A22 - W912EK24R0004 DRAFT-REV2.pdf

Brandon Road Interbasin Project (BRIP) Increment I-A

See Section 01 11 00 Summary of Work NAICS Code: 237990 Size Standard: $45,000,000.00 Estimated Range: Over $10,000,000.00 Completion Days: 1,670 consecutive calendar days 100% Small Business Set-Aside, Best Value Trade Off

All questions shall be submitted via Projnet. See clause MVR.02 for additional information.

SAMANTHA K JOHANSON 309-794-5259

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

29-Jan-2024

(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 _______15 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________1670 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________52.211-10

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 __________1 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________29 Feb 2024 (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 _______60 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

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1500 ROCK ISLAND D

ROCK ISLAND IL 61201

W912EK

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

02:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

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

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

FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

W912EK24R0004 59

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

Section 00010 - Solicitation Contract Form

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

BRANDON ROAD INTERBASIN PROJECT 1-A

FFP

FOB: Destination

PSC CD: Y1KA

NET AMT

Section 00100 - Bidding Schedule/Instructions to Bidders

SCHEDULE OF PRICES

ITEM NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

BASE BID

0001 Mobilization and Demobilization 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0002 Temporary Construction Facilities 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0003 Clearing, Grubbing, and Stripping 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0004 Demolition and Debris Removal 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0005 Excavating LDB Access Road and Parking Area

0005AA First 14,000 Cubic Yard 14,000 CY $ $

0005AB Over 14,000 Cubic Yard 2,500 CY $ $

0006 Commissioning for Total Project 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0007 Site Signage 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0008 Site Restoration 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

Mechanical Dredging

0009 Monolith Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0010 Automatic Barge Clearing Deterrent 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0011 Acoustic and Bubble Curtain Deterrents 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0012 Protection Cell Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

Rock Excavation

0013 Monolith Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0014 Automatic Barge Clearing Deterrent Trench and Channel

1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0015 Acoustic and Bubble Curtain Deterrents Trenches and Channels

1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0016 Protection Cell Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0017 Retaining Wall Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

LDB Monolith

0018 Monolith Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0019 Precast Cells 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0020 Concrete Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0021 Aluminum Railing Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

RDB Monolith

0022 Monolith Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0023 Precast Cell 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0024 Concrete Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0025 Electrical Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0026 Riprap

0026AA First XX Tons TN $ $

0026AB Over XX Tons TN $ $

Protection Cell

0027 Sheet Pile Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0028 Steel Plate Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0029 Concrete Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

Automatic Barge Clearing Deterrent (ABCD)

0030 Precast Trench 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0031 Concrete Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0032 Piping Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0033 Testing, Adjusting and Balancing (TAB) 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

Acoustic Deterrent

0034 Precast Trench 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0035 Concrete Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0036 RESERVED 1 JOB $0 $ 0

0037 Amplifiers and Bridging Transformers 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0038 Cable and Raceway Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0039 Testing, Adjusting and Balancing (TAB) 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

Bubble Curtain Deterrent (BCD)

0040 Precast Trench 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0041 Concrete Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0042 Piping Work, Bubbler Head, and Diffuser 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0043 Testing, Adjusting and Balancing (TAB) 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0044 Channel Floor Slabs 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

Facility Buildings

0045 Sheet Pile Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0046 Retaining Wall Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0047 Concrete Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0048 Grating Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0049 Aluminum Railing Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0050 Electrical Equipment and Compressor and Manifold Buildings

1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0051 Generator Installation 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0052 Compressors 3 EA $ $

0053 Electrical Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0054 Mechanical Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0055 HVAC Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0056 Architectural Finishes and Specialties 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0057 Lock Operations Management Application (LOMA)

1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0058 Testing, Adjusting and Balancing (TAB) 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

LDB Peninsula

0059 Earthwork/Processed Fill

0059AA First 5,300 Cubic Yards 5,300 CY $ $

0059AB Over 5,300 Cubic Yards 1,000 CY $ $

0060 Geogrid 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0061 Aggregate

0061AA First 2,600 Tons 2,600 TN $ $

0061AB Over 2,600 Tons 500 TN $ $

0062 Asphalt Pavement and/or Patching 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0063 Vehicle Gate Replacement 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0064 Riprap

0064AA First 1,000 Tons 1,000 TN $ $

0064AB Over 1,000 Tons 200 TN $ $

Site Utilities

0065 Fire Alarm and Mass Notification Systems Installation

1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0066 Duct Banks and Manholes 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0067 Electric Service 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0068 Communications Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0069 Electrical Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

Boat Ramp and Loop Road

0070 Mechanical Dredging

0070AA First 2,500 Cubic Yards 2,500 CY $ $

0070AB Over 2,500 Cubic Yards 1,900 CY $ $

0071 Aggregate Gradation CA-6

0071AA First 2,400 Tons 2,400 TN $ $

0071AB Over 2,400 Tons 400 TN $ $

0072 Loose Gravel Shelf 266 TN $ $

0073 Concrete Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $ 0074 Riprap 204 TN $ $ 0075 Special Waste Disposal 0075AA First 4,100 Tons 4,100 TN $ $ 0075AB Over 4,100 Tons 3,160 TN $ $ 0076 Earthwork 0076AA First 12,200 Cubic Yards 12,200 CY $ $ 0076AB Over 12,200 Cubic Yards 2,200 CY $ $ 0077 Floating Dock Work 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $ 0078 Asphalt Pavement and/or Patching 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $ 0079 Vehicle Gate Replacement 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

Switchyard

0080 Earthwork 0080AA First 18,100 Cubic Yards 18,100 CY $ $ 0080AB Over 18,100 Cubic Yards 3,200 CY $ $ 0081 Aggregate 0081AA First 5,700 Tons 5,700 TN $ $

0081AB Over 5,700 Tons 1,000 TN $ $

0082 Riprap 37 TN $ $

0083 Asphalt Pavement and/or Patching 1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

TOTAL OF ESTIMATED AMOUNTS FOR BASE BID

(ITEM NOS. 0001 THROUGH 0083, INCL.)

OPTION A

0101 Special Waste Disposal

0101AA First 1,000 Tons 1,000 TN $ $

0101AB Over 1,000 Tons 2,600 TN $ $

TOTAL OF ESTIMATED AMOUNTS FOR OPTION A

(ITEM NOS. 0101 THROUGH 0101AB, INCL.)

EA = EACH JOB = LUMP SUM SF = SQUARE FOOT TN = TONS

LDB = LEFT DESCENDING BANK RDB = RIGHT DESCENDING BANK

PLEASE ENSURE THAT UNIT PRICE AND AMOUNT LINES FOR ALL ITEMS

HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.

THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO EXERCISE OPTION A WITHIN 90

DAYS AFTER AWARD OF THE BASE BID.

IF OPTION A IS EXERCISED, THE CONTRACT WILL BE EXTENDED 30 CALENDAR

DAYS.

SOURCE SELECTION

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The Government will select for award the proposal that is most advantageous and represents the best overall value to the Government, considering the General and Adminstrative Criteria, Technical Approach, Past Performance, and Price, along with their respective elements (as applicable). The Government may select for award the Offeror whose proposed prices are not the lowest, but whose technical approach and past performance proposals justify the payment of a higher price. Conversely, the Government may select for award the Offeror whose proposed prices are lower than higher rated non-price proposals that are not sufficiently more advantageous as to justify the payment of a higher price.

Relative Order of Importance - The evaluation factors are as follows:

General and Administrative Criteria, Technical Approach, Past Performance, and Price.

Factor Relative Importance to Other Factors I. General and Administrative Criteria Will be evaluated on a pass or fail basis. If an Offeror is evaluated as “Fail” for Factor I, then they will be removed from further consideration for award.

II. Technical Approach Significantly more important than factor III.

III. Past Performance Least important non-price factor.

IV. Price When combined, the non-priced factors are approximately equal to price.

Proposed prices will be evaluated, but not scored or otherwise combined with the other aspects of the proposal evaluation. An Offeror must be considered “Acceptable” with no greater than a moderate risk in the Technical Approach Factor to be eligible for contract award.

B. FACTORS AND ELEMENTS TO BE EVALUATED

Award will be made to the Offeror whose proposal is most advantageous and represents the best overall value to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below. The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal:

Factor 1: General and Administrative Criteria:

Offerors must provide the administrative documentation as required below:

Proposal cover letter or proposal cover page (include names, office phone, cell phone numbers and e-mail addresses for Proposal POCs). The cover letter shall include a list of names and telephone number of persons authorized to conduct negotiations on behalf of the Offeror. Within the letter, all Offerors shall acknowledge and accept, without exceptions, all statement of work requirements. Offerors shall confirm no organization conflict of interest exists, or list any conflicts and steps taken to mitigate conflict.

Standard Form 1442: A conformed solicitation copy from this RFP with the original signature of an official authorized to contractually bind the Offeror in Block 20B of the SF 1442 and acknowledgment of any/all amendments. The Offeror must complete the Blocks 14-20 of the SF 1442.

Joint Venture and Mentor-Protégé Agreements: Small business offerors (e.g., 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSBC, etc.)

submitting a proposal as a Joint Venture or Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture must submit evidence from the Offeror's SBA Servicing Agency that the Offeror has notified and discussed the proposed joint venture for this specific project with the appropriate SBA Representative or Business Opportunity Specialist. Joint Venture agreements and approved 8(a) Mentor-Protégé agreements must be submitted with the proposal. Joint Venture Agreements and Mentor-Protégé agreements will not be rated but must comply with the relevant regulations in Title 13 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding: The Offeror shall submit a letter from their bonding company exhibiting the Offeror’s ability to be bonded for this project. Include the name, address, and telephone number of the firm's bonding company, as they may be contacted.

Excluded Parties List: No submission requirement, however the government will validate the Offeror is not on the Excluded Parties List both at the time of proposal receipt, and again prior to award (for the prospective Phase II participants).

Offerors shall submit an offer subject to Project Labor Agreement (PLA) requirements in accordance with FAR b5ct9sc9 Highlight

22.504, General requirements for project labor agreements.

Any PLA reached pursuant to the PLA requirements in the solicitation does not change the terms of the contract or provide for any price adjustment by the Government. See FAR provision 52.222-33, Notice of Requirement for Project Labor Agreement, and clause 52.222-34, Project Labor Agreement, for definitions and requirements pertaining to the use of a PLA for this contract.

Factor 2: Technical Approach: All offerors will be evaluated on the adequacy and feasibility of their technical approach. The Technical Approach factor is further divided into the following elements:

a. Element 1: Work Plan

b. Element 2: Corporate Management

c. Element 3: Safety

NOTE: Each element of Factor 2 is not evaluated or rated separately. The findings for all elements will be used to create one overall evaluation rating for Factor 2.

Factor 3: Past Performance: The past performance evaluation considers each Offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements.

Factor 4: Price: The resulting award will be a Firm Fixed Price Contract for construction services. Price reasonableness will be utilized in the evaluation of this effort in accordance with FAR Part 15 procedures. Unbalanced price analysis will also be conducted.

The Government will not conduct cost or price realism analysis of any pricing.

Evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal shall address each element as it applies to the plans and specifications. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team (SST).

1. The overarching evaluation approach for all factors a is as follows:

a. Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the Offeror’s methods and approach have completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the Request for Proposal (RFP). The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the RFP.

b. Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

2. Factor 1: General and Administrative Criteria

The General Administrative and Qualifying Criteria (Factor 1) will be evaluated based on the following rating scale:

Rating Description

Pass Proposal meets all stated requirements for this Factor.

Fail Proposal fails to meet all stated requirements for this Factor.

3. Factor 2: Technical Approach

The Government will be utilizing a combined technical/risk rating approach which includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining the technical ratings.

The following table, which utilizes a combined technical/risk rating, shall be used for the technical factor and all elements:

Table 2.1 - COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATING

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 unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

a. Element 1: Work Plan

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed Work Plan and schedule to determine understanding of and compliance with the Government’s requirements for this element. Table 2.1. will be used to evaluate the submitted work plan.

Submitted Work Plan shall at a minimum include:

1) Descriptions and pictures of past projects that best demonstrate your capabilities to construct a project of this nature. Ideally past projects will showcase your experience and capabilities on large navigation projects involving channel walls and floor work, “in-the-wet” construction expertise to include dive crews, and construction of comparable mechanical and electrical systems.

2) Provide a detailed construction schedule to show execution of major work activities within, or ideally ahead, of the required construction schedule defined within the contract documents. Include outlines of the critical paths, detailed construction durations, and critical milestones. Define work rhythm when working in between navigation to include any short navigation closure periods and when work involves navigation width restrictions and define any critical milestones. Opportunities to minimize disruption to navigation and/or accelerate the construction completion schedule are encouraged.

3) Strategies to minimize impacts to navigation while completing all channel work “in-the-wet”. Phasing and completion of work adjacent to and within the navigation channel to ensure minimum disruption to navigation traffic while meeting the construction completion schedule. Describe the process to excavate for the deterrent trenches, channel bottom slab, and installation of the deterrent components within the trenches. Provide description and process for “in-the-wet” construction of: troughs to house the deterrents;

installation of steel pipes for the bubble deterrent systems; conduit and wiring runs for the acoustic transducers; acoustic transducer installations; and commissioning of the system once everything has been installed.

Submitted Work Plan may include:

1) Strategy to procure and deliver materials to include identifying and scheduling timely acquisition of critical materials or equipment that have long lead times.

2) List any major subcontractors and the critical skills they bring to the project. Provide planned coordination and overall job site management. The work plan should anticipate the possibility of corrective measures during construction.

3) A thorough understanding of the necessary work as outlined in Specification Section 00 73 05, Paragraphs

“ADDITIONAL COMMENCEMENT,

PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK”

and “BRANDON ROAD LOCKAGES, COMMUNICATION WITH NAVIGATION

INDUSTRY”

4) Describe how and who will anticipate, manage, and correct potential issues that arise during construction including material manufacturer and delivery of components and multiple construction activities/traffic working within the narrow project area.

Assume a Notice to Proceed (NTP) of 1 March 2024 for proposal evaluation purposes only. The date is an estimated date for evaluation purposes and may not necessarily represent the actual NTP date for the awarded contract.

The Government will evaluate the Work Plan and schedule based on the following criteria:

Completeness and reasonableness of the Work Plan

Completeness, reasonableness, and compliance of the schedule with the contract requirements

Demonstration of thorough understanding of the project requirements

Reasonableness of work sequencing and durations in terms of site constraints and challenges associated with the work

Minimization of critical path activities

Ability to mitigate construction and scheduling risks associated with project features

b. Element 2: Corporate Management

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed Corporate Management to determine compliance with and capability to meet the solicitation requirements. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s organization chart. The organization chart shall list the Offeror’s key personnel and identify on-site and management personnel including lines of authority. The organization chart shall also list subcontractor’s key personnel and how the subcontractor interfaces with the Offeror.

The organization chart shall be clear and concise to allow thorough understanding of the contractor’s team for the project.

Employee duties and responsibilities should be clearly labeled on the organization chart. Based on the organization chart, the Government will verify that that the safety officer and quality control officer are different individuals. If using a subcontractor as team members in demonstrating construction experience, describe the roles the prime contractor and subcontractors will play in the project and the percentage of any type each will perform. For the purpose of this requirement, subcontractors are defined as members of an Offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform ten (10%) percent or more of the proposed effort.

The Government will evaluate the adequacy and strength of key personnel assignments (including prime and subcontractor personnel) to cover the necessary design disciplines and construction staffing requirements:

Description to include a minimum of three previous experiences on marine construction projects of similar complexity for key home office and satellite office employees. Include the scope of work completed and the total project construction costs.

Descriptions (include names and resumes), responsibilities, and authority for key field employees (including, but not limited to, all managers, superintendents, safety officers, and quality control managers that may be utilized on this project).

Provide qualifications for each type of subcontractor shown on the organization chart.

c. Element 3: Safety

The Government will focus its safety evaluation on the prime contractor. The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated on the following criteria:

Providing a list of projects with similar hazards the offeror has completed.

Providing the offeror’s OSHA 300A form for the last 3 years.

Experience Modification Rate

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Experience Modification Rate as provided by the Offeror’s Insurance carrier. The Offeror must provide documentation, from their Insurance carrier, that demonstrates their safety and health program experience using an "Experience Modification Rate (EMR)” from 2018- 2022. The table below lists the finding criteria to be used:

Table 2.2 - Experience Modifier Findings

Findings Experience Modifier

Strength or Significant Strength

0.7 or less

Acceptable 0.71 to 1.0 Weakness or Significant Weakness

Greater than 1.0

4. Factor 3: Past Performance

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the solicitation. Offerors may submit all Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime Offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past ten (10) years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Major subcontractors for the purpose of Past Performance evaluation are defined as members of an Offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform ten (10%) percent or more of the proposed effort.

Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this plan along with utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in Appendix D.

The Government will focus its inquiries on the Offeror’s (and major subcontractor’s) record of performance as it relates to all solicitation requirements, including cost, schedule, performance, construction experience and management of subcontractors. A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of the work can become an important consideration in the evaluation process. Therefore, Offerors will be reminded to include the most recent and relevant efforts (within the past ten (10) years) in their proposal.

The Government may use data provided by the Offeror in its proposal and data obtained from other sources, including data in Government files or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor and their current and past performance under Federal, State or Local government or commercial contracts for same or similar services as compared to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 237990. Data used in conducting performance risk assessments shall not extend past ten (10) years prior to the issue date of the solicitation but may include performance data generated during the past ten (10) years without regard to the contract award date.

Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

The Past Performance factor considers each Offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered. These are combined to establish one performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror. There are three (3) aspects to the Past Performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

The first Past Performance aspect is the recency of the Offeror’s past performance. Recency is expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. Offerors may submit all Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime Offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past ten

(10) years, from the issue date of this RFP. Offerors may submit up to five

(5) past performance projects for work performed during the last ten (10) years. Offerors may submit completed projects or substantially complete projects. Projects are considered substantially complete when most of the work has been completed on the contract so as to demonstrate the ability to successfully complete all phases of the project. Contracts that are not substantially complete will be considered recent or relevant. Contracts with completion dates prior to ten (10) years will not be considered recent or relevant.

The second Past Performance aspect is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be acquired. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration will be given to those aspects of an Offeror’s history of contract (or subcontract) performance that would provide the most context and give the greatest ability to measure whether the Offeror will successfully satisfy the current requirement. With respect to relevancy, past performance of greater relevancy will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

Relevance will reflect what an Offeror has done in relation to same/similar construction type projects such as:

Construction in-the-wet on an active navigation channel to include:

• 1) Diving support;

• 2) Excavation of bedrock;

• 3) Placement of precast and cast-in-place concrete elements;

• 4) Marine construction from a floating plant.

Working in limited construction staging areas.

Construction of vertical concrete.

Construction projects involving commissioning of unique and/or interconnected systems.

Table 3.1 - PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATING

Relevancy Description

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.

The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the Offeror’s past performance in accordance with FAR 15.304(c)(2). The Source Selection Team will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the Offeror’s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate these into the performance confidence assessment.

The performance confidence assessment will utilize the most appropriate ratings from the table below. This rating considers the assessed confidence of the recent/relevant/quality information gathered. 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 will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably and will be assigned a performance confidence rating of “neutral.” If an Offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of “neutral,” the Source Selection Authority may determine that a “Substantial Confidence” or “Satisfactory Confidence” past performance rating is worth more than a “Neutral Confidence” past performance rating.

Table 3.2 – PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE

ASSESSMENTS RATING

Assessment Description

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.

5. Factor 4: Price

Price will be evaluated for reasonableness. An offer that is materially unbalanced may be rejected as being unacceptable if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

(1) The Offeror shall ensure the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and fully supports the dollar values set forth in the SF1442 Schedule of Prices table.

(2) Prices offered will be evaluated for reasonableness in comparison to the Government estimate. In accordance with 33 U.S.C. 622 and 624, no civil works construction contract shall be awarded if the contract price exceeds the Government estimate by more than twenty five (25) percent.

(3) The Government will evaluate price utilizing unbalanced price analysis. Cost realism analysis will not be performed.

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. Introduction.

The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted in electronic version to both the Contracting Officer, Chris Paitson, j.c.paitson@usace.army.mil, and the Contract Specialist, Samantha Johanson, Samantha.k.johanson@usace.army.mil, as set forth below. The Offeror’s proposal shall consist of the following four (4) volumes and may be submitted to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist via email only:

The Offeror’s proposal shall consist of the following four (4) volumes:

I - General and Administrative Qualifying Criteria

II - Technical Approach III - Past Performance IV - Price

Files shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements or the Project Scope of Work with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

a. Each volume shall be submitted electronically via email. Each document within the file shall be clearly labeled with its title.

b. All documents shall be single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one (1) blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8- point and may be landscape.

c. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

VOLUME TITLE

DIGITAL

COPIES

MAXIMUM

PAGES

I – General and Administrative Qualifying Criteria

No Maximum

II - Technical Approach 1 100*

III – Past Performance 1 25**

IV – Price

Schedule of Prices

* Corporate Safety Program Documentation is excluded from the page count.

** Past Performance Questionnaires are excluded from the page count.

** Since the proposal is to be submitted electronically via email, a copy of the bid bond shall be submitted with the proposal. The original bid bond shall be received by the contract specialist within three (3) days of solicitation closing to be considered for award.

NOTE: Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed, not read, and will not be evaluated by the Government.

3. PROPOSAL FILES

a. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and RFP number in the header and/or footer. A Table of Contents should be created using the Table of Content feature in MS Word. MS Word (doc) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1”

Gutter – 0” From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5” Page Size, Width – 8.5” Page Size, Height – 11”

NOTE: 11X17 folded pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations; however, each

11X17 page counts as two pages.

The following additional restrictions apply:

b. File Packaging. Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files.

**Please note – Self extracting exe. files are not acceptable.

c. Content Requirement. All information shall be confined to the appropriate volume.

Each volume of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, along with the detailed information provided below:

i. VOLUME I – General and Administrative Qualifying Criteria:

This volume shall contain one, text searchable PDF to include the information required in Section B, Factor 1. No page limit.

ii. VOLUME II - Technical Approach: The volume shall consist of all information required to support the technical approach and shall not exceed one hundred (100) pages. No technical approach information shall be contained in any other volume of this proposal.

The volume shall include the work plan, corporate management and safety sections as required.

iii. VOLUME III – Past Performance: This volume shall contain past performance information regarding similar contracts. This volume shall not exceed twenty-five (25) pages including a maximum of five (5) pages for each major subcontractor. Major subcontractor is not defined for the purposes of this RFP and is left to Offeror discretion; however, a rationale must be provided for the Government to evaluate if the Government agrees with the Contractor’s definition of major subcontractor, and subsequent inclusion.

Offerors may submit all Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime Offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past ten (10) years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Data concerning the Offeror shall be provided first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor, in alphabetical order. The Offeror may also submit the written consent of its major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of its subcontractor’s past performance information to the Offeror. No past performance information shall be contained in any other volume of this proposal.

Submit a separate sheet for each reference. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure points of contact can be contacted by the government’s evaluators and that they will cooperate.

Section 1: Past Performance Questionnaire

The Offeror may submit up to five (5) Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) Forms which shall identify if the contract is active or complete, the contract was for the Government (Federal, state, local, etc) or commercial, if the Offeror was the prime contractor, a teaming partner, and/or joint venture. Clearly link the past performance information to the Technical Approach factor/elements stated in the solicitation.

Additionally, as applicable, Offerors are to include a discussion of efforts to resolve problems encountered as well as efforts to identify and manage project risk.

Where problems existed, clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming these problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. Contracts shall be at least six (6) months old to be considered. Contracts with expiration dates prior to ten (10) years ago shall not be considered. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Contract Specialist, Samantha Johanson, Samantha.k.johanson@usace.army.mil prior to proposal to the closing date.

Section 2: Organization Structure Change History

If applicable, include information on organization structure change history or a joint venture resulting in a different company name. Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition.

iv. VOLUME IV – Price: The volume shall consist of all information required to support the offered price. Certified cost and pricing data are not currently required;

however, the Government reserves the right to request such data prior to award. No pricing information shall be contained in any other volume of this proposal.

Price Schedule, located in section 00100 of request for proposal, must be completed and returned. Failure to provide may result in your proposal not being considered for award.

E. DISCUSSIONS

1. GENERAL INFORMATION

Per FAR 52.215-1(f)(4), the Government intends to award without discussions. Therefore, Offerors are encouraged to submit their best possible price with their proposal since Final Proposal Revisions are not intended.

In accordance with FAR 15.306(d), discussion sessions with each Offeror may be held within the determined competitive range. Should discussions take place, all Offeror’s in the competitive range will be allowed a minimum of seven (7) calendar days to submit Final Proposal Revisions.

2. DISCUSSION SCHEDULING

If discussions are conducted, the Contracting Officer will schedule the discussion sessions, and each Offeror will be notified of the time and place at least three (3) business days prior to their discussion session. Appropriate security clearances should be provided by the Offeror’s in sufficient time to process the requests. The Contracting Officer will provide additional instructions with the notification. The discussion sessions will take place by the method of the Government’s choosing and provided to the contractor in writing.

APPENDIX D

PAST PERFORMANCE

APPENDIX D - Enclosure 1

NAVFAC / USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information

Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: UEI 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: 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.

USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) TO BE

COMPLETED BY CLIENT

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT YOUR

EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

Form PPQ -0 (9/30/11)

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.

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

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

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)

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

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

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