A.07.24 W9127S20R0002- Amendment 0003.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

Amendment 0003 revises proposal submission requirements and provides additional RFI responses.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 17

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 17-Jul-2020

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 W9127S20R0002

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

01-Jun-2020

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

17-Jul-2020

CODE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

USACE, LITTLE ROCK (W9127S)

700 W. CAPITOL AVE, RM 7315

LITTLE ROCK AR 72201-3225

W9127S 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9127S20R0002

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The number of offeror copies required has decreased by 5 from 5 to 0.

The following have been added by full text:

FINAL RFI RESPONSES

UNCLASSIFIED\\FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Bid Inquiry Contractor Report All Inquiries

Project: Sam Rayburn 480V Electrical Distribution Project Review: RFI Review (00001) (sorted by CommentID ) Displaying 27 inquiries.

Id Discipline Sheet Detail Spec 8638320 Electrical E.201 SS Switchgear Section 26 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Plans and Specs do not call out 3PH 3 wire or 4wire – have used 3ph 4w but 3W is a potential VE What voltage system is apporpriate?

On: Jun 11 2020.

Government Response. . The plans and spec are clear. The 480VAC system is a delta system, which would be 3-wire. Therefore the 480VAC load centers are 3-wire. Ratings are as shown and as specified.

The panelboards rated less than 480VAC are a mix of 3-wire and 4-wire. Refer to specification section 26 28 00.00 26, paragraph 2.2.2, and contract drawing E-207. Transformers are covered in specification section 26 12 16.00 26, paragraph 2.3.1. On: Jul 01 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8638323 Electrical E.206 SS Switchgear 26 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Quoted as NEMA 1 indoor - MCC specs call for them to be Arc Resistant – Does USACE want the Switchgear to be Arc-Resistant as well?

Government Response. . Specification section 26 24 19.00 26, paragraph 2.2 says that the MCCs are to be "arc-flash preventative type similar to Eaton Flashgard series or approved equal". For the switchgear, USACE does not desire arc-resistant. On: Jul 01 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8638329 Electrical E.206 SS Switchgear 26 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Respectfully curious as to why the the switchgear was specified as UL1558 and not UL891 switchboards as the branch breaker ampacitys are small for 800 amp frame breakers.

If this is a VE option please let us know.

Thanks for your time.

Government Response. . USACE does not desire switchboards for this equipment, please bid as shown.

On: Jul 01 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8641703 Electrical 26 24 19

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

26 24 19 Spec 2.2.12 – Is the contractor required to wire the Modbus communication from the overload relays? Is yes, please provide a network diagram showing the contractor's scope of responsibility for the Modbus network.

On: Jun 12 2020.

Government Response. . The capability is to be provided in the equipment as specified. The contractor is not responsible for implementation. It will be for future use of the Government. On: Jul 01 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8641757 Electrical E-202 Panelboards 26 28 00 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Spec 26 28 00 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 Please provide the NEMA enclosure rating requirement for all panelboards and the switchgear remote control panel.

On: Jun 12 2020.

Government Response. . All equipment located indoors is to be NEMA 1. All equipment located outdoors is to be NEMA 4X. On: Jul 01 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8641770 Electrical E-202 Panelboards

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Are panels 480V MAINT SHOP and 120/208V MAIN SHOP the only panelboards that require retrofitting into existing boxes?

On: Jun 12 2020.

Government Response. . It is intended that all panelboards that are currently flush mounted into recessed boxes are to be replaced with flush mounted retrofit panelboards reusing the existing recessed boxes, as specified in section 26 28 00.00 26. This includes all panelboards located inside the powerhouse.

On: Jul 01 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8641799 Electrical 125VDC

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Please confirm that providing the 125VDC battery system is not in the scope of this project.

On: Jun 12 2020.

Government Response. . No. The 125VDC station battery and associated distribution boards have already been rehabbed, and are not included in this scope of work. On: Jul 01 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8641804 Electrical E-104

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Sheet E104 shows a new diesel generator circuit breaker. Is the contractor to supply this breaker? Is yes, please provide mfg make, model, specification and ratings for the existing circuit breaker.

On: Jun 12 2020.

Government Response. . The existing power circuit breaker at the diesel generator is to be replaced as part of this work, as shown on the contract drawings. We intend for this to be converted to a molded case circuit breaker rated for 600VAC, 14kAIC, 300AT, and lugs compatible with the 350kcmil feeder. On: Jul 01

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8661101 Contracting W9127S20R0002 W9127S20R0002 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

It states the following to be turned in under Tab A however there is no additional "Proposal Data Sheet" Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Data Sheet. (See the format provided as Attachment 1.)

On: Jun 22 2020.

Government Response. . Proposal Data Sheet will be provided. On: Jul 01 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

8664567 Electrical Paragraph 1.3.i section 01 11 00 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Paragraph 1.3.i in section 01 11 00 says to replace all existing 480VAC receptacles. Please provide reference drawing showing all 480VAC locations.

On: Jun 24 2020.

Government Response. . We do not have drawings of all of the locations compiled. For bidding purposes, use the conduit and cable schedules for cable information, and use E-603 to see where the outlet feeders originate. Use a quantity of 20 for the number of outlets to be replaced. On: Jul 01 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8664568 Electrical drawing G-002

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Can the Reference Drawings shown on contract drawing G-002 be provided?

On: Jun 24 2020.

Government Response. . The reference drawings will be added as an amendment. On: Jul 01 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8664569 Electrical Critical Circuits

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Can a list of critical circuits be provided so the contractor can accurately estimate what temporary provisions are needed?

On: Jun 24 2020.

Government Response. . Switchyard Loads:

Switchyard Lighting Microwave Main gate Code Call Horn Aerobic Sewage System

Unit Distribution Center Loads:

Turbine Head Cover Pump Both Governor Oil Pumps Backup 300psi Governor Air Compressor (outlet fed on EL.100.0)

Air Compressor Distribution Center Loads:

100psi generator brake air (could be done by keeping one station air compressor powered)

Water Treatment MCC Loads:

Raw Water Booster Pumps (two 3hp)

Pump Distribution Center Loads:

10hp Unwatering Pump Both 5hp Station Sump Pumps CO2 System

HVAC Distribution Centers:

If the outside temperature is forecast to be above 80 degrees F for more than a three day period, and an HVAC MCC is to be replaced, then the supply fans and air conditioning equipment served by the MCC will require temporary power in order to maintain humidity, dust, and pressure control within the facility. On: Jul 01 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed

8664570 Electrical drawing E-802

The cable schedule on drawing E-802 does not show number of conductors and size of conductors for circuits YP17 through YP24. Please provide so contractor can provide accurate estimate.

On: Jun 24 2020.

Government Response. . Clarifications for E-801 & E-802:

Cables YP11 - YP23 are not to be replaced.

Cable P42 is not to be replaced.

Text in the "Remarks" column should be black. On: Jul 01 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8665467 Contracting NA NA Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) Can the Government post the Site Visit attendance list?

On: Jun 24 2020.

Government Response. . The site visit attendee list has been posted to beta.SAM. On: Jul 01 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8670430 Electrical E-603

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

During the walk through I noticed a few small panels next to the lighting panels. These appear to be sub panels.

Example: LTG Cab LC5 has a small sub panel labeled LC5-1. If these are in fact sub panels they are not addressed on any of the drawings. Is the intent to replace these as well? If so we will need the drawings to reflect this.

On: Jun 26 2020.

Government Response. . These are part of the lighting control in the plant. They are not included in the scope of work. On: Jul 01 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8672649 Contracting STANDARD FORM 1442 STANDARD FORM 1442 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) We want to request an extension for the submission of proposals. Thank you!!!

On: Jun 29 2020.

Government Response. . Proposal due date will be extended. Please see posted amendment on beta.SAM for new deadline. On: Jul 01 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8674852 Electrical paragraph

2.2.10 Section 26 23 10.00

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Section 26 23 10.00 paragraph 2.2.10 describes a remote racking device. Please clarify if a remote racking device that mounts to the front of the breaker is acceptable (this would be provided with a 25 foot cable to pendant, and a pelican case for storage). Or, is the intent to have a remote racking device that is mounted on a wheeled base.

On: Jun 30 2020.

Government Response. . What is described is acceptable. The specification referenced does not require a wheeled base. On: Jul 01 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8674854 Electrical paragraph

2.2.14 Section 26 23 10.00

Section 26 23 10.00 paragraph 2.2.14 describes a requirement to submit complete relay configuration and settings. Is the government going to provide trip unit settings for coordination or is a coordination study required to be performed by contractor?

Government Response. . Coordination and protective settings will be provided by the Government. The paragraph referenced is requiring the contractor to provide the auto transfer and load shed configuration discussed in the preceding paragraphs. On: Jul 01 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8674855 Electrical paragraph

2.6.2 Section 26 23 10.00

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Section 26 23 10.00 paragraph 2.6.2 states that voltage transformers shall be mounted in switchgear compartments in a fused rollout tray. Voltage transformers in UL1558 metal enclosed switchgear are not provided in roll out trays. Roll out trays is a medium voltage metal clad switchgear design.

Government Response. . You are correct. This is a mistake in the specification. Ignore the sentence

"Voltage transformers shall be mounted in switchgear compartments in a fused rollout tray with stabs that disconnect the voltage transformer when the tray is pulled out.". On: Jul 01 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8674860 Electrical paragraph

2.6.3.4 Section 26 23 10.00

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Section 26 23 10.00 paragraph 2.6.3.4 describes CT ratios. Please clarify if this specification section also applies to 50:5 CTs. Paragraph references 75:5 to 500:5.

Government Response. . Yes, it should include 50/5. On: Jul 01 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

8674983

Electrical

G-002, ED-801, ED-802, E-201,

E-202, E-203, E-204, E-205, E-206, E-207, E-801, and E-802

G-002, ED-801, ED-802, E-201,

E-202, E-203, E-204, E-205, E-206, E-207, E-801, and E-802 Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO) the following sheets have schedules in a "spreadsheet" format which in the 8 ½" x 11" documents provided are too small to read. We tried enlarging and the text becomes distorted and we cannot read. Can these drawings be issued in a different format or size so we can read the text?

Drawing: G-002, ED-801, ED-802, E-201, E-202, E-203, E-204, E-205, E-206, E-207, E-801, and E-802

On: Jun 30 2020.

Government Response. . A resized set of the Plans will be provided. On: Jul 01 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8675465 Electrical paragraph

2.2.3.e Section 26 23 10.00

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Section 26 23 10.00 paragraph 2.2.3.e mentions the tie breakers to be separated by physical space and blast barriers. The elevation drawing E-210 shows these breakers in the same structure. In order to have the blast barriers between the two tie breakers, an additional structure will be required, and the tie breakers will be required to be in separate vertical structures.

On: Jun 30 2020.

Government Response. . The breakers in cubicles 5C & 5D can be exchanged with adjacent breakers

(4C&4D or 6C&6D) to solve this issue. On: Jul 01 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8675469 Electrical Drawing E-201

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Drawing E-201 – trip rating shown in device schedule. There are four breakers that have trip ratings at 40 and 70 amps. This amp rating is below the minimum setting on the trip unit specified. Would it be acceptable to supply these four breakers with a trip rating of 100 amps?

Government Response. . You are correct, the minimum trip setting that can be selected is 80A. Yes, changing 2B,4D,8B, and 9D to 100AT, and increasing the feeder size to #2, is an acceptable solution. On:

Jul 01 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8678915 Contracting SF1442

13. Additional Solicitation

Requirements Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

We respectfully request the use of DoD Safe for proposal submission with the expectation that online submission would be more convenient for the government and the contractor during the COVID-19 pandemic, while some personnel are working from home. Thanks for your consideration.

On: Jul 01 2020.

Government Response. . Solicitation will be revised to allow for electronic submission in CD format On:

Jul 16 2020 Current Request Status: Request Closed

Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8680524 Electrical E-205

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

There are no requirements in the specifications for the pressure switches shown on drawing E-205 for the water treatment box. What is the required pressure range?

On: Jul 02 2020.

Government Response. . The schematic on E-205 shows that one of the pressure switches closes below

55psi, and the other closes above 100psi. Ranges that include these setpoints will be acceptable. On: Jul 16 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8681674 Electrical inquiry 8675465 E-210

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

In response to government's response on inquiry 8675465, in order to put the two tie breakers in separate structures, an additional structure is required. The bus run between the two breakers would limit the number of feeder breakers in each of these two structures.

Our opinion is that the term "blast barriers" is not necessary. With the addition of ARMS on the main breakers you're keeping the "blast" well below the point of damaging any equipment.

We would recommend adding the note to include Barriers between vertical structures and Barriers between the cable and bus compartment.

If this is allowed, then the switchgear layout on E-210 can be achieved.

Government Response. . If the solution of exchanging cubicles is not workable, then we concur with the assessment that we are already protected by the ARMS, and barriers between the vertical structures and between the cable and bus compartment would also be an acceptable solution to the issue. On: Jul 16

Current Request Status: Request Closed Information for this report is procurement sensitive.

8682155 Electrical Paragraph

2.2.5a,b Section 26 23 10.00

Comment Classification: Unclassified\\For Official Use Only (U\\FOUO)

Section 26 23 10.00 Paragraph 2.2.5a,b This spec section requires all breakers to have control wiring connected to terminal blocks in cubicle 5A. Since this spec section also requires all control wiring (remote open, remote close, status, tripped status) to be connected to terminal blocks, this small cubical will not have enough physical space all terminal blocks.

If the arrangement is kept as shown on E-201, and since there are 32 breakers along with a requirement for 10% spare terminals, structure(s) would need to be added to either end. These structure(s) (instrument only – no 480V bus) would contain terminal blocks for field connection as well as circuit breakers for the control circuits. Estimated total terminal points required – 250.

Please advise if these additional structure(s) (instrument compartments) would be acceptable for a location of the control terminals. A 22" instrument structure at each end would allow separate control terminations cabinets for each bus.

Government Response. . Additional structures are not desired. These terminal blocks were added to facilitate future work, but after further consideration, these items are typically available on terminal blocks in each breaker cubicle, so we don't need them pulled to a central location. On: Jul 16 2020

Current Request Status: Request Closed

Report Complete

UNCLASSIFIED\\FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Patent 11/892,984 ProjNet property of ERDC since 2004.

SECTION 00 22 16 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

The following have been modified:

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

SECTION 00 2 2 16 - PROPOSAL SUBM ISS ION RE QUIREMENTS, EVAL UA TION CRITERIA , AND BAS IS

OF A WARD

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

The proposal shall describe the capability of the Offeror to perform the requirements of the Specifications. The proposal should be specific and complete in every detail; and should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the requirements. The proposal should be practical, legible, clear, and coherent.

In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information containing sufficient detail to allow review and evaluation by the Government. Proposal clarity, organization, and cross-referencing are mandatory. Failure to submit and organize proposals as requested may adversely affects an Offeror's evaluation.

Proposals shall not exceed the page limits described. Provide all information in tabbed sections. Appendices and/or attachments are not permitted and will not be evaluated.

SUBMISSION FORMAT

COVER SHEET & TABLE OF CONTENTS. Proposals shall consist of two (2) volumes. A cover sheet identifying the Offeror (name, address, point of contact) and solicitation number shall be provided. The second sheet shall be a table of contents. The proposal shall contain a detailed table of contents. Offers that violate these rules unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and may be rejected by the Government after the initial evaluation without receiving any further consideration. Neither the cover sheet nor the table of contents count toward the page limitations.

TABS. Written proposal materials shall be submitted in standard three ring loose-leaf binders. Proposals shall be tabbed and labeled as specified in a manner to afford easy identification from a Table of Contents.

FONT SIZE. Shall not be less than 10 point. Pages will be double-sided and each page shall be identified with the appropriate page number centered at the bottom of the page.

SHEET SIZE. Shall be 8-1/2 inches x 11 inches; however, if drawings, charts, or other graphics are submitted, sheets no larger than 11 inches x 17 inches and folded to 8-1/2 inches x 11 inches shall be used. Sheets that are 11 x 17 inch will be counted as two 8-1/2 inch x 11-inch sheets. All sheets shall be dated and numbered.

PAGE LIMITS. The proposal shall not exceed the specified page limits. The Government will not review any information in excess of the page limits or information submitted in an appendix or attachment to the proposal. The Offeror shall not submit verbatim sections of this solicitation as part of their proposal. Offers that do not meet these requirements may be subject to rejection.

NUMBER OF COPIES. Offerors shall submit an original and five (5) hard copies of their non-price proposal (Volume 1) with a matching number of electronic copies; and an original and one (1) hard copy of their price proposal (Volume

2) with a matching number of electronic proposals.

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

The proposal shall describe the capability of the Offeror to perform the requirements of the Specifications. The proposal should be specific and complete in every detail; and should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the requirements. The proposal should be practical, legible, clear, and coherent.

In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information containing sufficient detail to allow review and evaluation by the Government. Proposal clarity, organization, and cross-referencing are mandatory. Failure to submit and organize proposals as requested may adversely affects an Offeror's evaluation.

Proposals shall not exceed the page limits described. Provide all information in bookmarked sections. Appendices and/or attachments are not permitted and will not be evaluated.

SUBMISSION FORMAT

METHOD OF SUBMISSION. Offerors shall submit one (1) electronic copy of their proposal in Compact Disc (CD) format.

Each disc shall be externally labeled with the solicitation number, date, and the offeror’s name. Zip disks and USB thumb drives are not permitted.

FILE FORMAT. Files on each CD shall be in Portable Document Format, filename extension: “.pdf” and suitable for viewing in Adobe Reader. There shall only be two files on each offerors’ submitted CD: ‘Volume I, Technical Submission’ and ‘Volume II, Price Submission.’

FONT SIZE. Shall not be less than 10 point. Each page shall be identified with the appropriate page number centered at the bottom of the page.

SHEET SIZE. Shall be 8-1/2 inches x 11 inches; however, if drawings, charts, or other graphics are submitted, sheets no larger than 11 inches x 17 inches shall be used. Sheets that are 11 x 17 inch will be counted as two 8-1/2 inch x 11-inch sheets. All sheets shall be dated and numbered.

COVER SHEET & TABLE OF CONTENTS. Proposals shall consist of two (2) volumes. A cover sheet identifying the Offeror (name, address, point of contact) and solicitation number shall be provided. The second sheet shall be a table of contents. The proposal shall contain a detailed table of contents. Offers that violate these rules unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and may be rejected by the Government after the initial evaluation without receiving any further consideration. Neither the cover sheet nor the table of contents count toward the page limitations.

BOOKMARKS. Proposals shall be bookmarked and labeled as specified in a manner to afford easy identification from the Table of Contents. Additional bookmarks may be provided, but shall be nested under the appropriate tab bookmark.

HYPERLINKS. Hyperlinks are not permitted. This includes hyperlinks within the document, such as Figure or Table references to the page containing that content, and hyperlinks to websites.

ATTACHMENTS. Attachments/appendices are not permitted.

PAGE LIMITS. The proposal shall not exceed the specified page limits. The Government will not review any information in excess of the page limits or information submitted in an appendix or attachment to the proposal. The Offeror shall not submit verbatim sections of this solicitation as part of their proposal. Offers that do not meet these requirements may be subject to rejection.

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Offerors shall submit their proposals in accordance with the following:

VOLUME 1:

TAB A - Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Data Sheet. (See the format provided as Attachment 1.) Proposal must include offeror’s telephone number, FAX number, email address, and DUNS number. DUNS number will be used to access CPARS Data.

TAB B - Factor 1 – Experience TAB C - Factor 2 – Technical Work Plan TAB D - Factor 3 – Past Performance

VOLUME 2:

TAB A - Price Schedule TAB B - Offer Guarantee

FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE (VOL 1, TAB B)

Offerors shall provide project information for no more than three (3) relevant projects that best demonstrate the breadth and depth of the Offeror’s and/or Subcontractor’s relevant experience performing: removal, cutover (including providing temporary power facilities), installation, and commissioning of motor control centers; removal, installation, and commissioning of panel boards; and removal, cutover (including providing temporary power facilities), installation, testing, and commissioning of long lengths of conductors routed in new and existing raceways and cable trays. If the offeror submits more than three projects, only the first three, as ordered in the proposal, will be evaluated.

Projects should have been completed within ten years prior to the date of the RFP, or be substantially complete at the time of proposal submission. “Substantially complete” is defined as having completed more than 75% of the project work at the time of proposal submission. If an offeror submits a project that it represents is “substantially complete,” the offeror must reasonably explain why the project is considered at least 75% complete. If an offeror submits an ongoing project without providing an accompanying reasonable explanation that explains how the project is at least 75% complete, the Government reserves the right to reject the project.

Offerors should describe each project with enough detail to ensure that the Government can meaningfully assess the projects against the evaluation criteria described in the RFP.

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Page Limit – Eighteen (18). For each project submitted, include the following information, at a minimum:

For each project submitted, include the following information, at a minimum:

1. Project title, contract number, and award contract amount

2. Project geographic location

3. Contract period of performance, completion date, and final contract amount

4. Role of Offeror and/or Subcontractor

5. A narrative description of the work performed (scope and magnitude)

6. Proof that work is “substantially complete” (if applicable)

7. Point of contact for the agency, firm, or company for which the work was performed – Include name, title, current telephone number and email address.

If the Offeror and the Subcontractor have worked together in the past, include a list of projects or other evidence that the two firms have successfully worked together.

If the Offeror proposes as a joint venture, the Offeror must submit a joint venture agreement signed by all participating firms. The agreement must identify the role of each party. If the firms participating in the joint venture have worked together in the past, include a list of projects or other evidence that the two firms have successfully worked together.

EVALUATION CRITERIA – The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which it:

-Demonstrates the extent of the Offeror’s, and/or their sub-contractor’s experience in the removal, cutover (including providing temporary power facilities), installation and commissioning of 480VAC motor control centers.

-Demonstrates the extent of the Offeror’s, and/or their sub-contractor’s experience in removal, installation, and commissioning of 480VAC panel boards.

-Demonstrates the extent of the Offeror’s, and/or their sub-contractor’s experience in removal, cutover (including providing temporary power facilities), installation, testing, and commissioning of long lengths of conductors routed in new and existing raceways and cable trays.

-Demonstrates the extent of the successful completion of relevant projects the offeror and subcontractor have worked on together (if applicable).

-Demonstrates the extent of the successful completion of relevant projects the proposed joint venture has worked on (if applicable).

FACTOR 2 – TECHNICAL WORK PLAN (VOL 1, TAB C)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Page Limit – The Technical Work Plan must not exceed twenty-five (25). If the Technical Work Plan exceeds the page limit, the Government will only evaluate the information contained in the first twenty-five (25) pages of the plan.

Offerors shall submit a Technical Work Plan that includes a detailed narrative of the offeror’s plan for completing the following major tasks of work required by this RFP:

1. Provide a proposed schedule via Gantt Chart, detailing who (prime vs. subcontractor) will perform each activity, with the minimum included:

a. Preparation, submittal, and review period (NLT 90 days)

b. Procurement & Fabrication of long lead items (motor control centers, panel boards)

c. Provide temporary power and cutovers

d. Installation & Testing of:

i. Each auxiliary 480V Distribution Board (motor control center)

ii. Each panel board

iii. Each new feeder for 480V Distribution Boards (motor control centers)

e. Government commissioning of:

i. Each auxiliary 480V Distribution Board (motor control center)

ii. Each panel board

iii. Each new feeder for 480V Distribution Boards (motor control centers)

f. Provide as-built drawing & O&M Manuals for 480VAC motor control centers & panel boards

g. Critical Path (shall be readily identifiable or the work plan will be unacceptable)

2. Provide a narrative detailing possible challenges and site constraints; mitigation measures to successfully complete all major features of work:

a. Shop fabrication and testing

b. Field assembly activities; methodology for providing temporary power, cutover

c. Performance testing and commissioning

d. Contractor/ Operating Project Coordination (i.e. expected unit and/or line outages required (with duration); switching operations; lockout/tagout)

e. Technical risks and site constraints associated with required work

f. Critical assumptions & uncertainties that could impact the completion of work

g. Plan to deal with potential impacts identified above

EVALUATION CRITERIA – The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which it:

-Demonstrates the Offeror’s schedule has realistic durations and timeframes for each required work task and includes work task sequencing in a logical order;

-Demonstrates the Offeror’s understanding of the scope of work and the challenges to be encountered during construction;

-Demonstrates the Offeror’s ability to complete the work on time, despite schedule constraints and potential contingencies that may arise, -Demonstrates the Offeror’s understanding of risks and mitigates those and other challenges to be encountered during construction.

FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE (VOL 1, TAB D)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Page Limit- Eighteen (18) Pages. Submit completed Past Performance Questionnaires (Form PPQ-O) (Attachment A) from at least three (3) customers demonstrating past performance completed or substantially completed within the past ten (10) years. The Government will use the information to determine the Offeror’s probability of successfully performing the scope of work described in this solicitation.

NOTE: Teaming arrangements and Joint Ventures. Provide a copy of the teaming/joint venture agreement. Offerors may submit experience of an affiliated entity where that affiliated entity has made a firm commitment to participate meaningfully in the performance of the contract. If required, JV approval must be obtained in accordance with Small Business Administration policy.

EVALUATION CRITERIA:

The Government will evaluate how well the contractor performed on these contracts (See Past Performance Relevancy Ratings and Rating and Performance Confidence Assessments below). The Government may contact sources other than those provided by the Offeror for information with respect to past performance. These other sources may include, but are not limited to, Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), or other databases; telephone interviews with organizations familiar with the Offeror’s performance, and Government personnel with personal knowledge of the Offeror’s performance capability.

PRICE SCHEDULE (VOL 2, TAB A)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Submit the required Price/Bid Schedule (SF 1442); submit a detailed description of the types of costs included in the proposed coefficient factors; provide aggregate construction bonding capacity.

EVALUATION CRITERIA: The Government will perform a price analysis after completion of technical evaluations. Price analysis will be performed in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, to determine completeness, reasonableness, and understanding of the work. The evaluation will determine the adequacy of the offer in fulfilling the requirements of the proposal. Completeness addresses the extent to which the elements of the price proposal are consistent with the requirements of the RFP. Reasonableness will be established using historical price information, price competition information, the IGE, and any other pricing tools necessary. A clear audit trail must be evident as to the conversion of costs to the coefficients to accomplish the tasks described herein. Price will not be rated, but will be a factor in making the final best value determination for award.

OFFER GUARANTEE (VOL 2, TAB B)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Submit Standard Form 24. The guarantee shall be submitted in accordance with Contract Clause 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee.

EVALUATION CRITERIA: This item is not rated. The Government will review the Bid Bond for legal sufficiency. The Bond must be legally sufficient. Failure to submit a bid bond may make the Offeror’s proposal ineligible for award.

RATING A DJECTIVES AND DEF IN IT IONS

RATING ADJECTIVES

Outstanding - Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good - Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable - Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal - Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable - Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

DEFINITIONS

Clarifications. Limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated.

Communications. Exchanges, between the Government and offerors, after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range.

a. Offerors whose past performance information is the determining factor preventing them from being included in the competitive range. Such communications will address adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not had a prior opportunity to respond; and

b. Offerors (other than those discussed above) whose exclusion from or inclusion in the competitive range is uncertain.

c. Communications may be conducted to enhance Government understanding of proposals; allow reasonable interpretation of the proposal; or facilitate the Government’s evaluation process. Communications cannot be used to cure proposal deficiencies or material omissions, materially alter the technical or price elements of the proposal, and/or otherwise revise the technical or price elements of the proposal. Such communications may be considered in rating proposals for the purpose of establishing the competitive range, if required. Communications shall not provide an opportunity for the Offeror to revise their proposal, but may address ambiguities in the proposal or other concerns (e.g. perceived deficiencies, weaknesses, errors, omissions, or mistakes and information relating to relevant past performance).

Discussions. Negotiations conducted in a competitive acquisition. Discussions take place after establishment of the competitive range.

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

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.

Significant Strength - A significant strength appreciably enhances the merit of a proposal or appreciably increases the probability of successful contract performance.

Weakness - A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness - A significant weakness in a 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).

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVENCY RATINGS

In performing the past performance evaluation, evaluators will apply the following relevance levels to assess the relevance of the prior contract effort(s) of offerors.

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 Relevant - Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude 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.

RATING AND PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

The government will evaluate past performance information to determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment. Each offeror will be assigned one of the ratings below for past performance.

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- Base 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- Base 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 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.

TECHNICAL EVALUATION WE IGHTS

For the purpose of this evaluation, the following terms will be used to establish the relative importance of the technical factors:

More Important: The criterion is greater in value than another criterion.

Equal in Importance: The criterion is of the same value or nearly the same as another criterion.

Less Important: The criterion is less in value than another criterion.

Weight among technical factors:

Factor/Subfactor Location Description Relative Importance

FACTOR 1 Tab B Experience Equal in importance to Factor 3;

more important than Factor 2

FACTOR 2 Tab C Technical Work Plan Less important than Factor 1 and Factor 3

FACTOR 3 Tab D Past Performance Equal in importance to Factor 1 and more important than Factor 2

EVALUATION

Each member of the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will independently consider all information provided in the technical proposal. Once these individual analyses are completed, the team will meet and determine a rating for each of the evaluation factors by consensus decision. The evaluation team will document strengths (e.g., advantages), weaknesses (e.g., disadvantages), and other comments (e.g., deficiency and/or clarification) to support the rating for each factor, as well as the overall rating. The ratings for Technical Factors will be expressed in an adjectival assessment of Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal and Unacceptable. Documentation and comments are required for all ratings. This consensus rating will be provided to the Source Selection Authority.

BAS IS OF A WARD

Proposals must meet the criteria stated in the RFP in order to be eligible for award, to include responsiveness, technical acceptability and responsibility.

The Government intends to award without discussions based on initial proposals received; therefore, the proposals shall contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions in accordance with FAR 52.215-1. The Government reserves the right to address any pertinent issues in the proposals.

The Government will award a firm fixed-price contract to the responsible Offeror(s) whose proposal the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the request for proposal, is fair and reasonable with regard to pricing, and whose proposal offers the best overall value to the Government. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers.

The combination of all technical (non-price) evaluation factors are significantly more important than the price. As technical ratings and relative advantages and disadvantages become less distinct, differences in price between proposals are of increased importance in determining the most advantageous proposal. Conversely, as differences in price become less distinct, differences in rating and relative advantages and disadvantages between proposals are of increased importance to the determination.

(End of Summary of Changes)