W911XK-10-R-0006 Saginaw Electrical Closets.pdf

SEE SCHEDULE

FY10 Upgrade Electrical Closets and Primary Distribution at Aleda E. Lutz VA Medical Center, Saginaw , Michigan

AMERICAN RECOVERY & REINVESTMENT ACT FUNDED

The solicitation is a 100% Service Disabled Small Business Set Aside.

The NAICS Code is 238210. The Business Size is $14.000,000.00 The estimated cost range is $1,000,000.00 and $5,000,000.00.

A bid bond is required. Please refer to FAR 52.228-1 for more information.

Prepososal Conference and a site visit w ill be held at Aleda E. Lutz VA Medical Center. The date time w ill be communicated via an amendment and posted to w w w .fbo.gov

DARRYL K WILLIAMS (313) 226-3648

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-2010

(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 ________365 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________

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 __________4 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________02 Mar 2010 (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 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 _______90 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

DETROIT DISTRICT, USAED

477 MICHIGAN AVE.

DETROIT MI 48226

W911XK

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)

(313) 226-2209FAX:TEL: (313) 226-5148 TEL: FAX:

W911XK-10-R-0006 92

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

W911XK-10-R-0006

Section 00010 - Solicitation Contract Form

BID SCHEDULE

ITEM SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL

Phase I – Primary Electrical Upgrade

LS

0002 Option 1 – Phase I Retrofit Breakers for Normal

Power Switchgear No. 2

0003 Option 2 – Phase I Data Cable Upgrade to

Buildings 2, 3, & 4

Phase II – Electrical Closets Upgrade

Option 3 – Phase II Transformer Replacement

0006 Option 4 – Phase II Receptacle Replacement

Total Amount of Bid for VA Saginaw Electrical

Item 0001 - 365 days from NTP Item 0002 - No additional time required (Included in duration listed for item 0001) Item 0003 - No additional time required (Included in duration listed for item 0001) Item 0004 - No additional time required (Included in duration listed for item 0001) Item 0005 - Add 39 days to base duration Item 0006 - No additional time required (Included in duration listed for item 0001)

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 1 Lump Sum

TAS::96 3135:: TAS

FFP

Electrical Closets - FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY.

FOB: Destination

PURCHASE REQUEST NUMBER: W56MES93422792

NET AMT

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0002 1 Lump Sum

TAS::96 3135:: TAS

FFP

Electrical Distribution - FOR GOVERNMENT USE ONLY.

FOB: Destination

PURCHASE REQUEST NUMBER: W56MES93422797

NET AMT

SCOPE OF WORK

This project shall include, but not be limited to the upgrade and expansion of existing electrical closets and construction of new electrical closets in building 1 at the Department of Veterans Affairs, Aleda E. Lutz VA Medical Center Hospital.

The work shall include upgrading and expanding approximately (19) existing closets and constructing (3) new electrical closets in building one to provide safe working clearances for VA personnel and contract personnel working in these spaces in accordance with NFPA 70, 70E & 99. Work shall also include relocating several branch panels and circuits, replacing various electrical receptacles and branch wiring to remove multiple splices, removal of asbestos covered domestic water lines from out of electrical closet space, cleaning out abandoned telephone cabling, cable TV cabling & other cabling abandoned in these closets and removal of electrical meters.

The second part shall include, but not be limited to the upgrading of the primary electrical distribution system and correction of electrical deficiencies in buildings 3 & 4. This work includes the construction of new closets for electrical and communication equipment, the construction of an underground primary electrical duct bank and the installation of a new 8320 volt 3 phase primary circuit number 3 to run in this new duct bank, installation of transformer and primary circuits to existing and future buildings and the construction/installation of emergency transformers, transfer switches and enclosures.

Section 00100 - Bidding Schedule/Instructions to Bidders

INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD SF 1442 and SF 1442 BACK

SECTION 00010 - PRICING SCHEDULE, NOTES

SECTION 00100 - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

SECTION 00110 - PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

SECTION 00120 - PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND BASIS FOR AWARD

SECTION 00600 - REPRESENTATIONS & CERTIFICATIONS

SECTION 00700 - CONTRACT CLAUSES

SECTION 00800 - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

There are drawings associated with this Request for Proposal. All solicitation documents will be posted to FedBizOpps (FBO) at http://www.fbo.gov.

All amendments will be posted to the FBO website. It shall be the contractor’s responsibility to check the website for any amendments. Offerors shall submit in their proposals all requested information specified in this Request for Proposal (RFP) solicitation. There will be no public opening of the proposals received as a result of this solicitation.

EXHIBIT A – Past Performance Relevancy Questionnaire (to be completed by offeror) EXHIBIT B – Subcontractor Information and Consent Form EXHIBIT C – Past Performance Reference Questionnaire (to be completed by References) EXHIBIT D – Proposal Volume Contents Aid http://www.fbo.gov/

SECTION 00010 - NOTES

NOTES

1. Instructions for the preparation of proposals are located in Sections 00100, 00110 and 00120.

2 Reference Contract Clause 252.236-7008, CONTRACT PRICES – BIDDING SCHEDULES (DEC 1991). The term “Bidding Schedule” shall also be construed to mean “Offer Schedule” or “Schedule”. The terms “bid” and “offer”, and “bidder” and “offeror” shall be construed as having the same meaning in this solicitation and resulting contract.

SECTION 00100 - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERERS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 SCOPE

You are invited to submit a proposal in response to Request for Proposal (RFP) W911XK-10-R-0006 entitled “Saginaw VA Medical Center Electrical Closests and Distribution”. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Detroit District, intends to conduct this acquisition by use of a Competitive Source Selection Procedure, in accordance with the provisions set forth in this RFP.

Award of a firm-fixed price construction contract is anticipated. Award will be made to the offeror submitting a proposal determined to be most advantageous to the Government. The Government may not award any contract if the resulting contract would not represent a "Best Value" to the Government using trade-off selection procedures as required by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and guidance as prescribed by Army Source Selection Manual. It is strongly suggested that the provisions stated in the proposal be fully studied prior to assembly of the proposal.

1.2 CLAUSES

1.2.1 Clauses and provisions from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and supplements thereto are incorporated in this document by reference and in full text. Those incorporated by reference have the same force and effect as if they were given in full text.

1.3.2 Clauses and provisions in this document may not appear in consecutive order.

1.3 REMOVAL OF SECTIONS AT TIME OF AWARD

Sections 00100, 00110, 00120, 00600 and all exhibits will be physically removed as a result of an award, but will be deemed to be incorporated by reference in that award.

1.4 DISPOSITION OF UNSUCCESSFUL PROPOSALS

In compliance with FAR Subpart 4.8, the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. The Government will destroy extra copies of unsuccessful proposals. No destruction certificate will be provided.

1.5 BONDING REQUIREMENTS

Performance and Payment bonds will be required in the amount of 100% of the contract award value. Offerors shall submit a bid bond in accordance with the solicitation requirements to be considered eligible for award.

1.6 FORMAL COMMUNICATION, OFFEROR EXPLANATIONS

Any explanation desired by an offeror regarding the meaning or interpretation of the solicitation, for proposals, drawings, specifications, etc. must be requested in writing and with sufficient time allowed for a reply to reach offerors before the submission of their proposals. All questions and requests for information (RFIs) must be received NOT LATER THAN 18 February 2010 and answers will be posted not later than 23 February 2010 at the FedBizOpps website (www.fbo.gov). Questions and RFIs may be submitted to:

LRE-Quotes@usace.army.mil.

The Contracting Officer reserves the right to address questions received after 18 February 2010 following solicitation closing with those offerors in the competitive range should one be established. Any interpretations made will be in the form of an amendment of the solicitation, drawings, specifications, etc., and will be furnished to all prospective offerors via posting to FedBizOpps.

Acknowledgement of each amendment by the offeror must be made in the space provided on the SF 1442, or by returning a signed copy of the amendment by the time set for receipt of proposals. Explanations or instructions given in a form other than an amendment to the solicitation shall not be binding. Questions (on a non-attribution basis) and answers shall be furnished to all prospective offerors via the web site. For security reasons all potential offerors, plan rooms and printing companies are required to register in the Central Contractor’s Registration (CCR), at www.ccr.gov.

1.7 AMENDMENTS PRIOR TO DATE SET FOR RECEIPT OF PROPOSALS

The right is reserved, as the interest of the Government may require, to revise or amend the solicitation, specifications and/or drawings, prior to and/or after the date set for receipt of proposals. Such changes, if any, will be announced by an amendment or amendments to this Request for Proposal. All information relating to this RFP, including pertinent changes/amendments and other information applicable prior to the date set for receipt of proposals will be posted on FedBizOpps. Though every effort will be made to provide email notification when a change is posted, such notification is NOT guaranteed and should not be expected. Offerors are strongly cautioned to check this site frequently and to “refresh” their web page to ensure they have the latest information.

1.8 HAND CARRIED PROPOSALS/INVITATIONS

Proposals can be hand carried to the USACE Detroit District located at the McNamara Federal Building, 477 Michigan Avenue, 7th Floor, Detroit, MI 48226. Hand carried mailto:LRE-Quotes@usace.army.mil http://www.ccr.gov/ proposals must be received in the Contracting Office prior to the time established for receipt of proposals. Offerors are cautioned that they will be required to enter a Federal Government building and should allow time to accomplish this. Late receipt of proposals due to facility entry delays may not be deemed excusable and the Contracting Officer may declare the proposal “late” in accordance with FAR 15.208.

1.9 WAGE DETERMINATION

Davis Bacon Wage Rates are applicable to this project and shall be included in the contract.

1.10 PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS

This RFP does not commit the Government to pay costs incurred in preparation and submission of initial and subsequent proposals or for other costs incurred prior to award of a formal contract.

1.11 DRAWINGS

There are reference drawings associated with this Request for Proposal. All solicitation documents will be posted to FedBizOpps at www.fbo.gov.

1.12 EXCEPTIONS

If the offeror takes exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation, the offeror shall clearly identify each such exception and include a complete explanation of why the exception was taken and what benefit accrues to the Government. All exceptions to the solicitation requirements (Section 00010 through 00800) and supporting rationale shall be included in an addendum to the proposal and clearly labeled "Exceptions".

An addendum is only required if the offeror takes exception to any requirement in the solicitation. (The Addendum does not have a page limitation, but shall only include information relevant to exceptions taken to the solicitation requirements.) The Government will assume an offeror takes no exceptions to any solicitation requirement if the offeror does not submit an Addendum identifying exceptions. Offerors are advised that solicitation requirements are not necessarily negotiable and such exceptions may render an offeror’s proposal unacceptable and ineligible for award.

SECTION 00110 - PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERERS

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.1 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

1.1.1 These instructions prescribe the format of proposals, and describe the approach for the development and presentation of the proposal data. They are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information to provide for the understanding and comprehensive evaluation of proposals. Carefully review this section prior to commencing proposal preparation. All solicitation amendments must be acknowledged in accordance with Section 00100, FAR Provision 52.215-1, and Instructions to Offerors.

1.1.2 Offerors are cautioned to strictly comply with all instructions within this solicitation to ensure submission of a complete proposal. Failure to furnish a complete proposal, at the time of proposal submission, may result in the proposal being unacceptable to the Government and eliminated from consideration for award.

1.1.3 After compiling all required information, submit the information in accordance with the “Proposal Due Date Schedule” paragraph and return the original and specified number of copies to the issuing office listed in Block 8 of the SF 1442.

Mark the front of the envelope/box with the following: “PROPOSAL for W911XK-10-R-0006 - DO NOT OPEN - Competitive Acquisition”.

1.2 PROPOSAL CONTENT

Prospective offerors shall submit the following volumes in two separate packages in accordance with instructions contained herein:

1. Volume 1, Past Performance, in original and five (5) copies

2. Volume 2, Business Proposal, in original and one (1) copy

Offerors are cautioned to carefully review the proposal requirements for these volumes and ensure a complete proposal is submitted.

1.3 PROPOSAL DUE DATE SCHEDULE

The entire proposal (Volumes 1 and 2) is due by the date and time set for the receipt of proposals shown in Block 13 of the SF 1442. Offerors are also to ensure that past performance references provide questionnaire responses to the Contracting Officer not later than the closing date.

1.4 PROPOSAL FORMAT

1.4.1 Purpose: These instructions prescribe the format of proposals, and describe the approach for the development and presentation of the proposed data. The proposal shall include all of the information requested in the specific instructions.

Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation.

A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the RFP will be considered unacceptable. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will be easy for the Government to understand and will enable the Government to perform a thorough and fair evaluation.

1.4.2 Offerors are cautioned to submit enough information to enable the evaluation committee to fully ascertain each offeror’s capability to perform all of the requirements contemplated by this solicitation. All commitments made in the proposal may become a part of the resultant contract. The data submitted with each proposal should be complete and concise, but not overly elaborate.

Excessive reliance on promotional brochures is discouraged.

1.4.3 The number for pages per volume may be varied by the offeror to suit its needs for certain identified sections; however, the total number of pages for the proposal submitted may not exceed 75 pages. The specific information as listed in the note below will be excluded from the total number of pages.

NOTE: The items that are excluded from the page count are the Proposal Cover;

the Table of Contents; and Title or Index Page.

1.4.4 Each page should be numbered consecutively within each section. The page size of the offeror’s proposal shall not exceed an 8-1/2 inch by 11-inch sheet of paper.

Please refer to Section 00700, FAR 52.204-4 for printing/duplicating instructions.

NOTE: Double sided copies are considered as two pages. Proposals that exceed the specified page limit will have only those first pages that are within the required limits evaluated. All information appearing thereafter will not be evaluated.

1.4.5 Proposal type size for text documents shall not be smaller than Microsoft Word

Times New Roman 10 point font; normal proportional spacing and page size shall be no larger than normal letter size paper (8 ½” x 11”). Type size for graphics, charts, diagrams and tables, shall be of an appropriate font and size for the application, and must be clearly readable without magnification assistance to the normal eye. Text lines shall be no less than single-space. To the maximum extent practicable, proposal submission shall be double sided.

1.4.6 Binding: Elaborate format and binding are neither necessary nor desirable. All binders shall be capable of lying flat when opened. The cover and spine of each binder shall clearly identify the offeror’s name, Volume number, RFP number, RFP title and copy number, (e.g. copy 2 of 5). The original for each volume shall be clearly identified on the cover and the spine. All binders shall allow for easy removal and replacement of pages.

1.4.7 Indexing: Each binder shall contain a “Table of Contents” for that volume. The

“Table of Contents” shall identify major areas, paragraphs and subparagraphs by number and title as well as by page number and volume locations. Tab indexing shall be used to identify Sections as appropriate.

1.4.8 Offerors may, at the discretion of the Government, be asked to provide clarifications regarding their proposals in accordance with FAR 15.306 (a).

Requests for such information do not constitute discussions.

1.4.9 Offerors shall be held responsible for the validity of all information supplied in their proposals, including that provided by potential subcontractors. Should subsequent investigation disclose that the facts and conditions were not as stated, the proposal may be rejected.

1.4.10 The Contracting Officer will conduct proposal compliance reviews after closing for determination of basic proposal adequacy prior to providing the proposals to the evaluators. Failure to provide a complete proposal may result in the proposal being removed from further consideration for award. A Proposal that fails to address any of the sub-factors may be deemed incomplete and removed from further consideration for award.

2.0 PROPOSAL VOLUME CONTENTS

2.1 VOLUME 1 – PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

2.1.1 Volume 1 contains the offeror’s Past Performance Information. Past Performance includes current and on-going performance. It includes the Performance Relevancy Questionnaire, Exhibit A Parts 1 and 2 and any discussion and or additional information, awards, letters, etc. concerning past performance the offeror includes.

Offerors shall use the Reference Package, Exhibit C, to obtain references from past and present clients. Past Performance, which includes current on-going (present) performance, will be evaluated using the evaluation criteria set forth in Section 00120 of the solicitation. If the offeror represents the combining of two or more companies, joint venture, or formal teaming agreement for the purpose of this RFP, each company shall complete Exhibit A and obtain Exhibit C references. The Government may contact these references and may consider this information as well as information obtained from any other sources when evaluating the offeror’s past performance.

2.1.2 Offerors shall discuss their performance using the Performance Relevancy Questionnaire format, Exhibit A Part 1, for a minimum of three (3), maximum of five (5) prior relevant projects. Use this form to provide information that demonstrates a history of performance on contracts that are similar in scope, complexity, and cost magnitude to this project’s plans and specifications.

Explain what aspects of the contract you find relevant to the proposed effort and identify how each contract ranks, in terms of relevancy, with respect to the other contracts addressed in the volume. Offerors should consider the currency and relevancy of the past performance information. To be considered, the performance must have been completed during the past five (5) years. The period begins five (5) years prior to the solicitation release date and includes current performance. Current performance may have greater impact than older performance. In determining relevancy to the solicitation requirement, offerors should consider the similarity of methods employed, size, scope, cost magnitude, location, client type and complexity of work performed to those required for the proposed effort.

REQUIRED: Offerors are cautioned to complete all the questions on the Exhibit A Part 1 and Part 2. Detailed instructions are included in Exhibit A.

2.1.6.1 Offerors are encouraged to include with their proposal information any problems encountered on the identified contracts and the offeror’s correction actions.

2.1.4 Offerors lacking relevant present/past performance experience may submit information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement if such information is relevant to this acquisition. Such information shall, as a minimum, include:

a. Name(s) of Predecessor Company/Subcontractor and/or Key Personnel

b. Complete Address

c. Telephone, Fax Number and email address

d. A brief synopsis of the experience. A resume (not included in page count) may be submitted for "Key Personnel"

2.1.4.2 Provide at least three (3) but no more than five (5) references for each Predecessor Company, Subcontractor or Key Personnel. Clearly identify the contractor/individual for whom the reference information concerns.

Include “Subcontractor Information and Consent Form”, Exhibit B, for subcontractors/Team Partners if not already provided.

2.1.5 Past Performance References – REQUIRED - Offerors shall prepare and submit to prior client(s), to include the owners of the projects listed in Exhibit A, a

Reference Package (Exhibit C) (detailed instructions are included in Exhibit C).

This includes correspondence explaining the requirement to obtain an independent evaluation of prior contract performance, and the Past Performance Questionnaire for use in evaluating past performance.

The preferred method of submission of Past Performance Questionnaires is via e-mail in PDF format to LRE-Quotes@usace.army.mil. Responses may also be faxed to (313) 226-2209, or mailed to the following address:

USACE Detroit District

Contracting Office Attn: Darryl Williams 477 Michigan Ave, Room 700 Detroit, MI 48226-4523

It is suggested that offerors provide a pre-addressed stamp envelope to former clients for their convenience in submitting their Performance Questionnaire.

Further, references should be instructed to send their responses so as to arrive not later than the due date of the proposal. Offerors must not review the Past Performance Questionnaire prior to submission. They are to be submitted by the client/evaluator directly to the Contracting Officer. Offerors should follow-up and encourage references to get the questionnaires to the Contracting Officer in a timely manner.

2.1.6 Provide the names of the subcontractor and or Teaming Partner to be utilized.

2.1.6.1 Each proposed subcontractor/Teaming Partner must also complete an

Exhibit B, “Subcontractor Information and Consent Form”, to be considered. Multiple subcontractors may be named for the same discipline but are limited to a maximum of 3 subcontractors per discipline.

When multiple subcontractors are provided for the same discipline the evaluation will be in accordance with Section 00120. The Government may seek additional references and reserves the right to use the information provided to obtain additional references.

2.1.6.2 In assessing past performance the Government shall also consider the past performance of the offeror’s key personnel, Project Manager, Quality Control Manager and Site Superintendent, as it relates to previous projects. In the event the intended key personnel does not demonstrate past performance in the project(s) submitted in the Exhibit As, additional information is required. Each key personnel without prior past performance history submitted shall complete an Exhibit B, “Subcontractor/Teaming Partner/Key Personnel Information and Consent Form”. The Government may seek additional references and reserves the right to use the information provided to obtain additional references.

Failure to provide this information may result in the proposal being deemed incomplete and not considered for award.

2.1.7 Offerors are advised that the Government may use all data provided by the offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources, to include but not limited to Government–wide databases, in the development of performance confidence assessments. Past performance information on contracts not listed by the offeror, or that of planned subcontractors, may also be evaluated. The Government may contact references other than those identified by the offeror and information received may be used in the evaluation of the offeror’s past performance. While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing current accurate and complete past performance information rests with the offeror.

2.2 VOLUME 2 - PRICE/COST INFORMATION

2.2.1 Offerors shall provide all price/cost information necessary to provide a meaningful basis for Government's analysis and evaluation of price/cost for the project set forth in Section 00100 of this solicitation. The Government is not, and does not intend on, requesting certified cost or pricing data. Offerors may be required during the evaluation process to provided sufficient price/cost information that will enable the Government to perform an evaluation in accordance with Section 00100. If an offeror proposes an unusually low price, the offeror should also provide rationale to justify the price. Detailed requirements follow:

2.2.1.1 Offer and Section 00100 – Complete in its entirety the “Offeror” portion of the Standard Form (SF) 1442. An official having the authority to contractually bind your company must sign the SF 1442 in accordance with FAR 4.102. One copy of the SF 1442 is required to have an original signature.

2.2.1.2 Section 00100 – Insert the price/cost associated with the schedule line items.

2.2.1.3 Representations and Certifications - Section 00600 - insert the required certifications and representations.

2.2.1.4 Include an introductory page to include points of contact, authorized negotiators, contact phone, facsimile numbers, and email addresses.

2.2.1.5 Joint Venture Requirements - Parties wishing to propose as a joint venture must submit an executed copy of the joint venture agreement. The joint venture agreement shall be executed in accordance with FAR 4.102. Each joint venture partner shall submit evidence satisfactory to the Contracting

Officer that its Board of Directors has approved its participation in the joint venture and by an instrument of similarly binding character in the case of an unincorporated entity. Offerors are reminded that to obtain an award, the awardee, including any joint venture, must be registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database.

SECTION 00120 - PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND BASIS FOR AWARD

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 The solicitation will result in the award of one firm-fixed price construction contract.

Award will be made to the offeror submitting a proposal determined to be most advantageous to the Government. The Government may not award any contract if the resulting contract would not represent a "Best Value" to the Government using trade-off selection procedures.

The Best Value is the most advantageous offer, price and other factors considered, and consistent with the Government's stated importance of evaluation criteria. This may result in award being made to a higher-rated, higher-priced offeror where the Contracting Officer determines that the past/present performance of the higher-priced offeror outweighs the cost difference.

To arrive at a Best Value decision, the Source Selection Authority will integrate the evaluation of past performance and price. While the Government and the Source Selection Authority will strive for maximum objectivity, the evaluation process, by its nature, is subjective and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire evaluation process. A proposal receiving a “Poor" or “Unacceptable” rating is unawardable and may be removed from further consideration for award.

1.2 The source selection process will be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.3, Source Selection procedures. Offers will be evaluated using the criteria listed in “Evaluation Factors for Award”. Noncompliance with the RFP requirements may raise serious questions regarding an offeror’s past performance and/or cost performance and may be grounds to eliminate the proposal from consideration for contract award. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the RFP will be considered unacceptable. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will be easy for the Government to understand and will enable the Government to perform a thorough and fair evaluation.

1.3 The Contracting Officer will conduct proposal compliance review after closing for determination of basic proposal adequacy prior to providing the proposals to the evaluators. Failure to provide a complete proposal - both volumes - may result in the proposal being removed from further consideration for award. A Proposal that fails to address any of the past performance factors detailed on Exhibit A or provide pricing of all the line items may be deemed incomplete and removed from further consideration for award.

1.4 Offerors must ensure that no pricing information is displayed in any volume except the

Business Proposal.

1.5 Offerors are advised that the past performance evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence in that past performance proposals are reviewed and rated without knowledge of the price offered. The number and identities of offerors are not revealed to anyone who is not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other offerors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is the Best Value determination.

1.6 The evaluation process essentially consists of four parts: proposal compliance review and responsibility determination, past performance evaluation, price evaluation and cost/past performance trade-off analysis.

1.6.1 Proposal Compliance Review: This is an initial review to ensure that all required forms and certifications are complete and that required volumes of the proposal were received.

1.6.2 Past Performance Evaluation: The SSEB will evaluate and rate those proposals passing the compliance review. Proposals will be evaluated against the RFP requirements. Past Performance criteria will be rated using an adjectival based system.

1.6.3 Price Evaluation: The SSEB will evaluate price proposals independent of the past performance evaluation. The SSEB will not have access to price information until completion of the past performance evaluation.

1.6.4 Cost/Past Performance Trade-off Analysis: After all above evaluations are complete, the Source Selection Authority (SSA) will compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of proposals and compare prices. The SSA will then consider all factors to select the proposal offering the most advantage to the Government.

1.7 Although the assessment of Past Performance as a specific evaluation factor is separate and distinct from the Determination of Responsibility required by FAR Part 9, Past Performance information obtained herein will be used during the Government’s responsibility determination. The Government also reserves the right to obtain additional information solely for the purpose of making a responsibility determination from all offerors after receipt of proposals. Requests for responsibility information do not constitute discussions.

1.8 The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

1.9 The Government reserves the right to reject any or all offers if such action is in the

Government's best interest.

1.10 ENFORCEABILITY OF PROPOSAL: The proposal must set forth full, accurate and complete information as required by this solicitation. The Government will rely on such information in the award of a contract. By submission of the offer, the offeror agrees that all items proposed (if applicable e.g., key personnel, subcontractors, etc.) will be utilized for the duration of the contract and any substitutions will require prior Contracting Officer's approval.

2.0 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

2.1 General: The relative importance of the evaluation factors that will affect the contract award are as follows: Past Performance and Price. Past Performance is approximately equal in importance to Price. The evaluation process is as follows:

2.2 Past Performance Evaluation

2.2.1 The Past Performance evaluation will consider such things as an offeror’s business practices, customer relationship, ability to successfully perform as proposed and other considerations as described in Performance sub-factors, elements and other considerations.

Past Performance includes current/on-going (present) performance. The evaluation will also consider the past performance of subcontractors. Based on the evaluation results, the evaluator will assign one of four confidence ratings as defined below. An offeror with no Past Performance may receive a rating based on the evaluation of its predecessor companies, key personnel, and/or subcontractors. These ratings may have the same weight as the ratings of the proposing company. If such information is not applicable (i.e., the offeror does not have a predecessor company, key personnel or subcontractors with relevant experience), the offeror shall be evaluated as “Unknown Risk”. However, the proposal of an offeror with no relevant Past Performance history, while rated “Unknown Risk” in Past Performance, may not represent the most advantageous proposal to the Government and thus, may be an unsuccessful proposal when compared to the proposal of other offerors.

2.2.2 In assessing performance confidence, the evaluator may:

a. evaluate present and past performance information through the use of questionnaires completed by the offeror’s references;

b. use data independently obtained from other Government or commercial sources, to include but not limited to Government databases;

c. rely upon personal business experience with the offeror;

d. use the information provided in the offeror’s Past Performance Relevancy

Questionnaire;

e. consider any information the offeror submits which explains any problems encountered on the identified contractor and the offeror’s corrective actions.

The Government reserves the rights to obtain and evaluate past performance information from any source it deems appropriate.

2.2.3 The evaluation may take into account Past Performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to this acquisition. The evaluation will also consider information provided relative to corrective actions taken to resolve problems on past or existing, contracts.

2.2.4 In accordance with FAR 15.306(a)(2), if award will be made without conducting discussions, offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their proposals, e.g., the relevance of an offeror’s past performance information and adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond or to resolve minor clerical errors.

2.2.5 Current, Relevant, Trends: Evaluators will consider the performance information for currency, relevancy as well as trends in the performance while conducting its evaluation.

2.2.5.1 “Current” means performance occurring within the last five (5) years for the period beginning five years prior to the solicitation release date.

Within this period, performance occurring later in the period may have greater significance than work occurring earlier in the period.

2.2.5.2 In assessing relevancy, the Government may evaluate an offeror’s references for similarity of the construction methods, e.g. hospital work, sterile environments, etc. Trends in performance will be considered.

The following apply to weighting relevancy considering all the elements listed above:

VERY RELEVANT - Past/present performance efforts may have involved the magnitude of effort and complexities, which are essentially what this solicitation requires.

RELEVANT - Past/present performance efforts may have involved less magnitude of effort and complexities, including some of what this solicitation requires.

SEMI-RELEVANT - Past/present performance efforts may have involved much less magnitude of effort and complexities, including some of what this solicitation requires.

NOT RELEVANT - Past/present performance efforts may have involved none or significantly less magnitude of effort and complexities than what this solicitation requires.

Offerors who otherwise have satisfactory performance on previous construction projects, may be rated “neutral” if those projects are not considered relevant to the proposed acquisition and relevancy cannot be obtained through key personnel and/or subcontractors. Projects that are not current will not be considered in the evaluation. Relevancy may affect an offeror’s overall Past Performance rating.

2.2.6 Past Performance Sub-factors. There are five (5) sub-factors, as follows:

a. Management Effectiveness

b. Quality Control

c. Timely Performance

d. Compliance with Safety Standards

e. Compliance with Federal laws and regulations

The sub-factors are listed in descending order of importance. Evaluation will be at the factor level (i.e., a rating will be given only for Past Performance as a whole).

2.2.7 The elements that may be considered under each sub factor are described below:

2.2.7.1 Management Effectiveness may consider such things as:

a. General Business Practices, including, but not limited to: contractor provided experienced managers, and supervisors with the ability needed to meet contract requirements; hired experienced subcontractors; paid subcontractors/suppliers in a timely manner; the contractor cooperated to resolve problems, attending meetings (as applicable) and maintained communication to assure satisfactory resolution.

b. Pricing, including, but not limited to: submitting proposals that accurately represent the work required; the contractor's supporting price/cost information for modifications are accurate, complete and reasonable (not over inflated or under estimated); provided well-substantiated pricing data for change orders.

c. Site Management/Superintendent, including, but not limited to: site manager ensured compliance to contract requirements & safety regulations; site manager acted promptly to resolve problems and ensure work quality; site manager had sufficient authority to make decisions or take actions during project performance; site manager consistently present on site when work was performed.

2.2.7.2 Quality Control (QC) may consider such things as: quality of workmanship; adequacy of the contractor QC; identification/correction of deficient work in a timely manner; suggested solutions and displayed initiative to implement solutions; adequacy of materials; use of specified materials; adequacy of submittals and adequacy of "as-builts”.

2.2.7.3 Timely Performance may consider such things as: Met established progress schedule; timely submission of updated and revised progress schedules; resolved delays in an expeditious manner;

identification/correction of deficient work in a timely manner; provided submittals in a timely manner; completed all contract work prior to requesting final inspection; timely completion of punch-list items; left no major discrepancies; timely submission of close out documents, i.e., “as builts”, “red lines”; provided timely and satisfactory response to warranty issues after project completion.

2.2.7.4 Compliance with Safety Standards may consider such things as the adequacy of implementation of a safety plan, and an acceptable safety history.

2.2.7.5 Compliance with Federal Laws and Regulations may consider such things as compliance with labor laws and regulations with specific attention to the Davis-Bacon Act, including, but not limited to:

submitted payrolls in a timely manner; payrolls were complete and correct; compliance with drug-free workplace requirements; compliance with Executive Order 13101- Use of Recovered Material (Affirmative Procurement)/compliance with Executive Order 13423 – Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management;

compliance with environmental regulations.

2.2.8 Other Past Performance Considerations: Evaluators may also consider the following issues when evaluating an offeror’s Past Performance. These issues may help provide additional guidance in deciding a descriptive performance confidence assessment (e.g., “Low Risk” or “Moderate Risk”) for a specific offeror if there is a question as to which adjective is most appropriate.

a. Effectiveness of value engineering change proposals on prior Government contracts (impact on reducing cost or schedule, increasing efficiency or improving quality).

b. Professional/Industry Awards.

c. Letters of appreciation, recognition or commendation, etc., received on behalf of a customer may be submitted. The Government will consider up to five (5) such documents.

d. Unique skills and accomplishments.

e. Assessment of liquidated damages (frequency, circumstances, severity of problem, etc.).

f. Experience with LEED. Offeror may describe experience on other type projects.

g. Contractor Desirability: Based on the contractor's overall performance, how willingly a customer would re-hire the offeror.

2.2.9 Overall, a rating of “Outstanding”, “Good”, “Adequate”, “Marginal”, “Poor”, or “Unknown” will be assigned to the Performance Risk Factor as follows:

ADJECTIV

E

DEFINITION

Outstanding

Essentially no doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Performance met or exceeded contract requirements. Quality was excellent. If minor problems were identified, contractor took satisfactory corrective action to resolve where appropriate. Performance was current and very relevant to relevant. High probability of success with overall very low degree of risk in meeting the Government's requirements.

Good

Little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Performance met contract requirements.

Quality was good. If minor problems were identified, contractor took corrective action to resolve where appropriate. Performance was current and very relevant to relevant. Good probability of success with overall low degree of risk in meeting the Government's requirements.

Adequate

Some doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Performance met most contract requirements.

Quality was adequate. Problems were identified however; contractor usually took adequate corrective action. Performance was current and very relevant to semi-relevant. Good probability of success with an average degree of risk in meeting the Government's requirements.

Marginal

Significant doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Performance met some or did not meet some contractual requirements. There were problems, some of a somewhat serious nature. Contractor’s corrective action was sometimes marginally effective to ineffective. Performance was current and very relevant to semi-relevant. Probability of success is questionable with a high degree of risk in meeting the Government's requirements.

Poor

It is extremely doubtful that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Performance met some or did not meet some contractual requirements. There were problems, some of a somewhat serious to serious nature. Contractor’s corrective action was sometimes marginally effective to ineffective. Performance was current and very relevant to semi-relevant. Probability of success is questionable with an unacceptably high degree of risk in meeting the Government's requirements.

Unknown

The offeror has little/no relevant past performance upon which to…