W911KB-15-R-0025_AM_1.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

PROJECT TITLE/LOCATION: Douglas Harbor Maintenance Dredging, Douglas, Alaska

PROPOSAL DUE DATE remains 4 August 2015, 2:00 PM Alaska Time. Proposals shall be submitted in accordance w ith Section 00 21 00 Paragraph 1.10 Proposal Submittals.

This Amendment provides changes to the solicitation as indicated on page 2 of this document.

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THIS AMENDMENT ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THE STANDARD FORM 1442.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 18

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 13-Jul-2015

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W911KB-15-R-0025

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

19-Jun-2015

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

13-Jul-2015

CODE

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA

CEPOA-CT( W911KB)

PO BOX 6898

JBER AK 99506-0898

W911KB 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W911KB-15-R-0025

SECTION SF 30 – BLOCK 14 MODIFICATION CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

AMENDMENT #0001

• The following drawings are substituted for the superseded drawings:

NONE

• The following revised documents are substituted for the superseded documents. The identifier “AM#01” appears before and after new and/or revised material and replacement pages are provided, except as noted:

- Section 00 22 11 Paragraph 10.1.1 (A replacement of Section 00 22 11 is provided in its entirety.)

NOTE: REVISIONS WITHIN THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS DO NOT

CONTAIN THE ABOVE REFERENCED IDENTIFIERS

-Cover, “Draft” Watermark is removed (Replacement Cover Provided)

-SF1442, Block 10 – Description, quantity is changed from 40,000 cubic yards to 27,100 cubic yards (Replacement SF1442 Provided)

• The following documents/drawings are deleted:

• The following documents are added:

• The following revisions are incorporated:

• Other:

Pre-Proposal Conference Minutes and Attendance are attached.

Wage Determination Schedule updated from AK150001 06/12/2015 to AK150001 07/10/2015

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska District

DGH010 P2

No. 154114

DOUGLAS HARBOR DREDGING

DOUGLAS, ALASKA

JUNE 2015

W911KB-15-R-0025-0001

PROJECT TITLE AND LOCATION: Douglas Harbor Maintenance Dredging, Douglas, Alaska

NAICS: 237990 SIZE STANDARD: $27.5 Million*

* Per U.S. SBA Table of Small Business Size Standards - NAICS code 237990 for Dredging: To be considered small for purposes of Government procurement, a f irm must perform at least 40 percent of the volume dredged w ith its ow n equipment or equipment ow ned by another small dredging concern.

TOTAL SMALL BUSINESS SET-ASIDE

DESCRIPTION: Contractor shall perform surveying, dredging, disposal and capping of approximately 27,100 cubic yards of mercury contaminated silts, sands and gravels from the harbor basin at Douglas, Alaska as described in the Scope of Work and Specifications.

KIMBERLY TRIPP (907)753-2549

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

19-Jun-2015

(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 _______10 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________ 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 __________2 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________04 Aug 2015 (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 offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee is, X 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

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, AK

CEPOA-CT (W911KB)

PO BOX 6898

JBER AK 99506-0898

W911KB

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:

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 00 22 11

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS OF AWARD

ONE STEP - - LOWEST PRICE/TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE

(SINGLE AWARD)

1.0 OVERVIEW

2.0 BASIS FOR AWARD

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

4.0 PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

5.0 VOLUME 1, TAB A – FACTOR 1, SUB-FACTOR 1: DREDGING EQUIPMENT

6.0 VOLUME 1, TAB B – FACTOR 1, SUB-FACTOR 2: SURVEYOR QUALIFICATIONS

7.0 VOLUME 1, TAB C – FACTOR 1, SUB-FACTOR 3: SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

8.0 VOLUME 1, TAB D – FACTOR 1, SUB-FACTOR 4: SCHEDULE

9.0 VOLUME 1, TAB E - FACTOR 1, SUB-FACTOR 5: SITE MONITOR

10.0 VOLUME 1, TAB F – FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

11.0 VOLUME 2 – TAB A – FACTOR 3, STANDARD FORM 1442, PROPOSAL DATA SHEET,

AND CONTRACT LINE ITEM SCHEDULE

12.0 VOLUME 2 – TAB B – FACTOR 3, REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

13.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

ATTACHMENTS:

1 - PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

2 - COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE CONSTRUCTION OR PRIME CONTRACTOR

3- PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1. Interested firms or joint venture entities (here after referred to as Offerors) shall submit proposals demonstrating their capability to successfully execute the contract resulting from this solicitation. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein.

1.2 It has been determined to use the lowest price technically acceptable source selection process for this solicitation for surveying, dredging, disposal and capping of approximately 40,000 cubic yards of mercury contaminated silts, sands and gravels, some of which have not been dredged before, from the harbor basin at Douglas, Alaska. The Government will evaluate proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein, and award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible offeror, whose proposal conforms with all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and whose proposal is determined to represent the overall best value to the Government utilizing procedures in accordance FAR PART 15.101- 2 Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Source Selection Process. The lowest price technically acceptable source selection process is appropriate when best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price.

2.0 BASIS FOR AWARD

2.1 The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible Offeror whose proposal the Source Selection Authority has determined conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the “best value” to the Government, considering all non-price factors described herein, and price.

A firm-fixed-price construction contract will be awarded to the Offeror who submits a proposal which has the lowest price and is found to be technically acceptable.

A. The evaluation factors and significant sub-factors that establish the requirements of acceptability shall be set forth in the solicitation.

B. Proposals are evaluated for acceptability but not ranked using the non-cost/price factors.

C. Exchanges may occur (see FAR PART 15.306).

3.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

3.1. Proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms from a price and technical standpoint. Do not assume offerors will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss or revise their proposals. In accordance with FAR 52.215-1, Para. (f)(4), the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint.

3.2 Submit proposal in a tabbed, three-ring binder. Note that the Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits, indicated in the sections below.

4.0 PROPOSAL INFORMATION AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

Location

Factor Number

Description

Rating Criteria

Factor 1 PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY Acceptable/Unacceptable

Volume 1, Tab A

Factor 1

Sub-factor 1

Dredging Equipment Acceptable/Unacceptable

Tab B

Factor 1

Sub-factor 2 Surveyor Qualifications Acceptable/Unacceptable

Volume 1, Tab C

Factor 1

Sub-factor 3 Specialized Experience (minimum of 2 examples of similar experience) Acceptable/Unacceptable

Volume 1, Tab D

Factor 1

Sub-factor 4 Schedule Acceptable/Unacceptable

Volume 1, Tab E

Factor 1

Sub-factor 5 Site Monitor Qualifications Acceptable/Unacceptable

Tab F Factor 2 Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable

Location

Factor Number

Description

Rating Criteria

Volume 2, Tab A Factor 3

Price (Standard Form 1442, Proposal Data

Sheet Contract Line Item Schedule) Low Price

Volume 2, Tab B N/A Required Pre-Award Information Not Rated

5.0 VOLUME 1- TAB A - FACTOR 1, SUBFACTOR 1: DREDGING EQUIPMENT

5.1. Submission Requirements:

5.1.1. Submit a list of equipment meeting the requirements listed below to be used for dredging, transporting, and placing, and capping the dredged material. Include the make, model, year and size of equipment as applicable.

• Excavator or crane, minimum 30 foot reach with a 2 cubic yard rock bucket.

• Deck barge for use as the work platform for the excavator; the barge shall be 45 feet by 145 feet minimum and equipped with spuds or anchor wires.

• Scow with 500 cubic yard minimum capacity.

• Tug boat, 750 horse power minimum

• Dredging Quality Management System equipped scow, or detail the plans to become Dredging Quality Management System compliant for the scow.

• State the type of Global Positioning System to be used for tracking each dredge disposal/capping event. Include procedures for logging: GPS coordinates, the date, duration, and volume of each discharge of dredge or capping material.

5.2. Evaluation Criteria:

5.2.1. The Government will evaluate the submitted equipment list against the list shown. To be acceptable, all of the criteria in Section 5.1.1 shall be met.

6.0 VOLUME 1- TAB B - FACTOR 1, SUBFACTOR 2: SURVEYOR QUALIFICATIONS

6.1. Submission Requirements:

6.1.1. The offeror shall submit the following:

• The independent hydrographic survey firm name.

• Certificate of the independent Professional Land Surveyor (PLS) with both a valid license in the

State of Alaska and a current hydrographic certification from the American Congress of

Surveying and Mapping.

• Three documented years of experience in hydrographic surveying of navigable waters.

6.2. Evaluation Criteria:

6.2.1. The Government will evaluate the submitted surveyor’s qualifications against the list shown above. To be acceptable, all of the criteria in the list in Section 6.1.1 shall be met.

7.0 VOLUME 1- TAB C - FACTOR 1, SUBFACTOR 3: SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

7.1. Submission Requirements:

7.1.1 The offer shall submit 2 project descriptions documenting experience of using barged mounted mechanical equipment Utilize the CONSTRUCTION – SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE FORM

(Attachment 2) at the end of the section or an equivalent form. Projects shall be at least 50% complete or completed within ten (10) years prior to solicitation.

To be acceptable, 2 projects shall be submitted, demonstrating each of the following:

• Use of barge mounted mechanical equip to dredge 15,000 cubic yards or more of sands and gravels.

• Transporting and placement of the dredge material within the open water disposal site boundaries with a scow.

• Use of electronic positioning systems to dredge within the dredge prism and place material within an open-water placement site.

7.2. Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate the two submitted projects against the requirements listed in Section 7.1.1.

To be acceptable, all of the criteria in the list in Section 7.1.1 shall be met.

8.0 VOLUME 1 – TAB D – FACTOR 1, SUB-FACTOR 4: SCHEDULE

8.1. Submission Requirements:

8.1.1 The offer shall submit a schedule showing when the work required by this contract shall be performed. The schedule shall include a bar-type Gantt chart and narratives describing the scope of work to be completed for each task listed on the schedule. The narratives shall include the pertinent equipment and personnel required to complete each task. For proposal preparation purposes only, offerors shall utilize an anticipated NTP of 20 August 2015.

To be acceptable, the schedule shall include start and end dates for the following activities:

1. Notice to Proceed (NTP)

2. Mobilization of dredge and personnel

3. Pre-construction survey

4. Environmental monitoring tasks

5. Harbor dredging

6. Post dredge survey

7. Production of sand cap material

8. Construction of harbor sand cap

9. Construction of disposal site sand cap

10. Post cap survey

11. De-mobilization

12. 1-year environmental monitoring and hydrographic survey

8.2.1. The Government will evaluate the submitted schedule against the list shown above and the requirements of the RFP. To be acceptable, all of the criteria in the list in Section 8.1.1 shall be met and a narrative for each task shall be included and the schedule shall present a logical sequence of the work. A schedule that exceeds the contract performance period will be rated as “unacceptable”.

9.0 VOLUME 1 – TAB E – FACTOR 1, SUB-FACTOR 5: SITE MONITOR

QUALIFICATIONS

9.1. Submission Requirements:

9.1.1. The offeror shall submit the following:

• The independent monitoring firm name.

• A list of equipment to be used to monitor water quality, take sediment samples and perform

Sediment Profile Imaging (SPI) and Plan View Imaging (PVI). The list shall include descriptions of the functionality of each device.

• Resumes of the following monitoring party members showing at least one previously completed marine monitoring project:

1. SPI/PVI technician

2. Biologist

9.2. Evaluation Criteria:

9.2.1. The Government will evaluate the submitted site monitor qualifications against the list shown above. To be acceptable, all of the criteria on the list in Section 9.1.1 shall be met.

10.0 VOLUME 1 – TAB F – FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

10.1. Submission Requirements:

10.1.1. Past performance refers to the quality of recent project experience from the owner's perspective.

Past performance evaluations or questionnaires shall be provided for at least two projects. For Federal projects, the offeror may rely on finalized CCASS or CPARS reports, otherwise the Past Performance

Questionnaire (PPQ) included as Attachment 3 to this section is provided for the offeror to submit to the client for each project. Previously completed PPQ’s may be submitted; however, ensure a current phone number and email address is provided for the client point of contact. Completed Past Performance

Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal and may be duplicated for submission on future solicitations. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first 2 pages of the

PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). 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, Kimberly Tripp via email at kimberly.tripp@usace.army.mil prior to the proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

mailto:kimberly.tripp@usace.army.mil

Projects cited shall be of AM#1 similar size, scope, or magnitude and AM#1 currently well underway

(at least 50% completed) or completed and turned over no longer than six (6) years preceding the date of this solicitation.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may be include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor

Performance Assessment Reporting Systems (CPARS), 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.

10.2. Evaluation Criteria:

10.2.1 The Government will consider how well the offeror performed on the contracts. The Government will only consider the projects completed or well underway (50 % or more) in the past 6 years. Past Performance will be rated on an “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” basis using the ratings and descriptions shown below.

Acceptable – Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown (see note below).

Unacceptable – Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: An offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned will be determined to have ‘unknown’ past performance and shall not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably. Unknown past performance shall be considered “Acceptable”.

11.0 VOLUME 2 – TAB A – FACTOR 3: STANDARD FORM 1442, PROPOSAL DATA

SHEET, AND CONTRACT LINE ITEM SCHEDULE

11.1. GENERAL

Submit all Volume 2 information in a separate binder labeled: “Volume 2 - Pro Forma Requirements.”

11.2. Submission Requirements:

11.2.1. Submit the properly filled out and executed SF 1442, along with the CLIN Schedule, containing proposed line item and total pricing. See instructions in Section 00 21 00, “Instructions to Offerors.”

Submit the Proposal Data Sheet (Attachment 1).

11.2.2. Supplemental Price Breakdown. If deemed necessary to evaluate the price proposals, the

Government will request a price breakdown of the Contract Line items in a sealed envelope marked

“Price Breakdown Information,” in Excel format. The Government will provide details on where and how to send the breakdown. This information will not be needed sooner than three (3) working days after the proposal submission due date. This information may be required for the initial proposal and, if requested, for any revised proposals. This information is not an opportunity for an offeror to revise its non-price or price proposal.

11.3 Evaluation Criteria:

11.3.1 Price will not be rated or scored, but will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness through the use of price analysis as stated in FAR Part 15.404-1(b)(2)(v), Comparison of proposed prices with independent Government cost estimates. Price analysis is the process of examining and evaluating a proposed price without evaluating its separate cost elements and proposed profit. Unless an exception from the requirement to obtain certified cost or pricing data applies under 15.403-1(b)(1) or (b)(2), at a minimum, the contracting officer shall obtain appropriate data, without certification, on the prices at which the same or similar items have previously been sold and determine if the data is adequate for evaluating the reasonableness of the price. Price analysis may include evaluating data other than certified cost or pricing data obtained from the offeror or contractor when there is no other means for determining a fair and reasonable price.

11.3.2 If deemed necessary, the supplemental price breakdown information will be used to assist the

Government in performing the price evaluations described above.

12.0 VOLUME 2, TAB B - REQUIRED PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

12.1. Submission Requirements:

12.1.1. Submit this information for the Contracting Officer’s determination of Offeror responsibility, which includes, but is not limited to the following:

(a) Joint Venture agreement or Limited Liability company Certificate of Organization, Articles of

Organization and Operating Agreement, if applicable.

(b) A list of present commitments, including the dollar value thereof, and name of the organization under which the work is being performed. Include names and telephone numbers of personnel within each organization who are familiar with the prospective contractor’s performance.

(c) A certified statement listing of each contract awarded within the preceding three (3) month period exceeding $1,000,000.00 in value with a brief description of the contract. If the prospective contractor is a joint venture, each joint venture member will be required to submit the above defined certification http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/15.htm#P347_59648

(d) Completed Representations and Certifications included by full text in Section 00 45 00.

Representations and certifications shall also be completed in the System for Award Management

(SAM) at www.sam.gov.

(e) One copy of the following information shall be provided:

(1) Proof of Financial Ability (Most recent financial statement covering assets and liabilities)

(2) Number of years the firm has been in business

(3) Name, address and telephone number of firm’s bonding company

(4) Information showing offeror’s bondability for this project. Submit a letter from the prime contractor’s bonding company indicating the offeror’s ability to obtain performance and payment bonds in the amount of their proposal price.

(5) Name, address and telephone numbers of two credit/trade references.

12.1.2. Evaluation Criteria:

In addition to the other proposal information, the Contracting Officer shall use this information in making an affirmative responsibility determination for award to the Successful Offeror, in accordance with FAR

Part 9.

13.0 EVALUATION PROCEDURES

13.1 SOURCE SELECTION EVALUATION BOARD (SSEB)

13.1.1. An SSEB will be established to conduct the evaluation of proposals received in response to this solicitation. The evaluation will be based on the content of the proposal and any subsequent discussions required. The SSEB will not consider any information incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

13.2. EVALUATION

13.2.1The SSEB will evaluate the proposals and assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor and subfactor.

13.2.2 The Government intends to award without discussions. Offerors are cautioned to put forth their best efforts, and to furnish all information clearly to allow the Government to evaluate proposals.

Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in their proposal after submitting it.

13.2.3 A “Competitive Range” is a subjective determination of the acceptable proposals in the event that the Government decides that discussions with Offerors are required or are considered to be in the Government’s best interests.

http://www.sam.gov/

13.2.4If discussions are held, the Government may engage in a broad give and take with those Offerors in the competitive range, in accordance with FAR 15.306(d). During discussions, the Government may ask the Offeror to further explain its proposal and to answer questions about it.

13.2.5 Upon conclusion of discussions, those Offerors still considered acceptable will be afforded an opportunity to submit their proposal revisions for final evaluation and selection

13.3. DEFINITIONS for Technical Evaluation Factors (except Past Performance):

Acceptable (A): The proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable (U): The proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

SECTION 00 22 11 - ATTACHMENT 1

PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

(1) Name of Solicitation: Douglas Harbor Maintenance, Douglas, Alaska

(2) Name of Offeror:

Address:

Phone: Fax:

Individual Authorized to Bind the Company:

E-mail:

DUNS # (used for accessing the Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS) or A-E

Contractor Administration Support System (ACASS) Database) :

Also provide any other assigned number that identifies the member firm(s) in the ACASS or CCASS databases. If a separate DUNS has been created for a joint venture (J-V) it must also be submitted.

Provide a DUNS number for each company identified in any proposed Contractor-subcontractor association of firms. If the firm is a joint venture or contractor-subcontractor association of firms, list the individual firms and briefly describe the nature of the association. Provide DUNS for each.

Firm 1:

Firm 2:

Firm 3:

Nature of Association:

(3) AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATORS. FAR 52.215-11

The Offeror represents that the following persons are authorized to negotiate on its behalf with the

Government in connection with this Request for Proposals (RFP).

[List names, titles, and telephone number of the authorized negotiator.]

Name of Person Authorized to Negotiate:

Negotiator's Address:

Negotiator's Telephone:

Negotiator’s E-mail:

SECTION 00 22 11 - ATTACHMENT 2

COMPANY SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

Provide the following information to show examples of projects your company constructed within the last ten (10) years indicating experience with projects of similar type and scope. Use one form per project.

a Type of Project Represented __________________________________________________________ b Firm that Executed the Project_________________________________________________________ c Name of Project (include Federal Contract Number if applicable)______________________________ d Location of Project__________________________________________________________________ e Owner ____________________________________________________________________________ f General Scope of Construction Project ___________________________________________________ g Offeror’s Role (Prime, Joint Venture, or Subcontractor, etc.) and Work Your Company Self-Performed h Construction Cost ___________________________________________________________________ i Extent and Type of Work You Subcontracted Out __________________________________________ j Dates Construction: Began (MM/YY)__________________ Completed (MM/YY)________________ k Your Performance Evaluation by Owner, if known l Were You Terminated or Assessed Liquidated Damages? ___________________________________

(If either is “Yes”, attach an Explanation) m Owner’s Point of Contact for Reference (Name and Company) n Current Telephone Number of Reference POC_____________________________________________ o Current Email Address of Reference POC ________________________________________________

SECTION 00 22 11 - ATTACHMENT 3

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

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.

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0) CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Offeror Information Firm Being Evaluated: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs 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.)

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0)

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete following blocks) Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Describe the client’s role in the project:

Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

Client’s Signature:

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

E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

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)

E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes;

responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines

E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes

E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively E VG S M U N lead, manage and control the program)

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client

E VG S M U N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E VG S M U N

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section. Yes No

e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below. Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues? (Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.

E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

E VG S M U N

b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues) E VG S M U N

c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below) Yes No

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor.

E VG S M U N

Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks.

Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary): _____________________________________________________

END OF QUESTIONNAIRE

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.

Minutes for Douglas Harbor Pre-Proposal Conference Call

30 June 2015, 10:00 AM

Attendees:

USACE:

Donna West, Project Manager, CEPOA-CO-O Christine Dale, Contracting Officer, CEPOA-CT-SP Kimberly Tripp, Contract Specialist, CEPOA-CT-SP Julie Anderson, CEPOA-CO-O Robert Tedrick, CEPOA-EN-G-HH Lynn Meyers, CEPOA-CO-AO

Contractors attending via teleconference:

John McAmis from JE McAmis Nicholas Arvberger from American Construction Joe Zech from Western Marine Greg Speyer from HME Construction

1. Scope:

The scope of the project is to survey, dredge, dispose and cap approximately 27,100 cubic yards of mercury contaminated silts, sands and gravels from the harbor basin at Douglas, Alaska.. (Note: SF1442 says 40,000 cubic yards but will be corrected in an amendment). Dredged material will be placed in a designated open water site in Gastineau Channel. Both the harbor dredge area and the open water placement site will be capped with sand after dredging is complete. Dredging equipment is restricted to mechanical methods; hydraulic dredging is not allowed. Dredging shall be accomplished in a manner that keeps the harbor accessible for traffic. Environmental monitoring will be required during dredging and sand cap placement.

2. Specifications:

00 21 00: Section 1.5.1 provides instructions for submitting questions through the bidder inquiry module of ProjNet. All questions should be submitted in this manner instead of by email.

00 22 11: This RFP utilizes lowest priced technically acceptable selection procedure. Award will be made to the offeror that has the lowest price of those offerors found to be technically acceptable.

There are two technical evaluation factors: Performance Capability and Past Performance. Performance Capability is divided into 5 subfactors for Dredging Equipment, Surveyor Qualifications, Specialized Experience, Schedule and Site Monitor Qualifications. Proposals must meet the minimum acceptability requirements for each factor and subfactor to be considered for award.

31 09 13.00 29 Surveys – Note Section 1.5 Survey Plan requirements and in Section 1.6 the requirements for the independent surveyor. Required surveys include:

1. Pre-dredge /pre-construction survey of the harbor and disposal area.

2. An interim condition survey of both the harbor and disposal area.

3. Post-dredge/pre-cap survey of the harbor and disposal area

4. Post construction survey of the sand cap in the harbor and disposal area

5. Option for 1-year performance survey of the harbor and disposal area to determine the condition of the sand caps

6. Option for confirmation surveys of the harbor and disposal area if repairs are necessary.

Daily soundings of the harbor area are required during dredging operations.

35 20 23.13 National DQM Program – Note that this contract requires the use of the National Dredging Quality Management (DQM) Program to monitor scow status. Review specification for minimum instrumentation and data requirements.

35 20 23 Dredging, Section 1.3 Character of Materials – note the 2 types of materials listed (marine and glacial deposits) including the possibility of cobbles and boulders in the glacial deposits. Also note the possible harbor debris listed in Section 1.4 as well as the floats and piles that will be removed and those that will remain in place. Mechanical methods and equipment shall be used for dredging. Per Section

3.1.1 a silt containment boom or curtain is required within the harbor during dredging.

Section 3.2 Disposal – Note the constraints for placing dredged material and sand cap material in the disposal area. The constraints include direction of approach to the disposal area, timing of the disposal/placement events and barge speed. An on-site observer shall survey the vicinity for Humpback whales at least 30 minutes prior to discharging material.

Section 3.3 Sand Cap – The harbor sand cap shall cover the entire federal dredge basin. The extent of the disposal area sand cap will be determined with Sediment Profile Imaging (SPI) after all dredged material has been placed. The sand cap material shall be tested to ensure it is free of contamination.

Gradation tests required for each 500 CY placed.

Section 3.4 and 3.5 – Note the Monitoring Plan and Construction Monitoring required due to the nature of the mercury contaminated material being dredged. Monitoring to be performed by an independent firm. Monitoring will include water quality monitoring, chemical monitoring, Sediment Profile Imaging (SPI) and Plan View Imaging (PVI). There is an option for additional monitoring 1 year after sand cap construction is complete. See Appendix A, Sediment Cap Monitoring Plan for detailed monitoring requirements.

3. Drawings:

Sheet 6 of 25 (C-101) – Note that dredging is to occur only within the federal dredge basin limits in Douglas Harbor. All floats, gangway, pilings and vessels will be removed from the federal basin by others prior to the start of field work. The contractor will be required to remove and dispose of an abandoned HDPE water line and concrete anchor block located within the dredging limits. The extent of dredging along the boundary between the federal and the City and Bureau of Juneau (CBJ) areas of the harbor will be to the practicable limits of the dredge equipment as there will be CBJ floats and pilings present. Dredging around the launch ramp shall not undermine the toe of the ramp or the additional concrete ramp planks located at the toe.

Sheet 7 of 25 (C-102): Note that the disposal plan requires the controlled release of dredged material and sand cap material at the disposal site. Per the notes, placement shall occur from 1-½ hour before to 1-½ hour after the predicted high or low tides and placement shall be against the tide to limit material drift. Specific placement zones and disposal approach directions are shown.

Sheet 10 of 25 (C-301): Project depth is -14 feet, with the maximum pay line -15 feet. Some areas may not have been dredged before. Maximum finish elevation of the sand cap material is -13 feet. Side slopes are generally required to be 2H:1V except as noted.

4. Proposal Schedule Review

Base Items 0001 – 0006 include mob and demob, dredging of the harbor, placement of the harbor sand cap, placement of the disposal site sand cap, associated surveys and the construction monitoring during dredging and sand cap placement. Sub-divided items are based on estimated quantities. Please refer to FAR 52.211-5001 in Section 00 72 00 for the rules on unit price adjustments for sub-divided items.

Work period for the base items is 12 October 2015 through 1 March 2016.

Option Item 0004AC is additional sand cap material for the disposal area in excess of the 30,800 cubic yards in Items 0004AA and 0004AB. Item 0004AC will only be awarded if needed to complete construction of the disposal area sand cap. If awarded, Item 0004AC shall be completed by 1 March 2016.

Option Items 0007 and 0008 are for the survey and monitoring to be conducted 1 year after completion of the sand caps and, if awarded, shall be completed no later than 1 June 2017.

Options Items 0009 through 0012 will only be awarded if the 1 year survey reveals that repairs to the harbor and/or disposal area sand caps are necessary. Performance period for the repairs is 15 October 2017 to 15 November 2017 and repair surveys are to be completed by 15 December 2017.

5. Proposal Due Date: Proposals due no later than 2:00pm on August 4, 2015.

6.…