W9127N-16-R-0006-0002.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Project Title: John Day Dam Drilled Waterstops

1. The purpose of this amendment is to delete the site visit data and to put in new site visit data.

2. The amendment is changed to list the factors in the descending order of importance throughout the solicitation.

3. The amendment is changed to properly show the listing of factors as five and not four.

4. FAR Clause 52.217-7 is changed to 45 calendar days after notice to proceed.

5. Section 00100 Paragraph 6, Factor 3 is changed to relabel experience as Factor 2.

6. Section 03 15 13.23 25 - 1.2 Qualifications. Driller licensure for the specific states of Oregon and Washington is removed.

7. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 13

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 15-Jan-2016

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-16-R-0006

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

29-Dec-2015

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 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

15-Jan-2016

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:

W9127N-16-R-0006

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE / INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

BASIS FOR AWARD

A. General

(1) The solicitation is unrestricted. The Government intends to award a firm-fixed price construction contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors and sub-factors in the solicitation. Offeror’s shall submit a technical proposal and a price proposal. The evaluation results of the technical and price proposals will determine an awardee. All non-price factors are listed in descending order of importance, with Factor 1 being the most important factor.

All evaluation factors 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 Offeror’s are encouraged to include their best pricing in their initial proposal.

(3) In the context of this proposal, the “offeror” refers to the proposed prime contractor. A major subcontractor is defined as a subcontractor that the offeror proposes to perform 25% or more of the work required under the solicitation.

(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 submitted a written commitment from the 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) A joint venture is defined as follows: a legal business entity formed between two or more companies (parties) to undertake the performance activities of a contract together. This does not include other arrangements such as “teaming agreements” or “strategic alliance” which are not recognized as bona fide joint ventures for the purposes of this solicitation. A company that is part of a joint venture shall submit a legally binding joint venture agreement. Joint ventures shall include a copy of the legal joint venture agreement signed by an authorized officer from each of the firms comprising the joint venture with the chief executive of each entity identified. If submitting a proposal as a joint venture, the experience and past performance of each of the joint venture partners can be submitted for the joint venture entity. The experience for each joint venture partner will be considered the experience of the joint venture entity. Page and project form limits apply to the joint venture as a whole. Prospective Offeror’s that submit proposals may not change their firm (including Letters of Commitment (LOC) and proposed subcontractors) or their Joint Venture firms, if selected to submit Final Proposal Revisions (FPR).

(7) The Government recognizes that completion of a project is often a team effort. Thus, Offeror’s are required to submit experience and past performance information for any major subcontractor proposed to be used to help demonstrate that the team they select to perform this project has a complete record of experience and past performance. Per FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii). 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.

(8) 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.

(9) Small Business Participation Plan (All Offeror’s). All Offeror’s (both large and small businesses) are required to complete a Small Business Participation Proposal. Offeror’s should propose the level of participation of small businesses (as a small business prime and/or small business subcontractors) in the performance of the acquisition relative to the objectives/goals set forth in the evaluation of this area. Small Business Participation Plan is listed in descending order of importance to other non-price factors. See Attachment B

(10) Subcontracting Plan (Large Businesses Only). Proposals from large businesses, as defined by the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code, will be rated on the extent to which Small Businesses (SBs), Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (VOSBs), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (SDVOSBs), HUB Zone Small Businesses, Small Disadvantaged Businesses (SDBs) Woman- Owned Small Businesses (WOSBs), would be utilized in the performance of this proposed contract. The plan must include realistic goals and demonstrate a track record of consistently meeting those goals in order to be acceptable. The Subcontracting Plan will be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable. Award cannot be made before a firm provides an acceptable subcontracting plan.

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 Offeror’s 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.

5. 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. EMAIL a copy of the proposal.

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

Table of Contents. Each proposal shall contain a table of contents.

Proposals. Shall 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. Larger format drawings or tables may be used.

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.

(2) Proposal Content Limitations.

The Offeror must confine the proposal to relevant information and documentation sufficient to provide an adequate basis for evaluation. Offeror’s 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 100 pages total. The 100 page limit does NOT include past performance information submitted under Factor 2.

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. Offeror’s who fail to submit a complete proposal may be excluded and thus receive no further consideration for award.

(1) Technical Proposal, Volume I: Email one pdf. file. Volume I shall consist of information for the five (5) factors listed in tabular form, as noted below. Repeating or restating the specifications without sufficient elaboration will be determined to show a lack of understanding of the requirement.

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

Factor 1: Technical Plan

Factor 2: Experience

Factor 3: Past Performance

Factor 4: Schedule

Factor 5: Small Business Participation

(2) Price Proposal, Volume II: Email one pdf. file. 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:

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 Offeror’s.

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 – Banking and Bonding point of contacts.

The Government is required to determine Contractor’s responsibility; the Offeror shall provide contact information (Company name, point of contact, address, email, and phone number) for the Offeror’s bank and bonding institutions.

Tab 5 - Bid/Offer Guarantee. The Bid Bond shall be at least 20% of the bid price, but shall not exceed $3 million.

C. Submission of Proposals: Proposals must arrive in the email of the Daniel.j.ellis@usace.army.mil before the date and time specified in the SF1442 or SF30. Emails received by the government, regardless of time sent, will not be accepted by the government if after the date and time specified in the SF1442 or SF30. There will not be a public proposal opening. In order for the proposal to be considered, it MUST be prepared in ENGLISH.

OFFEROR SHALL MARK THE SUBJECT LINE OF THE EMAIL WITH:

Solicitation No. W9127N-16-R-0006, “COMPANY NAME”

OFFEROR SHALLINCLUDE IN THE BODY OF THE EMAIL:

Proposal Due Date: _______________________________________________________ Number of each amendment that has been received: _________________________

6. EVALUATION FACTORS

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

FACTOR 1 – Technical Plan

Submission Requirements:

Submit a technical plan demonstrating the capability to provide a waterstop product in accordance with our technical requirements.

The plan will include:

a. Technical data sheets (Physical or chemical composition) for the waterstop product proposed to be used;

b. Explanation of how the product works, how it will be applied to this project, the life expectancy of the product, and how its application will best meet the needs of the waterstop requirements.

c. Evidence that demonstrates product usage, longevity, success, and the ability of sealing around fissures/voids in the drilled hole given structural inconsistencies. Examples could include historical data, reports, video/photo evidence, and customer satisfaction letters or surveys.

d. Product warranty information.

Evaluation criteria:

The Government will evaluate the technical work plan to determine whether the offeror’s proposed waterstop product meets or exceeds the technical requirements outlined in specification section 03 15 13.23 25 REMEDIAL WATERSTOPS. The Government will review each plan and evidence submitted for the waterstop’s capabilities in relation to longevity, in relation to product warranty information, and ability of the waterstop product to maintain a water tight seal. Plans that contain product warranties with a longer warranty period than what is provided in the contract will be rated higher. Plans that contain time-lapsed photo or video evidence that demonstrate a thorough and realistic method for ensuring that the waterstop will maintain a water tight seal in a non-smooth/jagged angular hole, for a period of at least 1-year after installation, will be more highly rated.

FACTOR 2 – Experience

The offeror shall submit project information on a minimum of three (3) and a maximum of five (5) recent and relevant projects that best demonstrate the Offeror’s experience on projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the work described in the specification. Recent experience is experience that has been completed or substantially completed** within 10 years from the date of the RFP. Relevant experience is that experience that is similar in size, scope, and complexity to the work described in the specifications.

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

“Project Information” on each project cited, shall at a minimum include:

a. Project name, contract number, and location.

b. Date of completion, name of customer, agency, or firm. If project is not complete, provide percentage complete and current contract completion date.

c. Offeror’s specific role in the project.

d. Project description in sufficient detail to demonstrate the similarities with this project.

e. Point of Contact (POC) information for the customer, agency, or firm.

f. Previous waterstop applications used.

Evaluation Method:

The Government will evaluate the information provided to determine the quality and amount of experience relative to the work required by this solicitation. Project submissions that demonstrate that the offeror has experience with the multiple key features of work that are required by this solicitation will be given more weight. The Government will place particular emphasis on proposals that demonstrate experience performing the following:

Installing waterstops in concrete dams with a minimum hydrostatic head of 170 feet or 75

Pounds per Square Inch (PSI) of static pressure, with greater weight given to this type of work at USACE concrete dams.

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.

FACTOR 3 – Past Performance

The offeror shall provide past performance information for each project listed by the offeror under Factor 2: 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.

** 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) that 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, 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 a CPARS evaluation is not available.

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).

Offeror’s 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, Daniel Ellis, via email at daniel.j.ellis@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date.

The Offeror shall instruct the clients to refer to the solicitation number in the subject line. The PPQs are Source Selection materials. All successfully submitted PPQs will receive an email 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.

Offeror’s 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 past performance information in the past performance evaluation.

Offeror’s may provide explanation on problems encountered on past projects and the corrective actions taken by the offeror.

In addition to the above, the Government may review 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 Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (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),FAPIIS, 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 you have done it. Past performance, however, measures how well you have performed.

There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation. Evaluators will first review each project submitted to determine how relevant the project is to the work being solicited by this RFP. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the offeror performed on those projects. A final Performance Confidence Assessment Rating will be given for this factor based on the assessment of recent and relevant past performance information and the assessment of the quality of past performance on prior contract efforts.

With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

Relevancy will be determined based on how closely the Past Performance effort involved similarity of scope and magnitude of effort, dollar value, and complexities this solicitation requires.

There are four levels of relevancy as shown in the Table below. Note that although relevance is a significant contributor to the final Past Performance Rating, it is not a formal Rating in and of itself.

Past Performance Relevancy

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 Past Performance Evaluation Team will review the 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, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements.

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.

If any performance issues are identified, the Government will consider the number, type and severity of the problems and effectiveness of corrective actions taken.

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 will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance, and therefore will receive an “Unknown Confidence” rating.

FACTOR 4 – Schedule (Gantt Chart)

The offeror shall submit a detailed Gantt chart showing a planned schedule to complete the project within the period of performance specified in the contract. At a minimum, include critical path, major work tasks, to include installation of the waterstop product, logs, and drilling.

The Gantt chart shall be accompanied with a narrative addressing the Offeror’s assumptions used when making the schedule and plan for maintaining and accomplishing the project schedule. Also discuss work flow and sequencing of major work tasks identified in the Gantt chart.

The Government will review the Offeror’s schedule to determine the Offeror’s understanding of the specification requirements of the RFP and the sequencing and duration of the major tasks that must be accomplished in order to fulfill the RFP requirements in the time allowed in the solicitation. A highly rated schedule will include a schedule and narrative that demonstrates an understanding of how the site constraints and the offeror’s contingencies may affect schedule, and a realistic plan for accomplishing the work on time despite those constraints.

FACTOR 5 - Small Business Participation Plan

The purpose of this criterion is to evaluate the amount of work to be performed by Small Businesses as prime or subcontractors in relation to the total value of the project, as well as the types of work small businesses will be performing, and the Offeror’s past performance complying with contract requirements contained in clauses FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns and FAR.52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

1. All Offerors (both large and small businesses) shall submit the Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP) template found at Attachment B. A mandatory minimum Total Small Business Participation goal of 20% of the total contract value (through small business participation from small-, small disadvantaged-, HUB Zone-, Service Disabled Vet-, Vet-, or Woman-owned small businesses is required based on the nature of the work for this project. The offeror should articulate how small businesses will participate through performance as either a small business prime or as a subcontractor, as well as demonstrating their past performance in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns and 52.219- 9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

2. Offeror’s are required to submit information that can be verified on at least three projects that demonstrate the degree (both by dollar and by percent of total contract value) to which the contractor utilized small business firms in performing the project. For small business Offeror’s, consideration will be given to self-performance if a small business for that project, as well as for providing subcontracting opportunities to small businesses - as is the policy of the government. For large business Offeror’s, in addition to the information for the three required projects, consideration may also include review of ISR’s (Individual Subcontract Reports) and SSR’s (Summary Subcontract Report) from the eSRS (Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System). The project information submitted for the small business participation plan evaluation does not have to be the same as those listed in Factor 2.

Using the SBPP template found at Attachment B to this solicitation, the government will evaluate Offeror’s on the extent of the planned participation of U.S. small businesses in the performance of this acquisition as follows:

1. The total level of participation of small business prime Offeror’s and small business subcontractors in terms of the percentage of the value of the total acquisition vs the large business participation percentage.

2. The extent to which the offeror meets or exceeds the suggested socioeconomic category goals.

These goals are a percentage of the value of the total acquisition. A mandatory minimum Total Small Business Participation goal of 20% of the total contract value is assigned to this acquisition.

In addition to the mandatory Small Business goal of 20% of the TOTAL contract value, the following goals are suggested for the individual socioeconomic categories and determined to be reasonable based on market research for this requirement. Goals are based on % of TOTAL contract value:

{5%} Small Disadvantaged Business {3%} Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB) {2%} Historically Underutilized Zone (HUB Zone) Small Business {5%} Veteran Owned Small Business (VOSB) {1%} Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB)

3. Identification of the firms, as defined in FAR Part 19 (small-, small disadvantaged-, HUB Zone-, Service Disabled Vet-, Vet-, or Woman-owned small businesses) are specifically identified in proposal by name (for Large Business prime ability to verify in the subcontracting plan as well) and the complexity and variety of the work (work requiring specific certifications i.e. welding, mechanical, electrical, fabrication, supply, etc.) to be provided by small businesses.

4. The extent (i.e. length of and formality considerations) of demonstrated commitment to use such firms (enforceable commitments (JV, MP or written teaming agreements, DFARS 215- 304(c)(i)C) will be considered more favorably than non-enforceable ones.

5. Verifiable past performance of the Offeror in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, (both small and Large businesses) and FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Large Business primes only).

NOTE: For Large Businesses only. No award can be made until a firm required to submit a subcontracting plan has an acceptable plan in place. The plan’s goals must conform to the goals provided in the Small Business Participation Plan (taking into account total dollars subcontracted

vs. total contract value as basis for development of the goals) and must contain the mandatory plan requirements outlined in FAR 19.704.

PRICE Evaluation

For this solicitation, the non-price factors when combined, are significantly more important than price. The Price Proposal will be evaluated using cost or price analysis techniques to determine reasonableness. For evaluation purposes, the total evaluated price will be calculated by adding the total price for all optional items to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the options.

The Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items or subline items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques.

A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

52.236-27 SITE VISIT (CONSTRUCTION) (FEB 1995) – ALTERNATE I (FEB 1995)

(a) The clauses at 52.236-2, Differing Site Conditions, and 52.236-3, Site Investigations and Conditions Affecting the Work, will be included in any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation. Accordingly, offerors or quoters are urged and expected to inspect the site where the work will be performed.

(b) An organized site visit has been scheduled for January 21, 2016 at 10:00am.

(c) Participants will meet at John Day Dam Main Entrance.

(d) The local visitor form is included as an attachment within the solicitation Amendment 2 package on FedBizOpps. This form is required to be filled out and submited to ( Patrick.J.Hunter@usace.army.mil ) by January 19, 2016 at 5:00pm.

(e) All visitors must present a photo-ID at our gate upon arrival and we must have verification that all visitors are U.S. citizens before we can grant access. Foreign nationals must go through a Foreign Visitor Authorization, which is conducted by the Portland District Security and Law Enforcement office.

(End of provision)

SECTION 00700 - CONTRACT CLAUSES

The following have been modified:

52.217-7 OPTION FOR INCREASED QUANTITY--SEPARATELY PRICED LINE ITEM (MAR 1989)

The Government may require the delivery of the numbered line item, identified in the Schedule as an option item, in the quantity and at the price stated in the Schedule. The Contracting Officer may exercise the option by written notice to the Contractor within 45 calendar days after the Notice-To-Proceed. Delivery of added items shall continue at the same rate that like items are called for under the contract, unless the parties otherwise agree.

(End of clause)

(End of Summary of Changes)