B.08.03 W9127S22R0001- Amendment 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

Amendment 0002 incorporates the follow ing:

1. Government Responses to RFIs.

2. Corrected Section 00 22 16.

3. Larger versions of R-703 and R-711.

4. Extends the proposal deadline from 28 January to 4 February.

*Note: Amendment 0001 is not in PIEE; it w as only uploaded to SAM. Amendment 0002 had been posted to both PIEE and SAM.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 39

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 25-Jan-2022

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 W9127S22R0001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

14-Dec-2021

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

25-Jan-2022

CODE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

CORPS OF ENIGNEERS, EXECUTION BRANCH

700 W. CAPITOL

LITTLE ROCK AR 72203-0867

M4P0600 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9127S22R0001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 01 10 - TABLE OF CONTENTS

The below Table of Contents has been added

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 1 Government Responses to

RFIs

10 25-JAN-2022

Attachment 2 R-703 (Larger) 1 25-JAN-2022 Attachment 3 R-711 (Larger) 1 25-JAN-2022

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 28-Jan-2022 12:00 PM to 04-Feb-2022 12:00 PM.

SECTION 00 22 16 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

The following have been modified:

PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

SECTION 00 22 16 - PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, EVALUATION

CRITERIA, AND BASIS OF AWARD

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 via the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Solicitation Module before the time and date specified in the solicitation (Standard Form 1442).

1. Register in PIEE:

a. Navigate to https://wawf.eb.mil/

b. Select Register [top right]

c. Select Vendor

d. Create a User ID and Password and follow the prompts [next]

e. Create Security Questions [next]

f. Complete your User Profile Information [next]

g. Complete your Supervisor or Approving Official Information [next]

h. Complete Roles

i. Step 1. Select SOL-Solicitation

ii. Step 2. Select Proposal Manager

iii. Step 3. Click Add Roles

iv. Step 4. Fill in your Location Code (CAGE Code) [next]

i. Provide a justification for your registration [next]

j. Follow the remaining prompts to submit your registration

2. Log into PIEE and select the Solicitation Icon.

3. Enter search criteria to find the solicitation. (Search Criteria can be the complete solicitation number, Solicitation Open Date, Response Due Date, Product or Service Code, NAICS, Set Aside code, Place of Performance Zip Code, Contracting Office DODAAC, or Status)

4. The search results display. Select the Solicitation Number link to open the solicitation.

5. The solicitation displays. The information is view only.

6. Scroll down to see the Contract Information and Attachments. The Attachments can be viewed by selecting the File link. Scroll back up to the top of the screen and click the Offer tab.

7. Click the Offer tab to Add and review current offers on the Solicitation. Click the Add button to add an offer to the Solicitation.

8. Select the applicable CAGE Code for which they are submitting the offer. The list is prefiltered based on the CAGEs in the Proposal Manager’s profile.

9. Upload the attachments that comprise their offer by selecting the Choose Files link.

10. After entering all necessary information enter a Signature Date and Click the Signature button.

11. The Sign Document pop-up will be displayed requiring the user to enter a Digital Pin and One Time Password (OTP). Click the Sign and Submit button to continue.

12. After successfully adding the Offer a success message of the submission will be displayed and the offer displayed collapsed. Users may expand and view all offers on a Solicitation.

FILE FORMAT. Files shall be in Portable Document Format, filename extension: “.pdf” and suitable for viewing in Adobe Reader. There shall only be four files in each Offerors’ submission:

W9127S22R0001- Firm Name- Volume I, Contractual/Admin, W9127S22R0001- Firm Name- Volume II, Technical, W9127S22R0001- Firm Name- Volume III, Small Business/Subcontracting, and W9127S22R0001- Firm Name- Volume IV, Price.

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 which 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 four (4) 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 violating 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 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 not meeting these requirements may be subject to rejection.

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Offerors shall submit their proposals in accordance with the following:

VOLUME I, Contractual/Admin Bookmark A – Standard Form 1442 (including any amendments) and Proposal Data Sheet (Attachment A). Proposal must include Offeror’s telephone number, FAX number, email address, and DUNS number. DUNS number will be used to access CPARS Data.

VOLUME II, Technical Bookmark A – Factor 1 – Performance Capability Bookmark B – Factor 2 – Personnel Bookmark C – Factor 3 – Past Performance

Bookmark D – Factor 4 – Technical Approach & Schedule (Seed Task Order)

VOLUME III, Small Business/Subcontracting Bookmark A — Small Business Participation Plan Bookmark B — Subcontracting Plan (if applicable)

VOLUME IV, Price Bookmark A — Price Schedule (Seed Task Order) Bookmark B — Offer Guarantee

PAGE LIMITS FOR VOLUME II FACTORS

Factor 1 Performance Capability

Medium Voltage Equipment, Low Voltage Systems, and Motor Control Centers Capabilities

Narrative Experience Forms

7 Pages No Limit

Quality Control Narrative 3 Pages

Safety Record – OSHA Forms 300 or 300a

OSHA Forms 300 & 300a Narrative

3 Pages

Factor 2 Personnel Project Management Narrative (Work Plan) 1 Page Personnel Management Narrative (Work Plan) 1 Pages

Subcontractor List Narrative (Work Plan) Chart

1 Pages No Limit

Joint Ventures Narrative (Work Plan) Chart

1 Pages No Limit

Project Organizational Chart Narrative (Work Plan) Chart(s)/Data/Drawing(s)

1 Pages No Limit

Drawings & Descriptive Information Narrative Drawings/Chart(s)

3 Pages No Limit

Resume Resume 1 Page (ea.)

Factor 3 Past Performance

Project Narrative/Corporate Experience

Narrative Experience Forms

1 Page 7 Forms

Past Performance Questionnaires PPQ 7 PPQs

Factor 4 Technical Approach & Schedule (Seed)

480V Switchgear, Motor Control Centers, and Distribution Work Plan

Narrative (Work Plan) Chart(s)/Data/Drawing(s)

Low Voltage Distribution Equipment and Battery Chargers Work Plan

Narrative (Work Plan) Chart(s)/Data/Drawing(s)

Drawings & Descriptive Information

Narrative Drawings/Chart(s)

3 Pages No Limit

Schedule Narrative Chart(s)

5 Pages 75 Items

FACTOR 1 – PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY (VOL II, BOOKMARK A)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Clearly and concisely describe the performance capability to execute the requirements included in this RFP within the SWPA region. The following elements are considered equally important to demonstrate adequate organization and abilities; use best judgment when apportioning space/pages to each area for this factor. All capabilities shall include activities within industrial and/or hydropower generating facilities.

Medium Voltage Equipment Demonstrate the ability to manufacture and install medium voltage equipment, inclusive of switchgear, bus, and cables.

Low Voltage Systems Demonstrate the ability to manufacture and install Low Voltage Systems, inclusive of 125VDC distribution, battery chargers, 120VAC distribution, inverters, PLCs, other automation equipment.

Motor Control Centers Demonstrate the ability to manufacture and install Motor Control Centers and has capabilities related to equipment inclusive of switchgear, MCCs, panelboards, motors, and 480V distribution.

Factory Quality Control Describe the factory quality control capabilities; include a description of the systems and capabilities used to maintain factory quality control throughout the project.

On-Site Quality Control Describe the on-site quality control capabilities; include a description of the systems and capabilities used to maintain on-site quality control throughout the project.

Describe how internal and external requests for information, shop drawings, progress meetings, site visits, contract completion, closeout, as-built drawings, and completion documentation will be handled.

Describe how the team will meet the USACE three phase quality control requirements.

NOTE: There is no need to submit a quality control plan as the successful Offeror will provide that after award.

Safety Describe the offeror’s safety approach, corporate systems, and capabilities to maintain safety requirements during construction.

Provide either OSHA Form 300 or 300a showing incident rates for all projects within the past three (3) years. This form, in Microsoft Excel format, can be downloaded from the Internet at: http://www.osha.gov/recordkeeping/new-osha300form1-1-04.xls. Convert the data using the following formula for each of the three (3) years:

a. Number of Lost Time Accidents for the Year (Column H on Form 300 or 300A) x 200,000 divided by Man-Hours Worked that Year (from Form 300A) = Incident Rate for the Year

b. The Offeror shall calculate the lost time incident rate for each of the past three (3) years using the appropriate OSHA Form data. These calculations shall be presented for each year with the mathematical average of all three years.

c. The target average lost time incident rate is 1.0. Offerors with an average lost time incident rate exceeding 1.0 are encouraged to submit an explanation of their incident rate and/or what they have done to improve their safety record.

Submit a narrative delineating improvement in the Offeror’s safety record, safety awards, and other safety recognition;

include a description of any safety incentives programs and how the program is administered, if one is established, and describe what benefits the Offeror has observed by implementing the program including any known benefits to their customers.

EVALUATION CRITERIA – The Government will evaluate the information provided to:

- Determine the Offeror’s ability to manufacture and install electrical equipment as identified in compliance with the technical documents included within this RFP; and

- Determine Offeror’s understanding of the requirements described in the Division 01 specifications of the Solicitation and Offeror’s capability to execute the project; and

- Determine the clarity and strength of the overall organization and if it is sufficiently organized, structured, and staffed to execute the entire scope of work; and

- Determine if Joint Venture participants’ contribution to the organization is commensurate with their skills and background (if applicable); and

- Determine Offeror’s capabilities and understanding of the contractually required quality control processes for construction; and

- Determine the realism, logic, and understanding of the contractual requirements in regard to the Safety Plan.

FACTOR 2 – PERSONNEL (VOL II, BOOKMARK B)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Demonstrate the Offeror’s personnel management, subcontractor relations, joint ventures (if any), project organization chart, matrix of responsibilities, and provide requested resumes listed below.

Project Management Clearly and concisely describe the organizational and technical approach to project management and execution of the contract.

Personnel Management Describe how the construction process will be managed as well as the authorities and the delegations of authority within the team.

Subcontractor List Name all the proposed subcontractors that will be used in the contract and describe how they will be utilized.

Joint Ventures Describe each firm’s roles and responsibilities on the project.

NOTE: A copy of the Joint Venture Agreement must be included in the Price Proposal.

Project Organizational Chart & Matrix of Responsibilities Illustrate in detail the role of the Offeror and all Subcontractors.

Describe the key work breakdown activities for the Offeror and each subcontractor, including construction activities for each major feature.

The Offeror must provide resumes for the following key personnel: Project Manager, Safety Officer, Quality Control Manager and Site Superintendent. One of the key personnel listed must possess a medium voltage cable splicer certificate.

Resumes shall be limited to one (1) page per person and include the following information as a minimum:

a. Name and title

b. Project Assignment

c. Name of firm with which associated

d. Years of experience with this firm and with other firms

e. Education degree(s), year, specialization, if applicable

f. Active professional registrations, year first registered, if applicable

g. Other experience and qualifications relevant to same/similar work applicable to position

h. The Quality Control Manager and Site Superintendent shall have experience and qualifications relevant to same/similar work required under this contract. Either the Quality Control Manager or Site Superintendent has met Security Level Two Requirements in accordance with the solicitation.

Experience considered same/similar would include scope such as motor control and switchgear replacement in an industrial facility or hydropower or power generating plant.

EVALUATION CRITERIA – The Government will evaluate the information provided to:

- Determine the experience of the personnel offered meet the requirements in Specifications Section 01 45 00 Quality Control and Section 01 35 26 Governmental Safety Requirements. If none is specified, all personnel shall have a minimum of 5 years specialized experience in their field; AND experience on projects same/similar to the requirements of this MATOC.

FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE (VOL II, BOOKMARK C)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: The Offeror shall submit a minimum of five (5) but no more than seven (7) projects to demonstrate the organization's/team’s recent and relevant experience. Only include projects completed up to 10 years prior to the date of this RFP OR projects currently under contract where at least 75% of the construction has been completed as of the date of proposal submission. Review will be completed in the order they are submitted within the proposal. Information shall be submitted utilizing the template found as Attachment B below.

If any corporate experience is not directly representative of the MATOC requirements, the Project Narratives shall explain how the experience is applicable and how the Government will benefit. Offerors shall provide project information on relevant projects that best demonstrate the breadth and depth of an Offeror’s and/or Subcontractor’s relevant experience performing fabrication and installation of Medium Voltage Equipment, Low Voltage Systems, and Motor Control Centers as detailed below. 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.

Medium Voltage Equipment Projects shall include the manufacturer and installer of the medium voltage equipment, inclusive of switchgear, bus, cables, and shows experience in providing and installing necessary equipment where 15 KV switchgear was provided in industrial facilities. Please indicate within the proposal if breakers provided were generator rated and were installed in hydropower or power generating facilities.

Project information shall include:

a. Description of the project including size, ratings and number of generating units

b. Switchgear manufacturer

c. Name of Point of Contact at the project

d. Project location

e. Project completion date

f. Information detailing Offeror’s experience with the installation of 15 KV switchgear manufactured by the same equipment supplier provided in Offeror’s proposal

g. Any agreements with the manufacturer for installing their equipment should also be provided.

Low Voltage Systems Demonstrate the manufacturer and installer of the Low Voltage Systems, inclusive of 125VDC distribution, battery chargers, 120VAC distribution, inverters, PLCs, other automation equipment, has provided similar rated equipment or higher in industrial facilities or hydropower or power generating facilities.

Project information shall include:

a. Description of the project including size, ratings and number of units

b. Name of Point of Contact at the project

c. Project location

d. Project completion date

e. Information detailing Offeror’s experience with the installation of 15 KV buses manufactured by the same equipment supplier provided in Offeror’s proposal

f. Any agreements with the manufacturer for installing their equipment should also be provided.

Motor Control Centers Demonstrate the manufacturer and installer of the Motor Control Centers has experience with related equipment inclusive of switchgear, MCCs, panelboards, motors, and 480V distribution and has the capability of providing and installing necessary equipment. Submit documentation for the installation of 480V motor control centers within industrial facilities or hydropower or power generating facilities.

Project information shall include:

a. Description of the project including size, ratings and number of generating units

b. Motor Control Center manufacturer

c. Name of Point of Contact at the project

d. Project location

e. Project completion date

f. Information detailing Offeror’s experience in the installation of 480V Motor Control Centers manufactured by the same equipment supplier provided in Offeror’s proposal

g. Any agreements with the manufacturer for installing their equipment should also be provided.

For each submitted project, the Offeror shall request a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), found as Attachment C below, from those Government agencies or private sector companies’ Point of Contact identified for each project.

These agency or company contacts must have detailed information concerning the performance of the project in order to accurately complete the PPQ for the Offeror. The POCs may be contacted by the SSEB to assess the scope of work performed and to evaluate performance of the projects listed under the previous experience tab of this volume, if necessary; therefore, it is imperative to ensure correct telephone and email addresses are identified for the client POCs on each PPQ. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires shall be submitted with your proposal if they are able to be received from the POC prior to the proposal due date. Offerors shall follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the Offeror’s client requests, he/she may submit the questionnaire directly to the Contract Specialist, Sarah Hagood at Sarah.N.Hagood@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date.

PPQs previously completed by the example project's POC may be submitted in lieu of requesting the POC to re-complete the form; however, Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

NOTE: For Department of Defense (DoD) projects, the Offeror need not submit a copy of the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Evaluations (ACASS & CCASS) for each DoD project; instead, provide written notification current ratings are available for the Government to evaluate. CPARS evaluations shall not be submitted by the Offeror in place of a PPQ.

TEAMING ARRANGEMENTS AND JOINT VENTURES. Provide a copy of the teaming/joint venture agreement. Offerors may submit experience of an affiliated entity where the 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: There are two aspects to the Government’s past performance evaluation: relevancy and quality of performance. The Government will first evaluate how relevant the past performance is to the work required by the MATOC specifications and then the Government will evaluate how well the Offeror performed on the submitted projects. In doing this, Government will use the relevancy and confidence ratings discussed below.

In addition to the PPQs, the Government may review and consider any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (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), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract

Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror (including information from Government personnel and databases).

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.

The Government intends to assess the relative risks associated with the Offeror’s performance based on the past performance information provided in the proposal and, if applicable, information obtained from available sources identified previously. A significant achievement, unexplained or unresolved problem, or lack of relevant data may significantly impact the risk rating by the Government. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the Offeror to include all relevant information, including demonstrated corrective actions, in its proposal.

In addition to the project information requested in this section, the Offeror shall also provide notification and information concerning any projects where it’s right to proceed was terminated for the convenience of the Government or for default/cause during the last five (5) years, or so state that there were none. If any contracts were terminated, whether for convenience or default/cause, the Offeror shall list each, providing the contract number, title, brief type of work effort, and the reason for the termination.

NOTE: Although the SSEB may not rate an offeror that lacks recent, relevant past performance favorably or unfavorably with regard to past performance, the SSAC may recommend, and the SSA may determine, that a "Substantial Confidence" or "Satisfactory Confidence" past performance rating is worth more than a "Neutral Confidence" past performance rating in the best value tradeoff as long as the determination is consistent with stated solicitation criteria.

FACTOR 4 – TECHNICAL APPROACH & SCHEDULE (SEED) (VOL II, BOOKMARK D)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: The Offeror shall provide a plan describing their proposed approach to executing the Seed Project. The plan shall consist of a Technical Approach Narrative and Schedule.

Technical Approach Narrative The Technical Approach Narrative should include a description of the offeror’s overall plan for completing the Seed Task Order work, inclusive of options, from NTP to final completion within the constraints identified by the solicitation documents. The discussion must be in a narrative format and may include diagrams, bubble charts, or sketches to support the narrative.

The Technical Approach Narrative shall address the following, at a minimum:

1. Work sequence(s)/phases related to execution of the Seed Task Order.

2. Coordination with powerhouse personnel for access and operation of powerhouse equipment and a plan for schedule management regarding powerhouse operations.

3. 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

Schedule

A schedule in Gantt chart format using the critical path method (MS Project 2007 or Primavera P6 software) showing a planned schedule to complete the Seed Task Order shall be included using the timeframe designated in the solicitation. For the purposes of this factor only, the Offeror shall use the date of 1 April 2022 for Notice to Proceed (NTP) and prepare the schedule assuming that all base line items and option(s) will be awarded on that date.

Limit the Gantt chart schedule to no more than 75 individual items/tasks. The schedule shall include a detailed outline of the project work schedule, identifying major work tasks and milestones that include completion of work performed and dates 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)

iv. Battery System

v. Inverter system

vi. AC and DC distribution systems.

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)

iv. Battery System

v. Inverter system

vi. AC and DC distribution systems.

f. Provide as-built drawing & O&M Manuals

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

EVALUATION CRITERIA – The Government will evaluate the information provided to:

- Determine the Offeror’s understanding of the scope of the Seed Task Order.

- Determine the Offeror’s understanding of the technical risks and site constraints associated with Seed Task Order.

- Determine the Offeror’s approach to managing the technical risks and site constraints associated with the Seed Task Order.

- Determine the Offeror's understanding of how major work tasks impact other major work tasks required to accomplish the work.

- Demonstrates the Offeror’s schedule is realistic considering the schedule constraint contained in FAR Clause 52.211- 10 – Commencement, Prosecution, and Completion of Work (APR 1984).

SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN (VOL III, BOOKMARK A)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: The purpose of this criterion is to evaluate the amount of work to be performed by small businesses as a prime contractor 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 a Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP, Attachment D) to identify the extent to which small businesses will participate in the performance of the proposed acquisition.

a. Large businesses may achieve the small business participation goals through subcontracting to small businesses.

b. Small business prime contractors may achieve small business participation goals through their own performance/participation as a prime contractor and also through subcontracting to other small businesses.

A mandatory minimum Total Small Business Participation goal of 34% of the total contract value (through small business participation from small, small disadvantaged, HUBZone, Service-Disabled Veteran Owned, Veteran Owned, 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 contractor 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. Submit information on up to three (no less than one) project(s) which demonstrates 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 Offerors, consideration will be given to self-performance if a small business for a project, as well as for providing subcontracting opportunities to small businesses—as is the policy of the Government.

For large business Offerors, in addition to the submitted project information, consideration may also include review of ISRs (Individual Subcontract Reports) and SSRs (Summary Subcontract Reports) 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 the Experience and Past Performance factors.

EVALUATION CRITERIA: Small Business Participation Plans will be evaluated using adjectival ratings, which are defined in “Small Business Participation Rating Adjectives.” Using the information completed in the required small business participation plan template, the government will evaluate Offerors on the extent of the planned participation of U.S. small businesses in the performance of this acquisition as follows:

1. The extent of participation of small business prime Offerors 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 total value of the acquisition. A mandatory minimum Total Small Business Participation Plan goal of 34% of the total contract value is assigned to this acquisition.

In addition to the mandatory Small Business goal, the following goals are suggested for the individual socioeconomic categories and determined to be reasonable based on market research for this requirement:

{8.5%} Small Disadvantaged Business {8.5%} Economically Disadvantaged Woman-Owned Small Business (EDWOSB) {8.5%} Historically Underutilized Zone (HUBZone) Small Business {8.5%} Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB)

Goals are based on percentage of TOTAL contract value.

3. The extent to which small businesses are identified, as defined in FAR Part 19 (small, small disadvantaged, HUBZone, Service Disabled Veteran Owned, Veteran Owned, or Woman-Owned small businesses) in the proposal by name (note: for large business Offerors, this also includes verification of those small businesses in the Offeror’s subcontracting plan (see DFARS 215.304(c)(i)(C)), and the identification of the complexity and variety of the work (work requiring specific certifications, e.g., welding, mechanical, electrical, fabrication, supply, etc.) to be performed by small businesses.

4. The extent of demonstrated commitment (i.e., length of and formality considerations) to use such firms.

5. The extent to which the Offeror has demonstrated past small business participation.

NOTE: For large businesses only. No award will be made to an Offeror until an approved subcontracting plan is in place. The subcontracting 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.

SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (VOL III, BOOKMARK B)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Separate from the Small Business Participation Plan, large business Offerors also must submit a Subcontracting Plan (Individual Contract Plan) as required by FAR 52.219-9. The Subcontracting Plan shall reflect and be consistent with the commitments offered in the Small Business Participation Plan. In accordance with DFARs 215.304(c), when an evaluation assesses the extent which small businesses are specifically identified in proposals, the small businesses considered in the evaluation shall be listed in any subcontracting plan submitted.

EVALUATION CRITERIA: Large businesses will not be eligible for award if they fail to submit an acceptable Subcontracting Plan. Subcontracting Plans will be evaluated on an ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE basis:

(a) Does the Subcontracting Plan adequately respond to each of the required elements of FAR 52.219-9 (d) paragraphs

(1) through (11)?

(b) Are the commitments in the Subcontracting Plan comparative to the commitments in the Small Business Participation Plan?

PRICE SCHEDULE (SEED) (VOL IV, BOOKMARK A)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT: Submit the required Price/Bid Schedule (SF 1442) for the Seed Task Order that includes pricing for all Contract Lines Items (CLINs). An Offeror that fails to submit a complete price proposal for the Seed Project may be considered unacceptable and may not receive further consideration.

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. Price will not be rated but will be a factor in making the final best value determination for award.

OFFER GUARANTEE (VOL IV, BOOKMARK 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.

DEFINITIONS AND RATING ADJECTIVES

DEFINITIONS

Affordability Caps are the approved cost constraints for major systems acquisitions determined by the resources a DoD component can allocate, which provide a threshold for procurement and sustainment costs that cannot be exceeded. For other procurements, this is the approved funding allocated for a given acquisition.

Best Value means the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement. See FAR 2.101.

Clarifications are limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussion is contemplated. See FAR 15.306(a)(1).

Communications are exchanges, between the Government and offerors, after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range. See FAR 15.306(b).

Competitive Range - See FAR 15.306(c).

Deficiency is 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. See

FAR 15.001.

Discussions are exchanges (i.e., negotiations) in a competitive environment that are undertaken with the intent of allowing the offeror to revise its proposal. Discussions take place after establishment of the competitive range. See FAR 15.306(d).

Evaluation Notice (EN) is the PCO’s written notification to the offeror for purposes of clarifications, communications, or discussions.

Excesses are elements of the proposal that have exceeded mandatory minimums (in ways that are not integral to the design) whose removal and corresponding price decrease may make an offeror’s proposal more competitive. See FAR 15.306(d)(4).

Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) is a process used in competitive negotiated contracting where the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price. See

FAR 15.101-2.

Objective (or objective (maximum) as used in this document) is the value of an attribute that is applicable when a higher level of performance delivers significant increased operational effect, or decreased operational risk, if it can be delivered below the affordability cap. The objective value is the desired operational goal that is achievable but may be at a higher risk in cost, schedule, and technology.

Performance Confidence Assessment is an evaluation of the likelihood (or Government’s confidence) that the offeror will successfully perform the solicitation’s requirements; the evaluation is based upon past performance information.

Recency, as it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the time that has elapsed since the past performance reference occurred. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant.

Relevancy, as it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance.

Requirements Documents are all aspects of the RFP that convey the needs of the Government to offerors, including the SOO, SOW, PWS, technical requirement documents, and system requirement documents.

Requirements Owner is the entity (for example, a program management office or other organizational entity) responsible for providing requirements documents within the RFP that communicate those requirements to offerors.

Risk, as it pertains to source selection, is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor or subfactor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. (For firm-fixed-price contracts, the reference to increased cost may be removed from the risk definition.)

Significant Weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

Source Selection Advisory Council (SSAC) is a group of individuals, appointed as needed by the SSA, that provides counsel during the source selection process, prepares the comparative analysis of the SSEB's final evaluation results, and makes an award recommendation to the SSA.

Source Selection Authority (SSA) is the official designated to make the source selection decision.

Source Selection Decision Document (SSDD) is the document that reflects the SSA's independent, integrated, comparative assessment and decision.

Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) is a group of individuals representing the various functional disciplines relevant to the acquisition that is responsible for evaluating proposals against the solicitation criteria.

Source Selection Information is information prepared for use by an agency for the purpose of evaluating a bid or proposal to enter into an agency procurement contract, if that information has not been previously made available to the public or disclosed publicly. See FAR 2.101 for a listing of source selection information.

Source Selection Plan (SSP) is a plan that describes how the source selection will be organized, how proposals will be evaluated and analyzed, and how source(s) will be selected.

Source Selection Team (SST) is a team that is tailored to the specific acquisition, tasked with carrying out a source selection. Composition of the team generally consists of the SSA, PCO (if different from the SSA), SSAC, SSEB, Advisors, Cost or Price Experts, Legal Counsel, Small Business Professionals/Specialists, and other subject-matter experts.

Strength is 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.

Subjective Tradeoff is a source selection process used when it may be in the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror but it is not possible to place a quantifiable value on proposed performance or capabilities above threshold (minimum) requirements (see paragraph 1.3.1.3).

Threshold (or Threshold (minimum) as used in this document) is the minimum acceptable value of an attribute that is considered achievable within the available cost, schedule, and technology at low-to-moderate risk. Performance below the threshold value is not operationally effective or suitable or may not provide an improvement over current capability. (See also “mandatory minimums” in FAR 15.306(d)(4).)

Value Adjusted Total Evaluated Price (VATEP) is a tradeoff source selection process where the offeror’s total proposed price may be adjusted based on the “value” placed on better performance as identified in the solicitation.

The SSA must then determine if a higher rated technical offer is “worth” the additional cost to the Government.

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

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.

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

Neutral Confidence— 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. The Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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 successfully perform the required effort.

SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION RATING ADJECTIVES

Outstanding— Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Good— Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Acceptable— Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.

Marginal— Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the…