Section IV Cover Page.pdf

Section IV

Evaluation Basis For Award

RFP 26-043JR

Evaluation and Basis for Award

EVALUATION AND BASIS FOR AWARD

1. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

PPPL will evaluate proposals submitted in response to this RFP and plans to award a Basic Ordering Agreement to the Offerors submitting the lowest priced, technically acceptable proposal on the basis of 1) responsiveness; 2) technical acceptability; 3) “responsibility” determination; and 4) price, as explained below:

A. RESPONSIVENESS. PPPL will determine the responsiveness of each proposal on a pass/fail basis. A proposal will be considered to be “responsive” if it is in compliance with all the requirements of the RFP. PPPL reserves the right to consider any proposal “nonresponsive” and reject in total or in part, with or without prior discussion with the Offeror, if the proposal (a) is not submitted in the format specified in the RFP or does not include all of the information requested by PPPL; (b) is not in accordance with the instructions contained in the RFP; or (c) contains material irregularities of any kind. Proposals determined nonresponsive will be eliminated from further consideration for award.

B. TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE. Responsive proposals from Offerors will be evaluated for technical acceptability. PPPL will determine the technical acceptability of each proposal on an acceptable/unacceptable basis. A proposal is deemed technically acceptable if all six (6) technical factors as described in Section 2 of this document are evaluated by PPPL to be acceptable. Proposal determined technically unacceptable will be eliminated from further consideration for award.

C. RESPONSIBILITY. PPPL will determine if an Offeror is a “responsible” prospective subcontractor, as the term is used in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Subpart 9.1.

Offerors determined not to be a responsible prospective subcontractor will not be eligible for award.

D. PRICE. Price will be evaluated to determine if the Offeror’s proposed price is fair and reasonable. Lowest price for the purposes of award will be determined using the methodology described in Section 3 of this document.

Upon receipt of proposals, PPPL may contact Offerors with a request for clarifications. Proposals will then be screened for responsiveness. Offerors whose proposals were determined to be nonresponsive will be eliminated from further consideration. Proposals determined to be responsive will be evaluated using the methodology described in this document.

PPPL intends to make an award or awards without discussions with Offerors. Therefore, Offerors’ initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical qualification standpoint. PPPL reserves the right to conduct discussions if subsequently PPPL determines it to be in the best interests of PPPL to do so.

2. EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY

In evaluating the Offeror’s proposal, PPPL will determine the technical acceptability of each proposal on an acceptable/unacceptable basis. The technical acceptability of an Offeror’s proposal will be based on the technical acceptability of six (6) factors listed below. Each factor will be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis. For a proposal to be determined technically acceptable, all 6 factors must be evaluated to be acceptable.

FACTOR 1 – OFFEROR’S QUALIFICATION

Factor is 1 acceptable if:

1. Offerors have a minimum of 10 years’ experience of performing construction projects of various size and scope similar in nature to that described in the RFP Statement of Work.

2. Offerors have bonding capacity of at least $300,000 for single project and $1,000,000 aggregate.

FACTOR 2 – QUALIFICATIONS OF PERSONNEL

Factor 2 is acceptable if:

1. The proposed Project Manager must possess a minimum of 10 years’ experience in managing construction projects of various sizes and scopes similar in nature to that described in the RFP Statement of Work.

2. The proposed On-Site Construction Superintendent possesses a minimum of 10 years’ experience in supervising construction projects of various sizes and scope similar in nature to that described in the RFP Statement of Work.

FACTOR 3 – ORGANIZATIONAL PAST PERFORMANCE

Factor 3 is acceptable if the Offeror has successfully completed construction projects various size and scope similar in nature to that described in the RFP Statement of Work. “Successfully performed” is defined as completion of the project on budget, on schedule, and no safety or environmental violations as confirmed by client references.

If PPPL is unable to determine through client references the acceptability of the Offeror’s past performance, PPPL will use independent sources of information including, but not limited to: Federal, state or local governmental agencies, better business bureaus, published media, or electronic databases to determine the past performance acceptability.

FACTOR 4 – HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN

Factor 4 is acceptable if the Offeror's Health and Safety Plan includes the following:

Factor is acceptable if the Offeror includes the Construction Environmental Safety and Health Plan, Part 1 that includes acknowledgement regarding Worker Safety 10 CFR 851 and the Subcontractors Corporate ES&H Program. Elements of both documents are included in Specification Section 013100 ESH Requirements.

FACTOR 5 – QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM

Factor 5 is acceptable if the Offeror's Quality Assurance Program includes the following:

1. Identification of the individual responsible for assuring quality.

2. A system in place to assure that personnel have appropriate training or qualifications prior to starting work.

3. A formal inspection process ensuring compliance with the Statement of Work requirements.

4. Formal document control implemented for project deliverables i.e., submittals, shop drawings, etc.

5. Controls to assure that unacceptable materials are not installed. These controls include maintaining material identification, detecting counterfeit parts and remanufactured, rebuilt, or used parts represented as new, and appropriate controls for age-sensitive items (product shelf-life).

6. A nonconformance process for requesting information, substitutions, and changes to the contract that may be considered nonconforming. The nonconformance process shall include identification, segregation, customer notification and concurrence, and action to prevent recurrence.

7. Subcontractors are qualified and their performance monitored.

FACTOR 6 – SAFETY RECORD

Factory 6 is acceptable if the Offeror’s Workers Compensation Experience Modifier (EMR). EMR must be 1.0 or lower for 2023-2025.

If the Offeror’s EMR of any of three years exceeds 1.0, the Offeror may submit their OSHA 300 Logs for 2023-2025 to demonstrate a satisfactory safety record.

Offeror’s 2023-2025 average job safety record (Lost Time Frequency (DART) and Total Recordable Case (TRC)) shall be less than or equal to the rates below which are based on 85% of the 2020 Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Incidence Rates:

Lost time frequency rate (DART)= 1.10 Total Recordable Cases (TRC) = 1.96

3. EVALUATION OF PRICE

For the evaluation of the price for determination of the lowest priced proposal, the Offerors total evaluated price will be the average of the proposed rates for the entire performance period (base year and option years).

4. BASIS FOR AWARD

Subcontract award, if any and at PPPL’s sole discretion, will be made to the responsible Offeror submitting the lowest priced, responsive, and technically acceptable offer.

PPPL reserves the right to accept or reject any proposal at its sole discretion, in total or in part, with or without prior discussion with the Offeror.

EVALUATION AND BASIS FOR AWARD

2. EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY

FACTOR 2 – QUALIFICATIONS OF PERSONNEL

FACTOR 3 – ORGANIZATIONAL PAST PERFORMANCE

3. EVALUATION OF PRICE

4. BASIS FOR AWARD