Denison_Powerhouse_Install_Solicitation.docx

W912BV18R0022

Section 00 11 00 - SF 1442 and CLIN Schedule

PRICING SCHEDULE

See Div 01`s.

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions, Conditions & Notices to Offerors

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

00 21 00

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

1.2 Interested firms or joint venture entities (referred to as “offerors” or “proposers”) submit specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully execute the design-bid-build construction contract resulting from this solicitation. The Government will evaluate the performance capability proposals in accordance with the criteria described in Section 00 22 11, PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, EVALUATION CRITERIA, AND BASIS OF AWARD to choose the best value proposal for award.

1.3 GOVERNMENT SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

The Offeror(s) must ensure that ALL mail sent to the Tulsa District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, either pre-contract or post-contract award, has a return mailing address on the outside of the item or it w ill be REJECTED by the US Army Corps of Engineers mail room facility.

1.4 COPIES OF SOLICITATION DOCUMENTS AND AMENDMENTS

Copies of the solicitation and amendments are available on the INTERNET ONLY. All solicitation documents will be posted to the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website at:

http://www.fbo.gov

Solicitation number: W912BV18R0022

It shall be the contractor’s responsibility to check the websites for any amendments. The offeror shall submit all requested information specified in this solicitation in the proposal. There will be no public opening of the proposals received as a result of this solicitation.

1.5 OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

If an Offeror believes that any element of the RFP is unclear or inconsistent, the Offeror is encouraged to submit an inquiry to the Bidders Inquiry System identifying their concern.

Questions and/or comments relative to the document should be submitted via Bidders Inquiry at:

https://www.projnet.org/projnet/binKornHome/index.cfm?strKornCob=HomePagePublic. Instructions for registering in the ProjNet Bidder Inquiry system are available on the above web site. The Bidder Inquiry Key for this project is: 5IZY45-QFCU2V. Any information given to an offeror which impacts the solicitation and/or offer will be given in the form of a written amendment to the solicitation.

Note: All questions and/or comments should be entered in Bidder’s Inquiry no later than 14 calendar days prior to the proposal deadline, so they may be given consideration or action taken prior to receipt of offers.

1.6 PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS

This Request for Proposal (RFP) does not commit the Government to pay, as a direct charge, any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of a proposal.

1.7 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

The Government intends to hold a pre-proposal conference for this Solicitation. The date, location, and time will be announced by Amendment to the Solicitation. Once announced each offeror must submit in writing, via email, the firm’s name, address, point of contact, telephone number, email address and number of personnel planning to attend no later than 48 hours prior to the conference to:

Jay Surman Email: Jay.V.Surman@usace.army.mil

(918) 669-7020

All interested Offerors are urged to attend. During this conference, the requirements set forth in the Solicitation will be reviewed and discussed, with part of the conference to include a question and answer period.

1.8 ACCURACY IN PROPOSALS

Proposals must set forth full, accurate, and complete information as required by this RFP, (including attachments). The penalty for making false statements is prescribed in 18 U.S.C. 1001.

1.9 PROPOSAL SUBMITTALS

Proposals shall be sent via the AMRDEC Safe website: https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/ before the time and date specified in the solicitation (Standard Form 1442). Enter the following email addresses for recipients of the AMRDEC download:

Amanda.M.McGovern@usace.army.mil Brian.C.Hutchison@usace.army.mil

Should AMRDEC not be available, proposals may be submitted on CD/DVD and delivered (postal or delivery service) to:

Contract Specialist: Amanda McGovern USACE Tulsa District

FLR 09

2488 East 81st Street Tulsa, OK 74137-4290

Proposals must be received by the time and date shown on Standard Form SF 1442 or as amended on SF30.

1.10 PROPOSAL FORMAT

See Sections 00 22 11 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, EVALUATION CRITERIA.

1.11.3 Debriefings. The Contracting Officer will promptly notify Offerors of any decision to exclude them from competition if a competitive range is determined, whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505. The Contracting Officer will notify unsuccessful Offerors of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.506. Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable. All debriefings will be provided officially in writing.

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.217-5 EVALUATION OF OPTIONS (JUL 1990)

Except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the Government's best interests, the Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(End of provision)

52.228-1 BID GUARANTEE (SEP 1996)

(a) Failure to furnish a bid guarantee in the proper form and amount, by the time set for opening of bids, may be cause for rejection of the bid.

(b) The bidder shall furnish a bid guarantee in the form of a firm commitment, e.g., bid bond supported by good and sufficient surety or sureties acceptable to the Government, postal money order, certified check, cashier's check, irrevocable letter of credit, or, under Treasury Department regulations, certain bonds or notes of the United States. The Contracting Officer will return bid guarantees, other than bid bonds, (1) to unsuccessful bidders as soon as practicable after the opening of bids, and (2) to the successful bidder upon execution of contractual documents and bonds (including any necessary coinsurance or reinsurance agreements), as required by the bid as accepted.-

(c) The amount of the bid guarantee shall be __20______ percent of the bid price or $3,000,000_____, whichever is less.-

(d) If the successful bidder, upon acceptance of its bid by the Government within the period specified for acceptance, fails to execute all contractual documents or furnish executed bond(s) within 10 days after receipt of the forms by the bidder, the Contracting Officer may terminate the contract for default.-

(e) In the event the contract is terminated for default, the bidder is liable for any cost of acquiring the work that exceeds the amount of its bid, and the bid guarantee is available to offset the difference.

(End of provision)

52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es):

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/vmfara.htm

(End of provision)

Section 00 22 11 - Proposal Submission Requirements, Evaluation Criteria, Basis of Award One-Step-Best Value, Design-Build (Single Award)

EVALUATION CRITERIA

SECTION 00 22 11

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, EVALUATION CRITERIA, AND BASIS OF AWARD

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.1 This is an unrestricted competitive solicitation for a firm, fixed-price Design-Bid-Build construction contract to be awarded using the Trade-Off, Best Value selection process. This Request for Proposal (RFP) is to Remove and Replace Generator Step-Up Transformers, 13.8 KV Switchgear, 480Volt Motor Control Centers, and 15 KV Bus at Denison Power Plant, TX. The solicitation criteria shall rely upon industry standards, as much as possible and firms must meet all project requirements.

1.2 Offerors will submit proposals with performance capability including identification of key subcontractors, the proposed contract duration, a preliminary schedule, and a price proposal. The Government will evaluate initial proposals in accordance with the criteria described in this Section. Award of a firm fixed-price contract will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms with all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and represents the overall best value to the Government, considering the evaluation factors, below. The final evaluation rating used for comparison, selection, and award will reflect the ratings received during proposal evaluation. Cost and price information will not be rated but will be evaluated in accordance with FAR Part 15.4. When combined, all non-price factors are considered significantly more important than price.

1.2.1 The proposal must describe the capability of the offeror to perform the work and understanding of the requirements contained in the Statement of Work, and set forth full, accurate, and complete information required by the RFP. The proposal should be prepared simply and economically and be legible, clear and coherent.

1.2.2 This is not a sealed bid procurement process. Issuance of this Request for Proposal does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government. Contract award is subject to funds availability.

1.2.3 Proposal Submissions and the Trade-Off Process. This process permits tradeoffs among price and non-price factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal. Proposals must demonstrate performance and capability information for review and consideration by the Government. Relative weights among past performance and technical factors are provided, below. The Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) reviews, evaluates, and rates the proposals against the source selection criteria in the RFP. If discussions are held, a competitive range consisting of the most highly qualified firms will be established, first. Concurrently, the Government analyzes price proposals. Price will not be rated, but will be a factor in making the final best value determination for award.

2.1 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.2 Who May Submit: Any legally organized business firm formally organized as entities, construction contractors that have associated specifically for this project, consortia of small business firms or any other interested parties may submit proposals. Associations may be as joint ventures or as key team subcontractors.

2.3 Specific instructions for Joint Ventures (JV) and Partnerships.

2.3.1 JV or Partnerships shall be registered in the System for Acquisition Management (www.SAM.gov) as a JV or Partnership.

2.3.2 JV or Partnerships shall provide a copy of the Joint Venture or Partnership Agreement.

2.3.3 JV or Partnerships shall provide a detailed statement outlining the following in terms of percentages, where appropriate:

A. The relationship of the JV or Partnership parties in terms of business ownership, capital contribution, and profit sharing.

B. The management approach of the JV or Partnership in terms of who will conduct, direct, supervise and control the project and have custody and control of the assets of the JV or Partnership and perform the duties necessary to complete the work.

C. The structure of the JV or Partnership and decision-making responsibilities of the JV or Partnership parties in terms of who will control the manner and method of performance of the work.

D. The bonding responsibilities of the JV or Partnership parties.

E. Identification of key personnel having authority to legally bind the JV or Partnership to subcontracts and state who will provide or contract for the labor and materials for the JV or Partnership.

F. Identification of party maintaining the JV or Partnership bank accounts for the payment of all expenses and deposits of all receipts, keep the books and records, and pay applicable taxes for the JV or Partnership.

G. Identification of party furnishing the facilities, such as office supplies and telephone service.

H. Identification of party having overall control of the JV or Partnership.

2.3.4 JV or Partnerships shall identify in other sections of the proposal, where appropriate, whether key personnel are employees of the individual JV or Partnership parties (and identify the party) or hired as employees of the JV or Partnership.

2.3.5 If one of the JV or Partnership parties possesses experience and/or past performance as a Federal Government contractor or as a Corps of Engineers contractor, that experience and/or past performance will be included as the experience and/or past performance of the JV or Partnership.

2.4 Where to Submit: Submit proposals to USACE Tulsa District as instructed in Section 00 21 00 INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS.

2.5 Submission Deadline. Proposals shall be received by the Tulsa District no later than the time and date specified in Block 10 of Standard Form 1442 or as amended in an Standard Form 30.

2.6 GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

2.7 Page Limitations. Proposals are limited to the number of pages shown below, not including the Table of Contents, tab dividers, OSHA forms, Drawings, Data Sheets, Installation Details, Construction Schedules and Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ-0) forms.

Past Performance Questionnaires Limit PPQ-0’s to five

Experience Forms 3 pages No Limit

Narrative No Limit 3 Pages

Chart(s) 3 Pages

Chart(s) 3 Pages

Chart(s) 3 Pages

Drawings & Descriptive Information Narrative, Drawings/Chart(s) 3 Pages

Chart(s) 3 Pages No Limit

2.8 In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, proposals must include sufficient detail to allow review by the Government. Proposal clarity, organization, and cross-referencing are mandatory. Failures to submit and organize proposals as requested may adversely affect a proposal's evaluation. Provide sufficient detail and clearly define all items required in this section.

2.9 The Contracting Officer may remove any proposal from further consideration during any phase of the procurement if the proposal fails to meet the submittal requirements of the RFP, or to reduce the competitive range for purposes of efficiency pursuant to FAR 15.306(c)(2).

2.9.1 Proposals shall be organized as shown in paragraph 3.0, “Proposal and Related Evaluation Factors.”

2.10 Proposal Submissions.

2.10.1 Proposals shall be submitted in electronic format and contain the information in original PDF files that are accurately bookmarked. Electronic proposals shall be submitted via AMRDEC Safe Download (https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/), see Section 00 21 00. Proposals shall be labeled in a manner to afford easy identification from a Table of Contents. Font size shall not be less than 10 point. Do not use condensed font. Each page shall be sequentially and consecutively identified with the appropriate page number centered at the bottom of each page. The Government will not review any information submitted in an appendix or attachment to the proposal. Do not submit verbatim sections of this solicitation as part of the proposal. Proposals that do not meet these requirements may be subject to rejection.

2.10.2 The proposal shall contain a detailed table of contents for each volume. A cover sheet identifying the firm(s) (name, address, point of contact), project description, and solicitation number shall be provided with each volume, followed by a Table of Contents. Improper proposal formats will unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and may be rejected after the initial evaluation without receiving any further consideration. The Government will not evaluate any information beyond the page limitations noted.

2.10.3 Electronic Format: The Offeror shall provide the complete proposal via AMRDEC Safe Download. The electronic files for each volume shall contain the respective portion of the proposal in PDF format using Adobe Acrobat software; do not scan the documents into a PDF file except the bid bond may be scanned. The text portion of each volume of the proposal shall be contained as a single PDF file. Sections of the proposal shall be linked to the index in logical order through use of bookmarks.

2.10.4 Number of Copies: Submit one copy of all electronic files via AMRDEC Safe Download, see Section 00 21 00.

2.10.5 Proposal revisions, if requested, shall be submitted as page replacements with revised text readily identifiable, e.g., bold face print or underlining. The source of the revision, e.g., Error, Omission, Clarification, or amendment shall be included and be annotated for each revision. Proposal replacement pages shall be numbered, shall be clearly marked “REVISED” show the date of revision.

3.0 PROPOSAL AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

Front Matter

4.0 STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

4.1 Submit the SF-1442, completed and signed by the firm’s authorized representative. Include the completed proposal data sheet (See Attachment 1, provided at the end of this Section).

5.0 FACTOR 1 – PAST PERFORMANCE

5.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.2 Past Performance Information (PPI) is to be provided for the projects listed under Factor 2 – Performance Capability.

1) For Department of Defense (DoD) projects 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 that current ratings are available for the Government to evaluate.

2) For Non DoD projects or projects that do not have a CPARS Evaluation:

· Offeror shall include copies of Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ, see Attachment 3) in the proposal.

· Offerors shall not incorporate PPQs previously submitted by reference in their proposal for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

· Offerors shall not request PPQs on projects that have final ACASS, CCASS, or CPARS evaluations. If a past performance questionnaire is received on a project where a final ACASS, CCASS, or CPARS evaluation exists, the ACASS, CCASS, or CPARS evaluation will serve as the official rating of record for evaluation purposes.

· If any negative past performance information is received, the contractor will be given an opportunity to provide rebuttal if the Offeror has not had an opportunity to previously address the evaluation.

· Entities that have no past performance shall notify Contract Specialist Amanda McGovern Amanda.M.McGovern@usace.army.mil, prior to the date and time established for receipt of proposals, that they have had no previous clients and that PPQs cannot be provided. The proposal must contain a written statement that no past performance evaluations are available.

· 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 reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects not submitted by reviewing the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) or other Government appraisal systems, or to interview owner or references. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

5.3 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.3.1 The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, related experience of the prime contractor as relevant to their role on this project. Experience on the similar projects identified in the project lists will receive more consideration than experience provided in the supplemental narrative. The Government may place greater importance on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor, depending upon overall role and relevancy considerations. Federal Government project experience will not be rated inherently more important than non-Federal Government project experience.

5.3.2 The proposal must demonstrate a record of recent, related experience in construction, for the types of work required by this project. Recent experience includes projects well underway (50% or more complete) or those completed and turned over within seven (7) years of the proposal issue date for this RFP. Joint Ventures and Partnerships should separately demonstrate experience commensurate with their role on this project or explain in the supplemental narrative how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project.

5.3.3 The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing the Corps of Engineers Construction Contractor (or Architect-Engineer) Appraisal Support System (CCASS/ACASS), other DOD or Government appraisal systems, or to interview owners or references. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

5.3.4 To receive credit for extent (amount) of experience, the prime shall demonstrate a history of recent, relevant experience. A firm will not receive credit under this factor based merely upon the relevant experience of key personnel proposed for this project.

5.3.5 The Government will consider extent of recent experience, degree of relationship of such experience to this project, demonstrated familiarity with applicable codes and local conditions. Some examples of relevancy to this project may include, but not be limited to:

· Number, size, type work, complexity, location

· Dates (well under way 50% or more completed, no more than 7 years preceding date of Solicitation)

· Firm's role and extent of work self-performed (brokering out all work and simply managing a cited project are examples of less relevant experience)

5.3.6 Previous experience is not mandatory for an acceptable rating. The Government will consider previous experience a strength, even if the experience is on different type projects than this project. Similarly, the Government may consider previous recent teaming experience among the team members as value added, even if on different type design and/or construction projects than this project. The more relevant the experience, the more credit given.

5.3.7 Past Performance evaluation includes two aspects to assess the offeror’s probability of performing the requirements stated in the RFP, based on the offeror’s demonstrated performance on recent, relevant contracts.

· First, the offeror’s past performance will be evaluated to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the requirements of the RFP.

· Second, the offeror’s past performance shall be given a Performance Confidence Assessment based on how well the contractor performed on past contracts.

5.3.8 The Government will assign a performance confidence assessment based on the probability of successfully meeting the contract requirements, considering the degree of success of the contractor’s recent, relevant experience. The Government will assess the past performance on projects submitted and reserves the right to conduct telephone interviews with points of contact identified in the proposal and/or to review other recent projects rated in CCASS/ACASS or other agency performance databases, review and/or contact furnished references, or to consider first-hand personal knowledge of Government employees.

5.3.9 The Government will first assess and rate the relevancy of recent projects accomplished compared to the scope of this contract for overall application to the performance confidence assessment ratings described, below. The projects will include those submitted as well as from other sources described, above. This rating is not a separate proposal rating but is only used in developing an overall past performance confidence assessment rating assigned to the Past Performance Factor. The past performance relevancy ratings are described below.

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.

5.3.10 The Government will next consider how well the offeror performed on the contracts. The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor performance. With respect to relevancy, past performance on projects with more relevance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment rating than past performance on projects of lesser relevance. The Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), 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 sources not provided by the offeror. Owners/references may be asked to comment on items such as quality of design or construction, timeliness, management of the work, subcontractor management, including timely payment to subs or suppliers, safety, relations between owner and designer or contractor, level of support for such things as as-built documentation, O&M manuals, training, correcting design or construction errors, warranty work, etc. The Government will target areas covered in the requirements of this proposal including records of meeting quality, schedule, cost control, customer satisfaction, level of support for work product such as as-built documentation, O&M Manuals, training, problem resolution for design or construction errors, warranty work, and safety. The Government will not release the Interview Forms to the Offeror at any time, in order for the Government to solicit candid, unbiased interview comments. The Government also places a higher value on projects which document successful outcomes and are supported by outside source confirmation, such as furnished references, customer evaluations, or personal knowledge. The Government also places a higher value on projects involving particularly difficult or unique challenges and the innovative methods the contractor used to resolve problems successfully.

5.3.11 A degree of confidence in the offeror’s ability to successfully accomplish the contract requirements will be assigned. The rating system used for the performance confidence assessment is described below.

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.

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

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.

Satisfactory Confidence: Based upon the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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.

5.3.12 Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance. If the Government does not obtain past performance information for the projects identified in the proposal, and cannot establish a past performance record for the offeror through other sources, past performance will be rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The performance confidence assessment will be considered “Unknown Confidence.”

5.4 FACTOR 2 – PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY

For Technical Factors (meaning all non-cost factors excluding Past Performance) the rating methodology (DoD Source Selection Procedure 3.1.2.2) is Combined Technical/Risk Rating. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. This methodology provides the most flexibility and least complexity in the rating process, conduct of the comparative analysis, and best value trade-off analysis process and will be used for this acquisition.

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

Acceptable

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

5.5 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

The contractor shall demonstrate recent, relevant experience on similar projects, using Construction – Specialized Experience form – (Attachment 2). Proposals may identify state and local government and private contracts that are similar to the Government’s requirements. If the offeror is a joint venture or partnership, each firm shall provide information demonstrating experience relevant to their role on this project. Submit projects selected from those discussed in the experience narrative that are currently well underway (designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or completed and turned over no more than seven (7) years preceding the date of this RFP. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division or unit submitting the offer, or by the team member. If projects were design-build, so identify them. The offeror shall provide project information for the stated minimum number of recent and relevant projects for each area identified below. The Offeror must submit a letter of commitment for any subcontractor where subcontractor experience is used to demonstrate experience under any area. Upon award, subcontractors proposed to be used to complete the assembly, erection, and/or manufacturing portion of the contract shall not be substituted without the Contracting Officer’s written prior approval.

The proposal may contain a supplemental narrative (not project lists), not to exceed two pages, explaining how any corporate experience that is not directly representative of this project is applicable and how the Government will benefit.

The proposal should describe any previous teaming experience between proposed team members, if not described in the project list.

5.5.1 The following elements are considered equally important to demonstrate adequate organization and performance capability: use best judgment when apportioning space/pages to each area for this factor. Provide information that describes the offeror’s organization and performance capability to execute the design-build contract per the detailed requirements herein. . Clearly but concisely describe the organizational approach to project management and execution. Do not exceed the page limits stated, above: resumes submitted for key personnel are limited to two pages each.

5.5.2 Transformer Installation Facility(ies) Experience

Submit all transformers installation, per proposed facility, in the last seven (7) years demonstrating transformer installation experience comparable in size, scope, and complexity with the transformer manufacturing requirements for this project, as described in the Specifications. Project information for each project submitted shall contain in tabular format:

· Transformer type manufactured (GSU, Auto, etc.);

· Number of phases;

· Rating (in MVA). Submit information for transformers manufactured with a rating of at least 50 MVA;

· Voltage class (kV). Voltage class above 230kV;

· Year manufactured/installed; and

· Fiber-optic temperature probes embedded in windings.

Evaluation Criteria: The Government will evaluate company experience for manufacturing and installing and demonstrate equipment manufacturing and installation compliance with specification requirements. The Government will use the information provided to confirm that the offeror has relevant and current experience to undertake the project.

5.5.3 13.8 KV Switchgear Company Experience Demonstrate the manufacturer of the 13.8 kV switchgear has experience in providing and installing necessary equipment by submitting no less than ten (10) Projects completed within the last seven years where 13.8 KV switchgear with generator rated breaker was provided. Project information shall include:

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

· Switchgear manufacturer

· Name of point of Contact at the project

· Project location

· Project completion date

· Information detailing offeror’s experience with at least five projects in the installation of 13.8 KV switchgear manufactured by the same equipment supplier

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

· Qualifications of proposed site personnel are submitted under Key Personnel, below.

Evaluation Criteria: The Government will evaluate company experience for manufacturing and installing and demonstrate equipment manufacturing and installation compliance with specification requirements. The Government will use the information provided to confirm that the offeror has relevant and current experience to undertake the project.

5.5.4 15 KV Bus Company Experience Demonstrate the manufacturer of the 15 KV bus has experience in providing equipment by submitting no less than ten (10) Projects completed within the last seven years where similar rated equipment or higher was provided. Project information shall include:

· Description of the project including size, ratings and number of units

· Name of point of contact at the project

· Project location

· Project completion date

· Information detailing offeror’s experience with at least five projects in the installation of 15 KV buses manufactured by the same equipment supplier

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

· Qualifications of proposed site personnel are submitted under Key Personnel, below.

Evaluation Criteria: The Government will evaluate company experience for manufacturing and installing and demonstrate equipment manufacturing and installation compliance with specification requirements. The Government will use the information provided to confirm that the offeror has relevant and current experience to undertake the project.

5.5.5 Organization/Management

Demonstrate the offeror’s personnel management, subcontractor relations, joint ventures if any, project organization chart, matrix of responsibilities, key personnel, factory quality control, on-site Denison Power House quality control and safety by submitting:

1) Project Management:

· Clearly but concisely describe the organizational and technical approach to project management and execution of the contract.

2) Personnel Management:

· Management Structure: Describe how the construction process will be managed and 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. NOTE: The Offeror shall be required to obtain the Contracting Officer’s approval for any substitution of listed firms after contract award.

· Joint Ventures: Describe each firm’s roles and responsibilities on the project. NOTE: A Joint Venture a copy of the Joint Venture Agreement must be included in the Price Proposal.

· Project Organizational Chart: Illustrate in detail the role of the Offeror and of all Subcontractors.

· Matrix of Responsibilities: Describe the key work breakdown activities for the Offeror and each subcontractor, including construction activities for each major feature.

· Key Personnel Chart: Illustrate the following: (1) key positions; (2) the names of the personnel holding that position and (3) the name of the company that person is employed by including their job title at that company. NOTE: the Key Personnel Chart MUST be consistent with the Project Organization Chart, the Matrix of Responsibilities and the list of key personnel provided.

Submit qualifications of the proposed site personnel to demonstrate the ability to perform the work as required in the specifications and their experience with the proposed equipment.

1) Narrative description projects involved with, whether as a current employee or working for another company, and information as to what equipment was installed, their responsibilities and information to demonstrate ability to install the equipment under this solicitation.

2) Name of point of contacts at the projects, project locations, and project completion dates.

3) Factory Quality Control:

· Describe the factory quality control approach for the project; include a description of the systems and capabilities to maintain factory quality control throughout the project.

· Describe the proposed factory quality control organization, including the proposed staffing plan.

4) On-Site Denison Quality Control:

· Describe the on-site Denison quality control approach for the project; include a description of the systems and capabilities to maintain on-site quality control throughout the project.

· Describe the proposed on-site quality control organization, including the proposed staffing plan.

· Describe how internal and external requests for information, shop drawings, progress meetings, site visits, contract completion, closeout, as-built, and completion documentation will be handled. NOTE: There is no need to submit a quality control plan as the successful offeror will provide that after award.

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

5) Safety:

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

· Describe the proposed safety organization, including the proposed staffing plan.

NOTE: Provide enough detail to demonstrate understanding of the project; however, do not provide the amount of detail that will be required in the pre-work submittals following contract award.

Evaluation Criteria: The Government will evaluate the information provided to:

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

2) 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

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

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

5) Determine if the staffing plan is adequate to cover all required tasks and responsibilities; AND

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

5.5.6 Key Personnel

Provide resume data for the following key personnel: Construction Project Manager, Quality Control Manager (CQC System Manager), all specialized personnel assisting the Quality Control Manager (Electrical, Mechanical, and Instrumentation), Site Superintendent, and Site Safety and Health Officer. Resume information to be provided shall be limited to no more than two (2) pages per person and shall include the following information as a minimum:

· Name and title

· Project assignment NOTE: demonstrate proposed site personnel possess the ability to perform the work as required in the specifications and their experience with the proposed equipment by including a narrative description of assigned projects, whether as a current employee or working for another company, and information as to what equipment was installed, their responsibilities and information to demonstrate ability to accomplish installation of the equipment under this solicitation.

· Name of point of contacts at the projects, project locations, and project completion dates.

· Name of firm with which associated

· Years experience in the role identified

· Years experience with this firm and with other firms

· Education degree(s), year, specialization, if applicable

· Active professional registration, year first registered, if applicable

· Other experience and qualifications relevant to same/similar work required under this contract

· The minimum experience requirements for the Construction Project Manager and on-site superintendent shall be in accordance with Section 01 45 00 of the Specifications.

· Minimum experience requirements for other personnel shall be as required by Division 01 specifications.

Evaluation Criteria: The Government will evaluate the resumes to determine how well the Offeror identifies and demonstrates key personnel meet or exceed minimum qualifications necessary to perform their assigned roles. Offerors providing resumes for key personnel for this project that have experience in similar key positions on the projects shown under Specialized Experience will be viewed more favorably by the Government. Performance of key personnel proposed for this project may be taken into account when it comes to the attention of the Government.

5.5.7 Safety Record

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:

· 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

· 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.

· 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 improvements 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 seen by implementing the program including any known benefits to their customers.

Evaluation Criteria: The Government will use all information available, to include CCASS rating for safety, lost time incident rate, safety incentive program, safety awards, and other indications of improvements in safety to evaluate the Offeror’s overall safety record.

5.5.8 Manufacturer Quality Control

Provide the following information:

1) Location of manufacturing facility(ies) proposed to be used along with the manufacturing facility(ies) current* ISO 9001 certificate(s): current means that the certificate(s) have not expired prior to the offeror’s proposal being submitted and will remain active for a minimum of 18 months after submission of offer.

2) A letter of intent to seek ISO 9001 recertification for each proposed facility in order to maintain uninterrupted certification for the life of the contract.

The Offeror shall not substitute any proposed manufacturing facility(ies) without the Contracting Officer’s written prior approval.

Evaluation Criteria: The Government will evaluate company manufacturing quality control experience in compliance with the specification SECTION 01 45 00 3.2 Factory and Job Site Quality Control Plans 3.2.2 Additional Requirements for Factory Quality Control (FQC) Plan. The Government will use the information provided to confirm that the offeror has relevant and current experience to undertake the project.

5.5.9 FACTOR 3 – TRANSFORMER, SWITCHGEAR AND BUS REPLACEMENT – TECHNICAL COMPONENT

5.5.10 Transformer Nameplate Drawings and Data

Provide the following Nameplate information for each transformer design type:

· Phase

· Frequency

· kVA rating at each cooling level

· Winding diagram indicating:

-Voltage and connection (if applicable) of high (H) voltage winding -Voltage and connection (if applicable) of low voltage (X) winding -Location of required winding taps

· Class and stages of cooling

· SF6 pressure rating

· Solid insulation material

· Percent design impedance at the 100% kVA rating

· Basic impulse level (BIL) ratings for primary winding (H), secondary winding (X), and high-voltage neutral (H0), if different than the line end.

Evaluation Criteria: The Government will use the information provided to confirm that the offeror understands and meets the contract requirements set forth in Section 48 19 23.50 26; 53,500 KVA CLASS II Gas-Insulated GSU Power Transformers.

5.5.11 13.8 KV Switchgear and 480 Volt Motor Control Center Nameplate Drawings and Data Provide the following:

13.8 KV switchgear data/information.

1. Scaled elevation and plan views of the switchgear outline shown in the intended location to demonstrate the offeror's clear understanding of the technical requirements and the site limitations of the site.