W9127N-15-R-0022Amd00001.pdf

W66QKZ50559521

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

See Section 0100, Amendment No. 0001

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 22

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 22-Jul-2015

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W9127N-15-R-0022

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

01-Jul-2015

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

22-Jul-2015

CODE

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

333 SW FIRST AVE

PORTLAND OR 97204-3495

W9127N 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 30-Jul-2015 04:00 PM to 06-Aug-2015 02:00 PM.

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE / INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been added by reference:

52.204-6 Data Universal Numbering System Number JUL 2013 52.204-7 System for Award Management JUL 2013 52.214-34 Submission Of Offers In The English Language APR 1991 52.214-35 Submission Of Offers In U.S. Currency APR 1991 52.236-28 Preparation of Proposals--Construction OCT 1997 252.204-7004 Alt A System for Award Management Alternate A FEB 2014 252.236-7008 Contract Prices-Bidding Schedules DEC 1991

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT NO. 0001

Amendment No. 0001 makes the following changes to Solicitation No.W9127N-15-R-0022:

1. Change to Solicitation due date from 30 July 2015 to 06 August 2015 and time from 04:00PM to 02:00PM (local time is PST).

2. Change to EVALUATION CRITERIA FACTOR 1‐ Safety Record: Submission Requirements: 2. OSHA Form 300 for the last "5" years change to the last "3" years. Evaluation method: 2. Add language "for each of the last 3 years" and "for any of the last 3 years".

3. Add to specs section 32 31 13.00 25 Chain Link Fences and Gates to include removing the overhead cross.

Drawing 09_fe6gated is an attachment to this Section.

4. Changes made to Specification Section 01 1010.00 25 paragraph 1.15, Government Office Trailer.

5. Change to Specification Sections:

26 05 00.00 25 – 2.7 26 05 00.00 25 – 2.12.3.5 26 05 00.00 25 – 2.13.15

6. Change on Drawings:

E-101 (Clarification - corrected plan scale) ES401 (Clarification – fixed callout for Detail 3) ES402 (Clarification – removed N/A components) ES403 (Clarification - Added callout for Detail 3) ES405 (Clarification – control cabinet working clearance)

ES504 (Added portable light bracket that never made it on the structural drawings and clarified applicability of Detail 3)) G-001 (Revised to indicate which drawings were issued under this Amendment) S-001 (Added note 1.10 and callouts for intermediate platform work and added required elevation for intermediate platforms) S-504 (Added stiffeners at all anchor bolt locations, added optional bit item note, added control cabinet support, added details for control panel support, and updated all impacted views) S-505 (Added stiffeners at all anchor bolt locations, added note 7 to grating notes, and updated center pier and left abutment grating layout views) SD101 (Removed note 7 referencing security fence removal, added note 7 referencing electrical conduit modifications, and added note 8 referencing optional bid items)

7. Delete and Add Clauses.

52.225-10 NOTICE OF BUY AMERICAN REQUIREMENT--CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS (MAY 2014)

(a) Definitions. “Commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) item,” “construction material,” “domestic construction material,” and “foreign construction material,” as used in this provision, are defined in the clause of this solicitation entitled “Buy American --Construction Materials” (Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause 52.225-9).

(b) Requests for determinations of inapplicability. An offeror requesting a determination regarding the inapplicability of the Buy American statute should submit the request to the Contracting Officer in time to allow a determination before submission of offers. The offeror shall include the information and applicable supporting data required by paragraphs (c) and (d) of the clause at FAR 52.225-9 in the request. If an offeror has not requested a determination regarding the inapplicability of the Buy American statute before submitting its offer, or has not received a response to a previous request, the offeror shall include the information and supporting data in the offer.

(c) Evaluation of offers. (1) The Government will evaluate an offer requesting exception to the requirements of the Buy American statute, based on claimed unreasonable cost of domestic construction material, by adding to the offered price the appropriate percentage of the cost of such foreign construction material, as specified in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of the clause at FAR 52.225-9.

(2) If evaluation results in a tie between an offeror that requested the substitution of foreign construction material based on unreasonable cost and an offeror that did not request an exception, the Contracting Officer will award to the offeror that did not request an exception based on unreasonable cost.

(d) Alternate offers.

(1) When an offer includes foreign construction material not listed by the Government in this solicitation in paragraph (b)(2) of the clause at FAR 52.225-9, the offeror also may submit an alternate offer based on use of equivalent domestic construction material.

(2) If an alternate offer is submitted, the offeror shall submit a separate Standard Form 1442 for the alternate offer, and a separate price comparison table prepared in accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of the clause at FAR 52.225-9 for the offer that is based on the use of any foreign construction material for which the Government has not yet determined an exception applies.

(3) If the Government determines that a particular exception requested in accordance with paragraph (c) of the clause at FAR 52.225-9 does not apply, the Government will evaluate only those offers based on use of the equivalent domestic construction material, and the offeror shall be required to furnish such domestic construction material. An offer based on use of the foreign construction material for which an exception was requested--

(i) Will be rejected as nonresponsive if this acquisition is conducted by sealed bidding; or

(ii) May be accepted if revised during negotiations.

(End of provision)

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION CRITERIA

BASIS OF AWARD

This contract will be awarded to one contractor using a best value tradeoff source selection process outlined in FAR part 15. The Government will use a trade-off process to determine award considering price and other factors described below. The Government may award to other than the lowest-priced or highest-rated offer. This acquisition will be set-aside exclusively for small business in accordance with the procedures outlined in FAR part 19. Similar past requirements have indicated that there are ample local small businesses capable of performing this project.

Award of this contract will be made to the offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government.

PROJECT OVERVIEW AND DESCRIPTION.

The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Portland District, seeks a contractor to rehabilitate one of the existing spillway gates at Blue River Dam to address safety, functionality, and reliability of the system. The existing system includes two spillway Tainter gates, mechanical hoist machinery, and electrical controls for operating the gates. Specific project features include:

a. Add structural reinforcement, including cover plates on the end frame strut arms and stiffeners on the outer ribs of gates

b. Replace gate seals

c. Replace trunnion bearing system

d. Replace hoist machinery, including position indication, limit switch equipment, and wire ropes

e. Replace gate control panels and all controls associated with gates, including new surface mounted conduit

f. Install site lighting

g. Upgrade existing fall protection system

h. Touch-up painting of gates and associated equipment

SELECTION PROCESS

This section identifies the minimum requirements of the Offeror’s proposal, and provides guidelines for the preparation of the proposal. Due to the technical requirements and the complexity of the project a “Best Value- Tradeoff” acquisition strategy will be used. The solicitation is a 100% Small Business Set-Aside. The Government intends to award a single award, firm-fixed price contract. The Source Selection Authority (SSA) will select the most qualified proposal. Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is highly rated technically and represents the best value to the government.

EVALUATION PROCESS

A. General.

(1) The solicitation is a 100% Small Business Set-Aside. The Government intends to award a single award, firm-fixed price contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors and subfactors in the solicitation. Offerors shall submit a technical proposal and a price proposal. The evaluation results of the technical and price proposals will determine an awardee. All evaluation factors other than price are approximately equal in importance to one another. Each subfactor is approximately equal in importance to one another. All evaluation factors and subfactors other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

(2) The Government intends to make an award without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions should discussions prove to be necessary or advantageous to the Government. Because the Government does not intend to hold discussions offerors are encouraged to include their best pricing in their initial proposal.

(3) In the context of this proposal, “offeror” refers to the proposed prime contractor. A major subcontractor is defined as one who will be providing critical hardware/services (i.e. performing “major features of work” as described under Factor 4 – see below) or whose subcontract is for more than 25% of the total proposed price.

(4) Information submitted about any company other than the offeror, whether an affiliated company, major subcontractor, or other associated business, may not be given much weight unless the proposal contains evidence that the offeror has obtained a written commitment from this other business entity to perform a portion of the work.

(5) All proposals received will stand alone and be considered complete and final. The evaluation board will not consider any information or data incorporated by reference or otherwise referred to. The successful offeror will be selected solely on the basis of the evaluation factors set forth below. Accordingly, proposals submitted in response to this solicitation should provide clear, complete, concise, and straightforward responses to the evaluation factors. Elaborate proposals, color brochures, and other excesses are discouraged.

(6) The Government recognizes that completion of a project is often a team effort. Thus, offerors are required to submit experience and past performance information for major subcontractor(s) to help demonstrate that the team they select to perform this project has a satisfactory record of experience and past performance. Per FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv), in the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

B. Evaluation Ratings.

All non-price factors other than past performance shall be rated using the combined technical/risk rating as follows:

COLOR RATING DESCRIPTION

Blue

Outstanding

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Purple

Good

Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Green

Acceptable

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow

Marginal

Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by the strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red

Unacceptable

Proposal does not meet the requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unacceptable and unawardable.

C. Definitions.

Deficiency. A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

Strength. An aspect of an offerors’ proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

Significant Strength is an aspect of an offeror's proposal that has appreciable merit or appreciably exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Significant Weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Uncertainty. Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission, or mistake).

EVALUATION FACTORS

Volume I – Technical (Non-Price) Submission Requirements and Evaluation Criteria:

FACTOR 1 – Safety Record.

The Safety Record will be rated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis.

Submission Requirements:

Provide the Prime contractor’s safety record. Information must include the following:

1. Experience Modification Rate (EMR) for Workers’ Compensation Insurance issued by an accredited company, Bureau, State, Council.

2. OSHA Incident Rates – OSHA Form 300 for the last 3 years.

Evaluation method:

1. The Government will review the submitted Experience Modification Rate to evaluate the offeror’s safety experience. Prime and/or subcontractor with an EMR of 1.0 or less will be given an acceptable rating. Prime and/or subcontractor with an EMR rating of greater than 1 will be unacceptable.

2. OSHA Form 300 will be used to calculate the Recordable Incident Rate (RIR). Prime with an RIR of 7 or less for each of the last 3 years will be given an acceptable rating.

Prime with an RIR rating of greater than 7 for any of the last 3 years will be unacceptable. (RIR = (200,000 x C)/B where C= # of recordable incidents & B = total # hours worked)

3.

A rating of acceptable must be received for both the EMR and OSHA Form 300 rates in order to receive an acceptable rating for this factor.

FACTOR 2 – Experience

For this factor, a highly rated proposal would demonstrate that the offeror’s project team has the expertise, qualifications, and experience to be able to complete the work and complete the work safely.

Subfactor 2.1 - Past Experience

The offeror shall provide project information for a minimum of 3 projects for the prime, and a minimum of 2 projects of each of the proposed major subcontractor(s)*, completed or substantially completed** in the past 10 years that are comparable in size, scope, and complexity with the project as described in the Project Background and Objectives. The project examples shall contain a description of the overall scope of the project and the contractor’s/subcontractor’s involvement in the project.

Project information shall contain:

A description of the project and the contractor’s involvement in the project (state percentage performed and whether performed as subcontractor or prime);

Project location;

Name, address, telephone number, and email address of a current representative of the contact customer representative that can verify work completed;

Contract awarded amount;

Final contract amount;

Project start date;

Project completion date (if not complete, provide % currently complete in addition to the projected completion date).

* If the offeror will not be having any major subcontractors (as defined above) perform a portion of the work, clearly indicate. An offeror will not be treated unfavorably for failing to utilize a major subcontractor.

** Substantially completed is defined as having completed more than 75% of the project work at the time of proposal submission.

Evaluation method:

More favorable ratings will be assigned to more recent projects, and projects similar in size, scope, and complexity to the requirement in this solicitation. Less recent and smaller dollar value projects may be given less weight.

Projects demonstrating that the prime and major subcontractor(s) are capable of completing projects similar in size and scope to the requirements in this solicitation will be more highly rated.

Note: The Government may consider past experience 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 the instant acquisition.

Subfactor 2.2 - Prime contractor personnel.

Provide the prime contractor’s organization chart indicating key construction personnel and the resumes of the key personnel. At a minimum, resumes must be provided for the positions of project manager, project superintendent, contractor quality control (CQC) system manager, and Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO) that will be assigned to this project.

The resumes shall include examples of project experience. Project experience examples must include the role and responsibilities on each project, dates employed on each project, dollar value of each project, and any other relevant information regarding each project.

Evaluation method:

More favorable rating will be given to resumes demonstrating more recent and similar experience for the specific function of the employee that compares to this project’s scope, size, and complexity. The Government will give a higher rating to offerors submitting letters of commitment of key personnel.

FACTOR 3 – Past Performance

The offeror shall provide past performance information for each project listed by the offeror under Factor 1: Past Experience. Recent and relevant projects are those projects completed or substantially completed** in the past 10 years that are comparable in size, scope, and complexity with this project as described in the Project Overview and Description.

** Substantially completed is defined as having completed more than 75% of the project work at the time of proposal submission.

If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal. If there is not a completed CPARS evaluation, the standard Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for USACE is Form PPQ-0 (9/30/11) and it is provided as Attachment A to the solicitation. PPQ-0 is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal under Factor 1, Past Experience, and for which a completed CPARS evaluation is not available. (Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact.) Do not submit a PPQ when a completed CPARS is available.

Completed PPQs should 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 (Attachment A), 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, Michael I.

Grasso, via email at Michael.I.Grasso@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. The offerors shall instruct the clients to refer the solicitation number in the subject line. The PPQs are Source Selection materials. All successfully submitted PPQs will receive an e-mail confirmation upon receipt. If the offeror does not receive the confirmation, it is their responsibility to follow up to ensure the government has received the information.

Also include performance recognition documents received within the last five (5) years such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

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 PPIRS, including CPARS, using all CAGE/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), telephone interviews with organizations familiar with the offeror’s performance, Government personnel with personal knowledge of the offeror’s performance capability, 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 method:

The Government seeks a contractor who maintains a strong commitment to customer satisfaction and superior performance. It is the offeror’s responsibility to affirmatively document these qualities in his technical proposal. In doing so, be mindful that “past performance” and “experience” are not identical. Experience measures what you have done and how many times, or for how long you have done it. Past performance, however, measures how well you have performed.

Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements The past performance evaluation considers each offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each offeror after evaluating the offeror's recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements. See FAR 15.305.

There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation.

The rating for Past Performance Relevancy will be determined based of the offeror’s contract history to measure closely the Past Performance effort involved similarity of scope and magnitude of effort, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming, and complexities this solicitation requires.

There are four levels of relevancy as shown in the Table below.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

RATING DEFINITION

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude

Relevant of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

The Performance Confidence Assessment will consider how well the offeror performed on the recent/relevant contracts. Based on that performance record, the Government will determine how likely the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

The Past Performance Evaluation Team will review this past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment. In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings using the Table below.

Performance Confidence Assessments

RATING DESCRIPTION

Substantial Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence

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

Limited Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

Important Note: The evaluation board will not consider any information or data incorporated by reference or otherwise referred to.

Past Performance (Factor 3) on projects that are similar in size and scope to this project may be considered to be more advantageous to the Government. Thus, the Government will take into consideration the age and relevance of past performance information and the offeror’s overall performance record. If any performance issues are identified, the Government will consider the number, type, and severity of the problems and effectiveness of corrective actions taken. More favorable ratings may be given to proposal that demonstrate past performance on projects of similar scope and complexity. More favorable rating will given to projects with higher satisfaction of past customers with the offeror’s goods or services, a proven ability to maintain supply/installation schedules, and a record of accomplishing work within budget. The government will evaluate the currency and relevancy of the information, which may help the government assess performance risk.

Past performance questionnaires (PPQs) and/or ratings in Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), indicating high levels of customer satisfaction, completing in advance of original contract schedule, finding innovative ways to cut costs, or increase value to the customer, will receive a better rating.

Documentation of past performance on projects not identified in Factor 2: Experience may be submitted (limit 4). However, this information will not be weighed as significantly as documentation for projects identified in Factor 2: Experience.

In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may receive an Unknown Confidence rating which is neither favorable or unfavorable; it is considered neutral.

FACTOR 4 – Work Plan

Subfactor 4.1 - Schedule

Gantt chart. The offeror shall submit a Gantt chart (MS Project or Primavera software) showing a planned schedule to complete the project in accordance with the Plans and Specifications. The schedule shall include the fabrication, installation, testing, and commissioning of major features of work. The schedule shall also include mobilization, demobilization, reservoir drawdown periods, in water work periods (IWWP), identified schedule windows, critical submittals, interim milestones, and contract completion date.

Narrative. The Gantt chart shall be accompanied with a narrative addressing how the offeror will maintain and accomplish the project schedule, to include the constrained construction window identified in the Plans and Specifications. Examples of narrative topics include critical path, production rates, weather days, assumptions used (i.e. size of crew, hrs/day, days/wk), anticipated problem areas, delaying factors and their impact, and/or other constraints identified within the proposed project scope, proposed corrective actions and contingency plans to meet project milestones (such as how the offeror will manage work operations when the reservoir raises above spillway crest during the contract), and other factors that demonstrate the ability to accomplish the schedule.

Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will review the submitted Gantt chart and the Narrative on practicality, flexibility, and thoroughness. A highly rated schedule will demonstrate that the offeror fully understands the required work, contingencies that may arise and how to deal with them, the site constraints, has a quality control process in place related to schedule, and has a realistic plan to complete the work on time.

Subfactor 4.2 - Technical Work Plan

Submission Requirements:

Provide detailed technical work plans for the major features of work on the project. The Technical Work Plan may also include drawings, cut sheets, examples, or other types of information to communicate the work plan. The Technical Work Plan must include the following Major Features of Work:

Mechanical Equipment Provide a detailed narrative that addresses the challenges and procedures proposed for the successful completion of the mechanical work for this project. At a minimum, specifically discuss:

a. Mechanical equipment procurement and fabrication plan, to include procurement and fabrication of the hoist system and trunnion bearing system.

b. Procedure for installing and aligning the components of the hoist system.

c. Procedure for installing and aligning the trunnion bearing system.

Structural Equipment Provide a detailed narrative that addresses the methods and equipment proposed for the successful completion of the structural work for this project. At a minimum, specifically discuss:

a. Type of equipment, equipment setup, transportation methods, and equipment access proposed to perform the work.

b. Procedures for shop welding, field welding, and quality control in accordance with AWS

(American Welding Society) D1.5 and AISC (American Institute for Steel Construction) Quality Certification Program with Intermediate Certified Bridge Fabricator and Fracture Critical Endorsement.

Electrical Equipment Provide a detailed narrative of the challenges and procedures proposed for the successful completion of the electrical work for this project. At a minimum, specifically discuss:

a. Electrical equipment procurement plan ( i.e. control panel fabrication and testing).

b. Removal of the existing control system.

c. Installing and testing of the proposed electrical system (i.e. control system).

Evaluation Criteria:

A highly rated proposal for this factor will demonstrate that the offeror’s project team understands the challenges of the major features of work and has effective solutions to those challenges.

Technical Work Plans will be evaluated on their approaches to the Major Features of Work. Plans will also be evaluated on their understanding of site challenges, plans and specifications, USACE quality control process, environmental constraints, and safety requirements. A detailed and specific work plan will be rated higher than a vague and general work plan. A detailed and specific work plan must include at a minimum the topics for each Mayor Features of Work, including access restrictions, crane limitations, ability to perform a significant amount of work in a compressed amount of time, addressing environmental regulations and permits, testing, quality control, demolition, commissioning of equipment and materials.

Volume II - Price.

PRICE Evaluation

For this solicitation, the non-price factors, when combined, are significantly more important than price. The Price Proposal will be evaluated to determine fairness and reasonableness. The government will consider not only the total for all line items but also the prices for each individual CLINs in the evaluation to ensure prices are not unbalanced.

SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

A. Administrative Details and General Instructions: Proposals are due no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

(1) General Proposal Format. Submit each copy of the proposal in tabbed, 3-ring binders with a “D” ring or locking closures.

Title Page. Each copy must include the Offeror’s name and address, phone number, email address, title of the solicitation, solicitation number, and date of submittal clearly identified on the front cover of the binder.

Table of Contents. Each binder of the proposal shall contain a detailed table of contents. The complete table of contents shall be included in each binder.

Printed Matter Submissions. Pages containing text are expected to be 8 ½ x 11 inches with at least one-inch margins at the top, bottom, and both sides. Paragraphs should be separated by at least one blank line. A standard 11-point font in either Arial or Times New Roman fonts are required.

Organization charts or schedules. A folded 11” x 17” format may be used. Larger format drawings or tables may be added by folding them to fit within the binder.

All information must be confined to the appropriate volume. If the materials do not fit within a single volume, they should be separated in additional binders, but clearly identified as such. Each volume of the proposal is expected to contain a table of contents, summary section with a brief abstract of the volume, and the narrative discussion.

THE OFFEROR SHALL SUBMIT AN ELECTRONIC VERSION OF EACH PROPOSAL. The electronic version shall be on a readable CD. Any discrepancies between the electronic and paper copies shall give precedent to the electronic version.

(2) Proposal Content Limitations.

The Offeror must confine the proposal to relevant information and documentation sufficient to provide an adequate basis for evaluation. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of the proposal. The page count is at the discretion of the offeror, however the proposal may not be more than 50 typewritten pages total. The 50 page limit does NOT include resumes of Key Personnel under Subfactor 2.2 and PPQs under Factor 3.

The evaluation panel for the Government is instructed to evaluate the non-price proposal factors on the basis of the information provided. Extraneous information provided in the proposals will not be considered in the evaluations; therefore, the offeror should only provide information that satisfies the solicitation requirements. Merely restating the specifications without sufficient elaboration demonstrates a lack of understanding of the requirement.

DO NOT cross reference past performance information. It is acceptable to repeat data, project information, or experience in more than one non-price area as long as it satisfies the requirements of the factor.

Proprietary information must be clearly marked.

B. Content of Proposals: All proposals must be prepared in two (2) volumes: A technical proposal (Volume I) and a price proposal (Volume II). Each of the volumes shall be separate and complete in itself so that evaluation of one may be accomplished independently from evaluation of the other. The technical proposal must not contain reference to price. The narrative and content structure of the proposal shall follow the format shown in the table for Volume I below. Offerors who fail to submit a complete proposal may be excluded and thus receive no further consideration for award.

(1) Technical Proposal, Volume I: Provide one (1) original and four (4) copies and one (1) pdf. file on a CD-ROM. Volume I shall consist of information for the three (3) factors, and the associated sub-factors, listed in tabular form, as noted below.

Volume I – Technical (Non-Price) Factors and Sub-factors:

Tab 1 - Factor 1 - Safety Record.

Factor 2: Experience Tab 2 - Subfactor 2.1 - Past Experience

Tab 3 - Subfactor 2.2 - Prime contractor personnel.

Tab 4 - Factor 3: Past Performance

Factor 4: Work Plan Subfactor 4.1 - Schedule

Tab 5 - Gantt chart Tab 6 - Narrative

Subfactor 4.2 - Technical Work Plan Tab 7 - Mechanical Equipment Tab 8 - Structural Equipment Tab 9 - Electrical Equipment

(2) Price Proposal, Volume II: The Price Proposal shall be complete, detailed, and submitted on forms provided in the RFP (one (1) original and one (1) pdf. file on a CD-ROM). Contractors shall provide pricing and complete all line items on Standard Form 1442 (SF 1442). Your price proposal must be prepared in accordance with below paragraphs and must include:

Volume II - Price. Your price proposal must be prepared in accordance with below paragraphs and must include:

Tab 1 - SF1442, Solicitation, Offer, and Award.

The SF1442 shall be filled out completely by the offeror and signed by an official that is authorized to bind the company. The offeror shall also acknowledge all amendments to the solicitation in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30 or Block 19 of SF1442.

Tab 2 – Section 00010, Proposal Price / Bid Schedule.

The offeror shall fully complete this section.

Tab 3 - Representations, Certifications and other Statements of Offerors.

The offeror shall complete all representations and certifications in Section 00600 and also ensure current registration and completed/updated Annual Representations and Certifications on the System for Award Management (SAM) website, www.sam.gov.

Tab 4 - Bid/Offer Guarantee.

C. Submission of Proposals: Proposals must arrive at the location designated in the RFP for receipt of such proposals prior to the time and date established in Block 13, SF 1442. There will not be a public proposal opening. In order for the proposal to be considered, it MUST be prepared in ENGLISH, and must be submitted as a hardcopy original (Volume I and II) and four (4) copies (Technical Volume I only) with the required electronic CD-ROM:

BY HAND OR COURIER TO:

U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, NWP

Block 300 (10th Floor USACE Security Desk) 333 SW. First Avenue Portland, Oregon Attention: Michael I. Grasso – CECT-NWP-C

OR SURFACE MAIL ADDRESS:

U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, NWP

P. O. Box 2946 Portland, OR 97208-2946 Attention: Michael I. Grasso – CECT-NWP-C

NOTE: E-MAIL SUBMISSIONS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. If the electronic CD-ROM proposal differs from the hard copy, the hard copy will take precedence.

OFFEROR SHALL MARK THE OUTSIDE ENVELOPE(S) (PURSUANT TO FAR 14.201-5) AS

FOLLOWS:

Envelope(s) shall be plainly marked with the following information:

Solicitation No. W9127N-15-R-0022 Opening Date: _______________________________________________________ Number of each amendment that has been received: _________________________

ATTACHMENT A

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

1. The USACE Form PPQ shall be utilized for all evaluations that require a Past Performance Questionnaire.

2. Solicitations:

“Solicitation Submittal Requirements: IF A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION IS AVAILABLE, IT

SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSAL. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED CPARS

EVALUATION, the PPQ included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 3, Past Performance. AN OFFEROR

SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE.

IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should 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 (Attachment A), 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, Michael I. Grasso, via email at Michael.I.Grasso@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.”

USACE Form PPQ will be made accessible on FBO website as a separate attachment.

W9127N-15-R-0022

The following have been deleted:

52.000-4016 Proposal Submission FEB 2001 52.215-20 Requirements for Certified Cost or Pricing Data or

Information Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data

OCT 2010

52.232-13 Notice Of Progress Payments APR 1984

SECTION 00600 - REPRESENTATIONS & CERTIFICATIONS

52.300-4001 EVIDENCE OF AUTHORITY (MAY 1995) FAR 4.102

If the bid is submitted by a corporation or partnership, the applicable form listed below must be completed. In the alternative, other evidence must be submitted to substantiate the authority of the person signing the bid. IF A CORPORATION, THE SAME OFFICER SHALL NOT EXECUTE BOTH THE BID AND THE CERTIFICATE.

CORPORATE CERTIFICATE

I ________________________, certify that I am the ___________________________ of the Corporation named as Bidder/Contractor herein; that ____________________________ who signed this bid/contract on behalf of the Bidder/ Contractor was then ___________________________of said Corporation; that said bid/contract was duly signed for and on behalf of said Corporation by authority of its governing body, and is within the scope of its corporate powers.

SEAL ____________________________________(Corporate (Secretary)

AUTHORITY TO BIND PARTNERSHIP

This is to certify that the names and signatures of all partners are listed below and that the person signing the Authority to actually bind the partnership pursuant to its . . . . . . . partnership agreement. Each of the partners individually has authority to enter into and execute contractual instruments on behalf of said partnership, with the United States of America, except as follows: (State NONE, or describe limitations, in any)

This authority shall remain in full force and effect until such time as the revocation of authority by any cause whatsoever has been furnished in writing to, and acknowledged by, the Contracting Officer.

TYPE OR PRINT NAMES SIGNATURES

252.204-7007 ALTERNATE A, ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS (JAN 2015)

Substitute the following paragraphs (d) and (e) for paragraph (d) of the provision at FAR 52.204-8:

(d)(1) The following representations or certifications in the System for Award Management (SAM) database are applicable to this solicitation as indicated:

(i) 252.209-7003, Reserve Officer Training Corps and Military Recruiting on Campus--Representation. Applies to all solicitations with institutions of higher education.

(ii) 252.216-7008, Economic Price Adjustment--Wage Rates or Material Prices Controlled by a Foreign Government. Applies to solicitations for fixed-price supply and service contracts when the contract is to be performed wholly or in part in a foreign country, and a foreign government controls wage rates or material prices and may during contract performance impose a mandatory change in wages or prices of materials.

(iii) 252.222-7007, Representation Regarding Combating Trafficking in Persons, as prescribed in 222.1771. Applies to solicitations with a value expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold.

(iv) 252.225-7042, Authorization to Perform. Applies to all solicitations when performance will be wholly or in part in a foreign country.

(v) 252.225-7049, Prohibition on Acquisition of Commercial Satellite Services from Certain Foreign Entities-- Representations. Applies to solicitations for the acquisition of commercial satellite services.

(vi) 252.225-7050, Disclosure of Ownership or Control by the Government of a Country that is a State Sponsor of Terrorism. Applies to all solicitations expected to result in contracts of $150,000 or more.

(vii) 252.229-7012, Tax Exemptions (Italy)--Representation. Applies to solicitations when contract performance will be in Italy.

(viii) 252.229-7013, Tax Exemptions (Spain)--Representation. Applies to solicitations when contract performance will be in Spain.

(ix) 252.247-7022, Representation of Extent of Transportation by Sea. Applies to all solicitations except those for direct purchase of ocean transportation services or those with an anticipated value at or below the simplified acquisition threshold.

(2) The following representations or certifications in SAM are applicable to this solicitation as indicated by the Contracting Officer: [Contracting Officer check as appropriate.]

____ (i) 252.209-7002, Disclosure of Ownership or Control by a Foreign Government.

____ (ii) 252.225-7000, Buy American--Balance of Payments Program Certificate.

____ (iii) 252.225-7020, Trade Agreements Certificate.

____ Use with Alternate I.

____ (iv) 252.225-7031, Secondary Arab Boycott of Israel.

____ (v) 252.225-7035, Buy American--Free Trade Agreements--Balance of Payments Program Certificate.

____ Use with Alternate I.

____ Use with Alternate II.

____ Use with Alternate III.

____ Use with Alternate IV.

____ Use with Alternate V.

(e) The offeror has completed the annual representations and certifications electronically via the SAM Web site at https://www.acquisition.gov/. After reviewing the SAM database information, the offeror verifies by submission of the offer that the representations and certifications currently posted electronically that apply to this solicitation as indicated in FAR 52.204-8(c) and paragraph (d) of this provision have been entered or updated within the last 12 months, are current, accurate, complete, and applicable to this solicitation (including the business size standard applicable to the NAICS code referenced for this solicitation), as of the date of this offer, and are incorporated in this offer by reference (see FAR 4.1201); except for the changes identified below ____ [offeror to insert changes, identifying change by provision number, title, date]. These amended representation(s) and/or certification(s) are also incorporated in this offer and are current, accurate, and complete as of the date of this offer.

FAR/DFARS Clause # Title Date Change

Any changes provided by the offeror are applicable to this solicitation only, and do not result in an update to the representations and certifications located in the SAM database.

252.247-7002 REVISION OF PRICES (DEC 1991)

(a) "Definition. Wage adjustment", as used in this clause, means a change in the wages, salaries, or other terms or conditions of employment which --

(1) Substantially affects the cost of performing this contract;

(2) Is generally applicable to the port where work under this contract is…