Pier_2_Solicitation_Site_Visit_Slides.pdf

US Army Corps of Engineers

BUILDING STRONG®

MOTCO Pier 2 Replacement & Modernization Solicitation Site Visit

September 19, 2017 @ 0900

Daniel Ross Project Manager US Army Corps of Engineers

Daniel Czech Contracting Officer US Army Corps of Engineers

Mike Onines, P.E.

Technical Lead US Army Corps of Engineers

Industry Day Schedule 0930 – 1030 In Brief

► Welcome / Ground Rules – PM (Daniel Ross) ► Introduce the Installation / Mission / Importance – DPW (Andrew Bianchi) ► Draft Scope / Project Constraints – TL (Mike Onines) ► Acquisition Process – CT (Daniel Czech)

1030 – 1045 Load Bus 1045 – 1100 Arrive at Site 1100 – 1230 Site Visit 1230 – 1315 Load Bus and return to parking Lot

Ground Rules

Questions must be asked and answered for all attendees ► You may ask anonymously by using Projnet (Bidder Inquiry) ► Questions & answers will be posted to FBO via amendment ► Only rely on the solicitation as issued

No wandering The purpose of the day is to allow contractors to view the site to assist in proposal development

NO PHOTOS, NO CELL PHONES OUT

► Photos will be taken and distributed via an amendment

0930 – 1030 In Brief

► Welcome / Ground Rules – PM (Daniel Ross) ► Introduce the Installation / Mission / Importance – DPW (Andrew Bianchi) ► Draft Scope / Project Constraints – TL (Mike Onines) ► Acquisition Process – CT (Daniel Czech)

1030 – 1045 Load Bus 1045 – 1100 Arrive at Site

0930 – 1030 In Brief

► Welcome / Ground Rules – PM (Daniel Ross) ► Introduce the Installation / Mission / Importance – DPW (Andrew Bianchi) ► Draft Scope / Project Constraints – TL (Mike Onines) ► Acquisition Process – CT (Daniel Czech)

1030 – 1045 Load Bus 1045 – 1100 Arrive at Site

Site Map

Project Overview

BUILDING STRONG®9

Environmental Constraints Endangered Species Act – Approved

Biological Opinions with NMFS and

USFWS

►No seasonal restrictions on work (authorized work outside normal “fish window”) ►24 month window for all in/over-water work ►7 months to complete over-water demolition ►12 month window for pile driving ►Agency-approved Biological Monitor ►Turbidity / Water Quality requirements

Environmental Constraints Pile-driving specific restrictions

►Only one pile-driver driving at any time ►Vibratory driving if feasible; impact driver authorized ►Cushion blocks ►Hydroacoustic monitoring (clarifying amendment forthcoming) Additional requirements; see specifications

Munitions Response Sites Area impacted by Port Chicago explosion Terrestrial Explosion Area MRS Water Explosion Area MRS

►Pre-construction clearance completed ►Cleared magnetic anomalies to 5’ below mudline See specifications for MEC support requirements

0930 – 1030 In Brief

► Welcome / Ground Rules – PM (Daniel Ross) ► Introduce the Installation / Mission / Importance – DPW (Andrew Bianchi) ► Draft Scope / Project Constraints – TL (Mike Onines) ► Acquisition Process – CT (Daniel Czech)

1030 – 1045 Load Bus 1045 – 1100 Arrive at Site

Contract Timeline/Issues

Current RFP Due Date: 11 October 2017 ► Bidder inquiries to extend due date under review

Discussions prior to Award date Expected

Evaluation Criteria

Descending Order of Importance:

►Experience and Capability ►Technical Approach (Co-equal with E&C) ►Past Performance ►Small Business Participation

Technical Factors Greater Than Price

Experience and Capability ►Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Example

Projects Demonstrating Experience and Capability

►Key Subcontractors:

• ≥ 25% Construction Effort

• Underwater Demo MEC/UXO

• Biological Surveys

• Pile Driving

• Demolition of Existing Pier

Technical Approach ►Organization Chart and Narrative ►Project Schedule

• Assume NTP of August 15, 2018

Past Performance ►Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Example

Projects Past Performance ►Key Subcontractor Authorization Letters

Socioeconomic Considerations ►Proposed Small Business Participation

Offerors Propose Their Own Socioeconomic Goals

Best Practices Thorough solicitation review – bring ambiguities/conflicts/questions to our attention Organization – make it easy for the reviewer to see that you have addressed/exceeded the request Concise proposal clearly aligned with GOVT Needs Articulate that you thoroughly understand the requirement and why you’re the solution Highlight the challenges you foresee and proposed mitigation measures Clearly identify proposed betterments

Solicitation Review Do your homework --- carefully read and reread the solicitation document to clearly understand what is being asked, including clauses and provisions

If you are not sure about something --- ask questions Review and understand the regulations (FAR Parts) governing the specific type of solicitation you plan to respond to

Make a list/matrix of the requirements Understand all important deadlines, including the deadline for Q&A

Align Proposal with Gov’t Needs Good proposals will clearly articulate how the offeror can solve the problem or fill the need defined by the solicitation

Understanding the government’s request is important -- how your firm can execute or deliver an appropriate solution is critical

A proposal may look good, but if it is not clearly aligned with fulfilling the government’s needs, it will fall behind other more substantive, solution focused proposals

Articulate What Makes You the Best Solution

Key is pulling it all together in a proposal package that clearly describes why your firm offers the best solution

No One Thing – it comes down to doing a lot of things right, e.g.:

• Understanding the solicitation and responding appropriately

• Demonstrating how your firm can best fulfill the government’s needs

• Offering pricing that is fair and reasonable, and competitive

• Making sure your proposal is well-written and error free

• Showing evidence of success through past performance

• Interweaving an amazing story throughout all parts of the proposal that makes a compelling case for your firm as the best solution

Common Mistakes: What to Avoid

Failure to fully understand the solicitation and governing regulations

Incomplete or late submission Proposal is not specific and to the point High on fluff and weak on substance Failure to understand best value considerations Unrealistic proposal pricing Evaluation components are not sufficiently addressed in the proposal Errors in the submission

Common Mistakes: Presentation This is a “sample” of your work

• Typos

• Grammatical errors

• Do your tables/charts convey the message?

• Check your firm’s name throughout the document

• Check the project title, especially when copying another proposal

• Answer all stated requirements in the solicitation

• Textboxes

• Use bold, highlighting, etc. to focus the readers eyes

• Readability

Use of “white space” Break lines into shorter segments

• Watch color combinations and font size

Common Mistakes: Spell Check Your Friend – Your Enemy

Spellcheck won’t check that you’ve used the correct word ORDINANCE – a law set forth by a governmental authority ORDNANCE – Weapons and Ammunition

Common Mistakes: Independent Review

Have someone outside of the proposal team (but familiar with the type of work) review your document

Make a list of the requirements – ►Does your proposal address every point ►Check experience and training requirements for all resumes

Source Selection Evaluation Boards Can ONLY Evaluate

What is in the Proposal

We do not evaluate past the page requirement.

0930 – 1030 In Brief

► Welcome / Ground Rules – PM (Daniel Ross) ► Introduce the Installation / Mission / Importance – DPW (Andrew Bianchi) ► Draft Scope / Project Constraints – TL (Mike Onines) ► Acquisition Process – CT (Daniel Czech)

1030 – 1045 Load Bus 1045 – 1100 Arrive at Site