evaluation.

Realism

Prices will be evaluated to determine whether the proposed pricing is realistic for the work to be performed, reflects a clear understanding of the requirements by the Offeror, and is consistent with the Offeror’s technical proposal. Comparison of prices to the Independent Government Cost Estimate and other offers received will occur to assess that prices are not unrealistically low.

Reasonableness Prices will be established by effective competition and will be reviewed to assess that prices are not unreasonably high.

3. DEBRIEFINGS

Debriefings may be requested in writing within 3 days upon notification of non-award.

Debriefings should occur within 5 days of a written request. The discussion shall not include comparisons with the other proposals. An explanation of the evaluation of significant elements in the Offeror’s proposal, summary of the rationale for eliminating the Offeror from the competition and assure the Offeror that its proposal was treated fairly, impartially, and objectively. The Sr. Subcontracts Administrator will conduct debriefing(s).