W911XK17R0012.pdf

REGIONAL INDEFINITE DELIVERY INDEFINITE QUANTITY (IDIQ) MULTIPLE AWARD TASK ORDER CONTRACT (MATOC) FOR MAINTENANCE

DREDGING WITHIN BOUNDARIES OF THE GREAT LAKES DISTRICTS.

DESCRIPTION OF WORK: A complete description of w ork for each specif ic project w ill be provided in Section 00 11 00 of the technical specif ications for individual task orders.

MAGNITUDE OF CONSTRUCTION: Maximum combined capacity is $130M. $85M for the Upper Great Lakes pool and $45M for the Low er Great Lakes Pool. Individual task orders w ill not exceed $6M.

THIS SOLICIATION IS 100% SET-ASIDE FOR SMALL BUSINESS FOR BOTH MATOC POOLS.

You must be registered in SAM in order to receive an aw ard from this solicitation. The SAM w ebsite is located at w w w .sam.gov.

THE North American Industrial Classif ication System (NAICS) Code is 237990, w hich has a small business size standard of $30M in average annual receipts for dredging activities.

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.

See SECTION 00010A for more information.

LISA M MAY 313.226.3639

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

10-Jul-2020

(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

X

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 _______ calendar days and complete it w ithin ________ calendar days af ter receiving aw ard, notice to proceed. This performance period is 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 __________0 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specif ied in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________11 Aug 2020 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time of fers are due.

B. An offer guarantee 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 _______180 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, DETROIT

477 MICHIGAN AVENUE, 7TH FLOOR

DETROIT MI 48226-4523

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)

FAX:TEL: (313) 226-6819 TEL: FAX:

W911XK17R0012 124

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

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION (SEE FAR 3.104)

Section SF 30 - Block 14 Continuation Page (SF 30)

CONT. OF BLOCK 10 OF SF 1442:

BLOCK 11: Performance period(s) shall be provided on each subsequent task order.

BLOCK 12 A & B: Performance and Payment Bonds will be required after each subsequent task order is awarded.

BLOCK 13A: See Section 00100A for the number of copies to be submitted.

BLOCK 13B: An offer guarantee will be required to accompany each proposal for subsequent task orders.

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation

SECTION 00010A, ATTACHMENT A

INSTRUCTIONS FOR TECHNICAL INQUIRIES AND QUESTIONS

A. Questions/Inquiries. A webinar will be held for industry to answer any questions or inquires with a special notice posted to beta.sam with the meeting invite information. All other questions pertaining to this requirement shall be submitted in writing no later than, 25 July 2020, 10:00 A.M. EDT. The offeror shall put the solicitation number located in Block 1 of the SF 1442 followed by QUESTIONS in the subject line of the email. All questions received after the above date and time WILL NOT BE ANSWERED.

B. Questions shall be submitted to Lisa May, Contract Specialist at Lisa.M.May@usace.army.mil and Isaac J.

Taylor, Contracting Officer, at Isaac.J.Taylor@usace.army.mil

C. Once all inquiries are compiled and addressed, the questions and answers will be generated as an amendment and posted to the beta.sam.gov website for all interested parties to view/acknowledge to be sent in with their submission prior to the closing date. If additional time is needed for submission, this extension will be executed on the same amendment as the questions and answers amendment.

REGISTRATION IN SAM

A. The System for Award Management (SAM) is the Government’s online database of federal contractors.

Contractors self-register in SAM at the website www.sam.gov . Registration is free to all users.

B. In accordance with FAR Provision 52.204-7 SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT, an offeror must be registered in SAM when submitting an offer, and must continue to be registered until time of award, during performance, and through final payment of any contract.

C. Offerors shall complete and submit any additional full text certifications that are included in the solicitation. An offeror may also complete the certifications at https://www.sam.gov in lieu of completing the representations and certifications in this solicitation provided that all the FAR and DFARS certifications contained in the solicitation have been completed.

D. All offerors shall be registered at https://www.sam.gov with the NAICS code that is shown on the front page of the solicitation prior to submitting an offer.

E. See FAR Provision 52.204-7 for more information.

RESPONSIBLE PROSPECTIVE CONTRACTORS

Offerors must be found to be responsive and responsible in order to be considered for award. See FAR Subpart 9.1, Responsible Prospective Contractors for more information.

NOTE: To establish its responsibility the offeror may be requested by the Government to submit a statement regarding previous experience in performing comparable work, business and technical organization, financial resources, and other plant available to be used in performing the work. The requested statement submitted will have the following: a minimum of one (1) up-to-date banking reference for their firm and a minimum of three (3) past performance references for similar work.

a. The banking reference shall include the financial institution’s legal name, complete physical address, a point-of-contact (POC) at the financial institution, the POC’s telephone number, and email address.

b. The past performance references shall include firm’s name, the contract number, the contract period of performance and/or contract completion date, the contract’s aggregate value, a brief description of the project, a POC, the POC’s telephone number, and email address.

SECTION 00010A

LINE ITEMS FOR UPPER AND LOWER POOLS

Regional Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOCs) For Maintenance Dredging Projects within the Boundaries of the Great Lakes Districts

LINE ITEM 0001 is comprised of The Upper Great Lakes Pool consisting of harbors and connecting channels in MI, WI, MN, IN, and IL.

LINE ITEM 0002 is comprised of The Lower Great Lakes Pool consisting of harbors and connecting channels in OH, PA and NY.

All Contracting Officers working in District Contracting Offices within the Great Lakes Districts shall have contracting authority to issue Requests for Proposals and to award and administer task orders under these contracts.

LINE ITEMS contains no pricing and the contractors shall not submit pricing with their initial proposal.

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 85,000,000 Job Upper Pool - Great Lakes Dredging MATOC

FFP

Multiple Award Task Order Contract for Great Lakes Dredging -- FOR

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING PURPOSES ONLY --

FOB: Destination

PSC CD: Y1KF

NET AMT

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0002 45,000,000 Job Lower Pool - Great Lakes Dredging MATOC

FFP

Multiple Award Task Order Contract for Great Lakes Dredging -- FOR

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING PURPOSES ONLY --

FOB: Destination

PSC CD: Y1KF

NET AMT

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

0001 N/A N/A N/A N/A

0002 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The USACE Buffalo (LRB), Chicago (LRC), and Detroit (LRE) Engineering Districts execute construction contracts for dredging of rivers, harbors, and federal shipping channels on the United States side of the Great Lakes basin. The Government intends to establish two Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) pools from this solicitation. The Government will use these two pools to write construction task orders in a timely and economical manner for dredging projects in this area. The total ordering period will be four years for each pool. The pools will be established as follows: Upper Great Lakes Pool (Lake Superior, Lake Michigan, Lake Huron, the Detroit District portion of Erie) and Lower Great Lakes Pool (Lake Ontario and the Buffalo District portion of Lake Erie).

In accordance with FAR 15.304(c)(1)(ii), Evaluation Factors for Certain MATOC or Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contract, dated December 13, 2017, the Government intends to award a contract to each qualifying Offeror. A qualifying offeror is an offeror that is determined to be a responsible source in accordance with FAR Subpart 9.1, Responsible Prospective Contractors, submits a technically acceptable proposal that conforms to the requirements of the solicitation, and the Contracting Officer has no reason to believe would be likely to offer other than fair and reasonable pricing. FAR 15.304(c)(1)(ii) permits Contracting Officers to evaluate cost or price only at the Task Order (TO) levels, as long as the multiple-award contract under which the orders are being placed are for the same or similar services and a contract award was made to each and all qualifying offerors. The Contracting Officer has confidence the Government will receive fair and reasonable pricing at the TO level.

The award will be made based on the appropriate consideration given to the two (2) evaluation Factors: Technical Capability and Past Performance. To receive consideration for award, a rating of Acceptable must be achieved in both Factors.

The source selection process will be conducted in accordance with FAR Subpart 15.3, Source Selection procedures.

Offers will be evaluated using the criteria listed below. Non-compliance with the RFP requirements may raise serious questions regarding an Offeror’s technical ability or past 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.

B. ORDERING PROCEDURES

No seed task order will be awarded as part of this MATOC; however, ordering procedures shown at Attachment 3 - Task Order procedures, are provided to offerors for their situational awareness.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals will be evaluated on the basis of the factors stated in the solicitation to award a contract to each and all qualifying offerors. There will be no trade-offs performed. Awards of MATOC's will be made to those offerors that are determined to be a responsible source, submitting a technically acceptable proposal that conforms to the requirements of the solicitation, and the Contracting Officer has no reason to believe would be likely to offer other than fair and reasonable pricing.

By submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation, offerors agree to comply with all terms and conditions contained in the solicitation. In this solicitation, the words “offer” and “proposal” are used interchangeably. (See definition of “offer” at FAR 2.101.) Except for any portions of the offeror’s proposal incorporated into the resulting contract by reference, the terms and conditions included in the solicitation, including any amendments, shall take precedence over the offeror’s proposal.

Proposal Evaluation: The Government intends to make award without holding discussions with offerors. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Source Selection Authority or the Contracting Officer determines them to be necessary. Therefore, offers are encouraged to include their best technical terms and complete past performance information in the initial offer.

Source Selection Decision: The Source Selection Authority (SSA), independently exercising prudent business judgment, will make the source selection decision based on the proposals that meet the requirements of the Government.

Listed below are the evaluation Factors to be used to evaluate each proposal.

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

SUBMIT FOR EVALUATION –

Offeror shall provide documentation for all marine floating plant(s) being proposed for use under this solicitation/contract, and any subsequent task orders. Floating plant documentation must identify the plant by name, serial number or some other way that leaves no doubt which particular plant is being discussed. The plant documentation must certify (i.e. Coast Guard Certificate, Affidavit, Insurance on the plant, or Bill of Sale. etc.), the following:

(1) plant type;

(2) plant meets minimum requirements stated below;

(3) proof of plant ownership.

Proposed marine floating plant(s) must meet one of the following:

1) Hydraulic Dredge; or,

2) Mechanical Dredge; or,

3) Rented plant of either 1) or 2), above.

If the Offeror does not own the plant, it must submit an enforceable teaming agreement or enforceable rental agreement which clearly demonstrates offeror’s accessibility of the plant for the entire four-year ordering period.

Offeror shall furnish affirmative evidence the owner of the plant is a small business concern.

The Offeror shall also provide Floating Service Naval Architecture Analysis (NAA) as per the standards described in the most current version of EM 385-1-1.

NOTE: Offeror can submit more than one floating plant(s) which meet the minimum requirements above in responding to this evaluation factor. Floating plant(s) which are still under construction or are in the process of undergoing a major reconstruction will not be considered.

EVALUATION CRITERIA –

Floating plant submission(s) will be evaluated according to the following criteria;

At least one proposed floating plant is a hydraulic dredge which utilizes a 10 inch or larger cutter-head, or a mechanical dredge using some form of bucket to excavate and raise submerged material (Minimum Requirement: 5 cubic yard bucket or larger); and, The proposed floating plant(s) meets the Floating Service NAA standards described in the most current version of EM 385-1-1, if applicable.

Rating Table for Factor 1—Technical Capability: Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method:

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the solicitation requirements.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the solicitation requirements.

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

SUBMIT FOR EVALUATION –

Using the Form at Attachment 1- Example of Project Performed, provide three (3) past performance examples.

Information provided should demonstrate recent and relevant past performance. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) (Attachment 2) should also be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page 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, Lisa May, via email at Lisa.M.May@usace.army.mil prior to 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.

Also include performance recognition documents received within the last six years, such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

Offerors may also include information discussing problems encountered and corrective actions taken on any identified contracts.

All pages of each PPQ must be initialed, and dated on the bottom right-hand corner by the Client/POC. If a PPQ is provided and is not complete and/or is not signed, then the PPQ for that project will not be considered for evaluation.

However, if a Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) record is available for any of the projects submitted, the CPARS record may be submitted in lieu of the completed Past Performance Questionnaire or an official Performance Evaluation from a non-Federal agency.

The Client or POC is defined as the entity that took ownership of the project after construction was complete. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from the Client, before the proposal receipt date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the Past Performance Questionnaire which contains contract and client information for the submitted project.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/UEID (DUNS) numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

EVALUATION CRITERIA –

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s record of past performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the Solicitation projects to be procured. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation; recency, relevancy, and quality.

The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is the recency of the past performance. Recent means 70% or more of the contract has been completed and performance occurred within six (6) years of the solicitation issuance date. Based on this criteria, an Offeror’s past performance submissions will be determined either “recent” or “not recent.” Submissions deemed not recent will not be evaluated further.

Once a project is determined to be recent, the second aspect of the past performance evaluation is the relevance of the Offeror’s present/past performance information. For this acquisition, relevant past performance is defined as;

Offeror contract experience valued greater than $200,000 with a significant feature of work being dredging in federal navigational waters with plant of similar size as proposed under FACTOR 1:

TECHNICAL CAPABILITY (through self-performance or sub-contracting). Dredging experience must be in channels, harbors, or open water with a depth of five feet or greater;

or placement of dredge material by either hydraulic and/or mechanical means (through self-performance or sub-contracting). Placement can be either in open water, onshore or upland;

heavy civil construction or earthwork repair, improvements, or maintenance (through self-performance or sub-contracting), which could include road grading, weir repair, culvert installation/cleaning and other minor earthwork needs at dredging or placement sites;

performance of environmental compliance (through self-performance or sub-contracting), which could include compliance with water quality certifications, water and sediment quality monitoring, water and sediment sampling, water management and treatment, and erosion control.

Past performance submissions deemed recent, but not relevant, will not be evaluated further.

After past performance submissions are determined recent and relevant, the quality of the recent and relevant past performance will be rated either "Acceptable" or "Unacceptable".

If a CPARS record and PPQ-0 exist for a particular project and the ratings conflict; the CPARS record shall govern.

Past performance will be rated "Acceptable" if all individual recent and relevant past performance submissions contain "Would Recommend for similar requirements in the future" or similar recommendations and, if submitted as PPQ-0s, "Satisfactory" or greater overall ratings were assigned on block 7(d) of all individual PPQ-0s.

Past performance will be rated "Unacceptable" if any individual recent and relevant past performance contains a "Would not recommend for similar requirements in the future" or similar recommendation or, if submitted as a PPQ- 0, a rating of less than "Satisfactory" was assigned on block 7(d) to any individual submission, unless the Offeror's comprehensive past performance information provides the Government with a reasonable expectation the Offeror will successfully perform the required efforts."

In addition to the NAVFAC/USACE PPQ or CPARS, the Government may use recent and relevant project data independently obtained from other Government or commercial sources or from any other sources available to include, but not limited to: (1) the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), (2) Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) or Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; (3) interviews with Program/Project Managers and Contracting Officers or rely upon personal business experience with the Offeror; and (4) consider any information the Offeror submits which explains any problems encountered on the identified contract and the Offerors corrective actions.

NOTE: In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance, for whom information on past performance is not available, or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)).

Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered Acceptable.

Rating Table for Factor 2—Past Performance: Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method:

Rating Description

Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. INTRODUCTION.

a. The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted electronically only, via DoD SAFE (Secure Access File Exchange). DoD SAFE is a free service to allow the exchange of unclassified files up to 8.0 GB. DoD SAFE does not have user accounts and authentication is handled via email. Offerors must obtain a request code from the government in order to drop-off files at DoD SAFE. Offerors shall obtain a request code by emailing Lisa May, Contract Specialist, at Lisa.M.May@usace.army.mil and Isaac J.

Taylor, Contracting Officer, at Isaac.J.Taylor@usace.army.mil. This will need to be completed five

(5) business days prior to proposal due date. A link will be sent to the offeror’s email to submit the drop-off electronically.

b. The offeror’s proposal shall consist of three (3) volumes. The Volumes are I – Technical, II – Past Performance, III – Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations. Files shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

c. All proposals shall contain the evaluation requirements stated herein and every binder shall also contain: Table of Contents, List of Tables (if required), List of Figures (if required), List of Appendices, and Name/Address/Telephone Number/e-mail address of the Offeror. Proposal clarity, organization, and cross- referencing are mandatory. No material (information not part of proposal) shall be incorporated by reference. The offeror shall submit in the proposal the requested information specified herein. Failure to submit requested information or to meet an RFP requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award.

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

e. All information shall be confined to the appropriate volume. The offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal and provide adequate basis for evaluation. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proposals without the specified content may be determined Unacceptable and removed from the competition. The Government will not make assumptions concerning intent, capabilities, or experiences. Clear identification of proposal details shall be the sole responsibility of the Offeror. The Government reserves the right to reject incomplete proposals after initial evaluation without further consideration.

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

a. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled in pdf format. Proposals shall use 8- 1/2 x 11-inch format whenever practical; however, 11X17-inch format is acceptable for tables and graphic representations.

b. Documents should be formatted single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are required.

Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscape.

c. The submission shall be organized into volumes as follows:

VOLUME TITLE

PRINTED

COPIES

DIGITAL

COPIES

MAXIMUM

PAGES

I -Technical 0 1 100 II -Past Performance 0 1 25 III -Solicitation, Offer and Award

Documents and Certification/ Representations

0 1 N/A

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

3. PROPOSAL FILES

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

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1” Gutter – 0” From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5” Page Size, Width – 8.5” Page Size, Height – 11”

NOTE: 11X17 pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations; however, each 11X17 page counts as two pages.

The following additional restrictions apply:

b. File Packaging. All of the proposal files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. Each file shall be labeled with the volume number, date, and the offeror’s name. **Please note – Self extracting exe files are not acceptable.

c. Content Requirement. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked. The volumes shall be organized as follows:

d. VOLUME I- TECHNICAL

a. Proposal Cover Letter: The technical proposal cover letter, printed on the prime Offeror’s letterhead, shall be the first page of the technical proposal. It shall be signed by an officer of the company and shall contain the following:

Solicitation number;

Name, address, telephone, facsimile numbers and e-mail address of the Offeror;

Names, titles, telephone and facsimile numbers and e-mail addresses of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation;

Names, title, and signature of the person authorized to sign the proposal;

A statement indicating whether the Offeror wishes to be considered for the Upper Pool

MATOC, the Lower Pool MATOC, or both;

A statement agreeing the offer is acceptable for a period of 180 calendar days from the date of submission;

b. Floating Plant Documentation: See evaluation factor 1.

e. VOLUME II- PAST PERFORMANCE

a. Past Performance Information: See evaluation factor 2.

f. VOLUME III – SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND

CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS

a. Standard Form (SF) 1442, Solicitation, Offer and Award. Complete, in its entirety, the “Offeror” portion of the Standard Form (SF) 1442 and SF 30 (as applicable). An official having the authority to contractually bind your company must sign the SF 1442 (and SF 30 as applicable) in accordance with

FAR 4.102.

b. Representations and Certifications and other Statements of Offerors. Reference FAR 52.204-8 ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS. The submitted information will be reviewed for completeness by Contracting Personnel. Provide the completed Representations and Certifications or provide those completed at www.beta.sam.gov.

c. 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. The joint venture agreement must be signed by both parties and will be subject to review by Office of Counsel. Also, if the joint venture involves an 8(a)-small business, approval by the Small Business Administration is required and must be submitted with the offeror’s proposal. Offerors are reminded that if it is an 8(a) or HUBZone joint venture, it shall ensure that it complies with the applicable requirements of 13 CFR Part 124 and 13 CFR Part 126, respectively. In addition, the joint venture must be registered in SAM as a joint venture in order for an award to be made.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 - EXAMPLE OF PROJECT PERFORMED Attachment 2 - NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE Attachment 3 - TASK ORDER PROCEDURES

ATTACHMENT 1

EXAMPLE OF PROJECT

PERFORMED

Provide the following information to show examples of relevant project.

Use one form per project. NOTE: Use additional pages as necessary to provide the information requested.

1. Type of Project Represented

2. Your Firm’s Name

3. Project Name and Number

4. Location of Project and Conditions

5. Owner:

6. General Scope of Construction Project

7. Describe how this project is relevant. Use additional pages as necessary to provide this information.

8. Role (Prime, Joint Venture, or Subcontractor, etc.) and work your company self-performed:

9. Construction Cost:

10. Extent and Type of Work Subcontracted:

11. Dates Construction began and if completed, completion date

12. Your Performance Evaluation by Owner.

Provide corresponding completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) at Attachment 3, or performance evaluation report (CPAR), or official performance evaluation from non-federal entity.

13. Were You Terminated or Assessed Liquidated Damages? (If either is “Yes”, attach an Explanation)

14. Owner’s Point of Contact for Reference (Name and Company)

15. Current Telephone Number and email address of Owner Reference

ATTACHMENT 2

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR CIVIL

CONSTRUCTION

PROJECT – Solicitation W911XK-17-R-0012

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

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: 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.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

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

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR.

THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO USACE. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR USACE POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL

INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST

REFLECT YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S

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.

W911XK17R0012

Contractor Information (Firm Name):

Client Information (Name):

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

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)

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)

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 lead, manage and control the program)

E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

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

E VG S M U N

Contractor Information (Firm Name):

Client Information (Name):

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 if needed)

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)

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.

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.

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.)

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).

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

END OF QUESTIONNAIRE

Attachment 3- TASK ORDER PROCEDURES

1. MINIMUM GUARANTEE: The Government does not guarantee an awardee will receive more than the contract minimum guarantee. The minimum guarantee for each MATOC is $5,000.00. This minimum guarantee is the amount a contractor may receive if they have NOT been successful in obtaining a task order by the end of the contract duration.

This minimum guarantee is NOT to be construed as the total amount of any individual task order. All task orders will substantially exceed this minimum guarantee amount. This minimum guarantee will be obligated on Task Order 0001 under each contract awarded as a result of this solicitation.

2. ADMINISTRATION: Detroit District shall administer the basic MATOC awards; however, each individual

District within the Lakes Districts shall have contracting authority to issue Requests for Proposals and to award and administer task orders under these contracts.

3. TASK ORDER PROCEDURES:

3.1. Task orders will be awarded on a competitive basis in accordance with FAR 16.505. Price will be the sole basis for selection for the majority of the task order competitions. Special standards of responsibility, hereinafter referred to as Definitive Responsibility Criteria (DRC), may also be included when price is the sole basis for selection. Lowest Price Technical Acceptable (LPTA) procedures may also be used if determined necessary on individual task orders. In these cases, selection criteria will be clearly stated in the task order solicitation and may include such criteria/factors as past performance, safety, availability of plant and equipment, and price. In all cases, the method of evaluation and award will be clearly indicated in the task order solicitation and documented in the contract file. The Contracting Officer must also make an affirmative determination of contractor responsibility prior to awarding any task order.

3.2. The RFP for a task order will provide, at a minimum, the following items:

(1) Plans and Specifications

(2) The basis of selection for award

(3) The time and place for the submittal of proposal

(4) Point of Contact in the cognizant Contracting Office

(5) Any and all required “fill-ins” for the contract clauses, including, but not limited to:

-Details regarding the Site Visit (see FAR 52.236-27) -Details regarding Commencement, Prosecution, and Completion of Work (FAR 52.211-10) -The amount of Liquidated Damages (FAR 52.211-12) -Applicable Construction Wage Determinations -Details regarding the requirement for a bid guarantee -Details regarding the number of days after award that Performance & Payment Bonds are required to be submitted.

(6) A Pricing Schedule pertaining to the specific individual project.

3.3. The Government reserves the right to obtain cost breakdowns of the proposals (and subcontractor proposals) if required in order to determine fair and reasonable pricing. In accordance with FAR Subpart 15.4, Contract Pricing, the contractor’s price proposal for any task order of $2 million or more will require submission of certified cost or pricing data, unless one of the exceptions at FAR Subpart 15.403-1 applies. If cost and pricing data has been requested and submitted, the contractor shall be required to submit a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data immediately prior to award of the task order.

3.4. Notification of the Apparent Successful Offeror. Offerors will be notified of the apparent successful offeror by email communication. Task Orders will be awarded within 60 days from receipt of proposals, unless otherwise stated in the task order RFP.

3.5. Award of the Task Order. Task orders will be issued on a firm-fixed price basis using the DD Form 1155, Order for Supplies or Services.

3.6. Reserved.

3.7. Bonding Requirements. Contractors are required to submit Bid Bonds with their proposal for each task order.

See FAR clause 52.228-1. Contractors shall be required to provide Performance & Payment Bonds on each task order in accordance with FAR 52.228-15. The time frame for providing bonds is usually within 10 days after award. Any compressed timeframe will be provided in the RFP for each individual task order.

3.8. Pre-Construction Conference and Notice to Proceed.

3.8.1. After Performance & Payments Bonds have been received and approved, the contractor will be notified regarding the date, time and place for the Pre-Construction Conference. The notification shall contain all pertinent details including what submittals must be received either prior to or at the Pre-Construction Conference.

3.8.2. Normally, a Notice to Proceed will be issued when all pre-construction requirements are met and the contractor is required to mobilize and commence work…