W912BV19R0036 - AM01.pdf

W912BV19R0036

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

Cranes MATOC

1. Amendment 0001 is hereby issued to make changes to Section 00 22 00 - Evalaution Criteria, Section 00 21 00, Instructions to Offerors and delete entirety of Section 01 10 00 - Statement of Work. RFP due date remains unchanged and is due 10 December 2020, 2:00 PM CST.

2. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged by this amendment.

3. The point of contact for this action is Shaw n Brady at (918)669-7670 or shaw n.brady@usace.army.mil.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 29

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 03-Dec-2020

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W912BV19R0036

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10-Nov-2020

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

03-Dec-2020

CODE

CONTRACTING DIV

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, TULSA DISTRICT

2488 E. 81ST STREET

TULSA OK 74137-4290

W912BV 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

This section reissued By Amendment 0001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 11 00 - SF 1442 AND CLIN SCHEDULE

The following have been added by full text:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SUMMARY OF CHANGES (SPECIFICATIONS AND DRAWINGS) AMENDMENT 0001

RFP NO. W912BV19R0036

SWD Crane MATOC

Standard Form (SF) 30, Block 14 (continuation):

The proposal documents shall be revised as follows:

SPECIFICATIONS

Section 00 22 00 replaced in its entirety.

Section 01 10 00 deleted Section 00 21 00 added changes

END OF SUMMARY OF CHANGES (SPECIFICATIONS AND DRAWINGS) – AMENDMENT 0001

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS & NOTICES TO OFFERORS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

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

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK

1.2 GOVERNMENT SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

1.3 COPIES OF SOLICITATION DOCUMENTS AND AMENDMENTS

1.4 OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

1.5 SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD/NAICS CODE

1.6 PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS

1.7 SITE VISIT

1.8 ACCURACY IN PROPOSALS

1.9 PROPOSAL SUBMITTALS

1.10 PROPOSAL FORMAT

1.11 JOINT VENTURE PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

1.12 DEVIATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS

1.13 On Ramp Procedures

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK

This is a competitive solicitation set aside for 100% Small Business firms for a total of five (5) firm fixed-price Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ), Multiple-Award Task Order Contracts (MATOC) that will have a 3-year base period and two 1-year options with a shared capacity of $49,000,000. The MATOCs will support a wide range construction projects to meet the requirements and time constraints for Cranes Rehabilitation and Replacement, and Fixed Hoists projects within the Southwestern Division (SWD) Tulsa District boundaries which includes all of Oklahoma, and portions of Texas and Kansas.

1.2. GOVERNMENT SECURITY REQUIREMENTS

The offeror(s) must ensure that ALL mail sent to the Tulsa District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, either precontract or post-contract award, has a return mailing address on the outside of the envelope, package, box, etc.

ANY MAIL addressed to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, including but not limited to bids, modifications to bids, proposals, revised proposals, bonds, correspondence, etc., will be REJECTED by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers mail room facility located at 2488 E. 81st Street, Tulsa, OK 74137-4290, if it does not contain a return mailing address. There will be no exceptions.

USACE Tulsa District Point of Contact is Shawn Brady:

Phone: 918-669-7670 Email: shawn.brady@usace.army.mil

1.3. COPIES OF SOLICITATION DOCUMENTS AND AMENDMENTS

Copies of the solicitation and any amendments will be provided electronically. All solicitation documents will be posted thought the Beta Sam Contract Opportunities (formerly FedBizOpps/FBO) website at:

https://www.beta.sam.gov. It shall be the offeror’s responsibility to check the beta.sam.gov website for any amendments. The offeror shall read the solicitation and all amendments in their entirety and submit all requested information specified in this solicitation and all amendments. There will be no public opening of the proposals received as a result of this solicitation.

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.

1.4. OFFEROR'S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

All contractual matters, questions and or comments relative to these documents should be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at http://www.projnet.org/projnet/binKornHome/index.cfm?strKornCob=HomePagePublic no later than 7 calendar days prior to the proposal due date, in order that they may be given consideration or actions taken prior to receipt of offers.

The bidder inquiry key for this project: 9JZF73-QM7RYT

Instructions for registering in the ProjNet Bidder Inquiry system are available on the above website.

1.5. SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD/NAICS CODE

The NAICS Code selected for this project is 333923, Overhead Traveling Crane, Hoist, and Monorail System Manufacturing, and the size standard is 1,250. Also see FAR 52.204-8.

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. SITE VISIT

All site visits will be held at the Task Order Level.

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 SUBMITTAL

1.9.1. The submittal method for proposals is electronic via DoD SAFE or email ONLY (no mailed proposals).

DoD SAFE web site: https://safe.app.mil/

The following email addresses must be entered for notification of proposal receipt and download availability:

shawn.brady@usace.army.mil julie.s.hill@usace.army.mil

1.9.2. Proposals will be received until the date and time and specified in this Request for Proposal. Mail all bonds to:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Tulsa District ATTN: CESWT-CT-E (Shawn Brady) 2488 E. 81st Street Tulsa, OK 74137-4290

1.9.3. The packaging shall be marked Solicitation Number: W912BV19R0036.

1.10. PROPOSALS

See Section 00 22 00 for proposal requirements and formats.

Offer Closing Date: 10 December 2020

Offer Closing Time: 2:00 pm Central Standard Time (CST)

1.11. JOINT VENTURE PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

When proposing as a joint venture, all members of the joint venture shall sign the SF 1442 and the bid bond unless a written agreement by the joint venture is furnished with the proposal designating one firm with the authority to bind the other member(s) of the joint venture. In addition, a copy of the joint venture agreement shall be submitted with the proposal. Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements may eliminate the proposal from further consideration. If this is an 8(a) or HubZone joint venture, the Offeror shall ensure that it complies with the applicable requirements of 13 CFR Part 124 and 13 CFR Part 126, respectively.

1.12. DEVIATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS

Deviations and exceptions to the terms and conditions of the solicitation are neither encouraged nor desired.

Should the offer include any standard company terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation, the offer may be determined “unacceptable” and thus ineligible for the award. Should the offeror have any questions related to specific terms and conditions, these must be resolved prior to submission of the offer.

Notwithstanding the above, if deviations and exceptions are included with the offer, the offeror shall list and describe in detail the deviations and/or exceptions.

1.13. On Ramp Procedures (AMENDMENT 00001)

The Government reserves the right to utilize an On Ramp concept, consistent with FAR 16.504(c)(1)(ii)(A), to maintain sufficient competition among the Indefinite Delivery Contact (IDC) awardees throughout the period of performance by adding additional IDC holders. This will be done by requesting and evaluating proposals in a manner consistent with the original IDC solicitation.

The following course of action is the anticipated procedure should the Contracting Officer determine to announce a new On Ramp competition to add additional IDC holders.

(a) First, an On Ramp solicitation will be synopsized on the Federal Business Opportunities website (www.fbo.gov). The solicitation shall state that it is issued for the sole purpose of refreshing the pool of contractors for this IDC. The solicitation shall identify, by name and contract number, the contractors who have already been awarded an IDC. The solicitation shall contain the description of the IDC.

(b) Although the solicitation must carry a new Procurement Identification Number (i.e, W912BV-xx- R-xxxx), Volume 1 of the solicitation shall be a mirror image of the original Volume 1 of the solicitation with the only exception(s) being incorporation of any amendments issued to the original solicitation and any changes to clauses from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clauses or any supplements to the FAR. The potential offerors shall be required to meet the same minimum evaluation criteria established in the original IDC solicitation for each evaluation factor where minimum criteria was established. The evaluation and selection of awardees will be on the same basis as the evaluation and award criteria used for the original IDC award. However, On Ramping offerors will not be evaluated against existing IDC holders.

(c) The On Ramp solicitation will identify the total anticipated number of new contracts intended to be awarded in response to the On Ramp solicitation notice. However, at no time will the total number of contractors in the MATOC pool exceed the maximum number specified in the original IDC solicitation. If no maximum is specified, the total number of contractors in the MATOC pool will not exceed X more than the number originally awarded in the IDC.

(d) The determination to announce a new On Ramp competition may be made on an annual or biannual basis, as determined by the Contracting Officer. The contract period of performance for any IDC holder selected in accordance with the solicitation’s On Ramp procedures will run concurrent with the existing IDC period of performance. The terms and conditions of any resulting awards will be materially identical to the terms and conditions of the existing IDC holders.

(e) The Contracting Officer reserves the right to not exercise remaining IDC option periods for IDC awardees if it is determined the contractor has not consistently participated in Task Order Requests for Proposals (TO RFPs). If a contractor does not consistently participate in TO RFPs for reasons other than bonding and/or maximum ordering limitations (MOL), then (a) the contractor acknowledges that abstaining from participation may be reflected on any contract performance evaluation, and (b) the base IDC Contracting Officer may determine that it is in the best interest of the Government to terminate the contract or not exercise any remaining IDC option periods.

(f) Immediately upon on-ramping award, each selected contractor is eligible to submit a proposal in response to any task order solicitation and will be eligible to receive task order awards with the same rights and obligations as any other contractor in the MATOC pool.

SECTION 00 22 00 - PHASE 1 OF 2 PHASE DESIGN BUILD SELECTION PROCESS

The following have been added by full text:

REVISED CRITERIA PHASE 1

SECTION 00 22 00

PHASE 1 OF 2 PHASE DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.0 OVERVIEW OF PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.1 P hase 1. The first phase consists of a process known in commercial design-build (DB) as the “Request for Qualifications” or the acronym: “RFQ”. This solicitation refers to it as “Phase 1”. In Phase 1 of the 2-phase selection procedure, interested firms or joint venture entities (referred to as “Offerors”) submit specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully execute design-build construction and design-bid-build construction contracts resulting from this solicitation. The Government will evaluate the performance capability proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein and will select no more than five (5) of the highest rated Phase 1 Offerors to compete for the MATOC contracts in Phase 2.

1.2 P hase 2. In Phase 2, the selected Offerors will submit proposals in accordance with the Section 00 22

20 PHASE 2 DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES AND BASIS OF AWARD.

1.3 Offerors will not be participating in a sealed bid procurement process under this acquisition method.

Issuance of this Request for Proposal does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government.

1.4 P roposal Submissions and the Trade-Off Process. This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest-priced proposal.

Offerors submit their performance and capability information for review and consideration by the Government. For those Offerors selected to compete during Phase 2, relative importance among technical factors are provided in Section 00 22 20 PHASE 2 DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES AND BASIS OF AWARD. The Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) reviews, evaluates, and rates the proposals against the source selection criteria in the RFP. A competitive range consisting of the most highly qualified technical Offerors will be established prior to discussion (if held). The SSEB will review, evaluate and rate the initial task order project technical proposals against the source selection criteria in the RFP for those Offerors included in the competitive range. Concurrently, the Government analyzes price proposals of Offerors utilizing the initial task order project cost proposal. Price will not be rated, but will be a factor in making the final best-value determination for award. The Source Selection Authority

(SSA) compares proposals to one another and determines the best value for the government. The perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal must merit the additional cost, and the rationale for tradeoffs must be documented.

1.5 I nitial Task Order Project. Those Offerors selected to compete during Phase 2 of the solicitation shall submit Technical and Cost (Price) proposals for the initial task order as part of Phase 2 Proposal submittals.

See Section 00 22 20 PHASE 2 DESIGN-BUILD SELECTION PROCEDURES AND BASIS OF AWARD. The scope of work for an initial task order project will be provided to Phase 2 Offerors in Section 01 10 00 TASK ORDER STATEMENT OF WORK. The initial task order project cost proposal will be used to evaluate price for the basic MATOC contracts. The best value initial task order may be awarded to one of the most highly-rated contractors on the MATOC pool if it is in the best interest of the Government.

1.6 T ask Orders. Fixed-price task orders shall normally be issued bilaterally against this MATOC.

Individual task orders will be competed among the contracts awarded under this MATOC pursuant to FAR 16.505. Generally, award will be made to the contractor that provides the best value to the Government, unless otherwise indicated. Source Selection decisions will not be subject to the Disputes Clause of this MATOC (FAR 52.233-1 or its Alternate).

1.7 P erformance of Work. If the Contractor is awarded a contract, the contractor shall perform work in accordance with Section 00 10 00 DESCRIPTION/SPECS/WORK STATEMENT, with the Scope of Work provided with each Task Order (Section 01 10 00 TASK ORDER STATEMENT OF WORK), and with strict accordance with the terms and conditions specified within the RFP and each Task Order.

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.1 W ho May Submit: Any legally organized small business firm, s mall business firms formally associated specifically for this project, consortia of small business firms, or any other interested small business parties may submit proposals. Associations may be a s Joint Ventures (JVs) or “team” arrangements. The size standard for this solicitation is as shown in Section 00 45 00

REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS.

2.2 W here to Submit: Offerors shall submit their proposal to the Tulsa District at the address shown in Section 00 21 00

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS.

2.2.1 2.2.1 Pro Forma Requirements to be provided for Phase 1: This information should be submitted as a separate .pdf file named “Pro Forma Requirements.pdf”. This information consists of the following:

a. The Offeror will submit a cover letter containing:

1) Solicitation number.

2) Name, address, email, and telephone and fax numbers of the Offeror.

3) Names, title, email, and telephone and fax numbers of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this RFP.

4) Name, title and signature of the person authorized to sign the proposal.

5) A statement specifying agreement with all terms, conditions and provisions included in the RFP.

6) Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Codes for the Offeror, and all teaming partners who participated in the Factor 1 – Specialized Experience.

b. Acknowledgement of all amendments to the RFP in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30 (amendment form).

c. The completed Section 00 45 00 of the RFP (Representations and Certifications), Printed Entity Record from System for Award Management (SAM)

d. Letter from Surety stating Offeror is capable of providing a Bid Guarantee in Phase 2 as required in FAR 52.228-1.

e. Financial statement and bank letter that verify that sufficient funds will be available to finance the work.

f. For Joint Ventures, the information required by paragraph “Joint Ventures”.

g. Identify if this proposal is being submitted as a HUBZone entity.

2.3 S ubmission Deadline. Proposals shall be received by the Tulsa District no later than the time and date specified in Block 10 of Standard Form 1442 via AMRDEC SAFE or email ONLY (no mailed proposals). AMRDEC SAFE web site:

https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe

The following email address(es) must be entered for notification of proposal receipt and download availability:

shawn.brady@usace.army.mil julie.s.hill@usace.army.mil 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. Failures to submit and organize proposals as requested may adversely affect an Offeror's evaluation. Offerors should provide sufficient detail and clearly define all items required in this section.

2.4 The Contracting Officer may remove any Offeror from further consideration during any phase of the procurement if the Offeror 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).

2.5 Tabs. Proposal shall be organized and tabbed as shown in paragraph 3.0, “Phase I Proposal Submittal Summary”.

2.6 Size of Printed Matter Submissions.

2.6.1 Proposal materials shall be submitted via AMRDEC SAFE website https://safe.armdec.army.mil/safe/, or via email, containing the proposal in PDF file format using Adobe Acrobat software. Proposals shall be tabbed and labeled in a manner to afford easy identification from a Table of Contents. Each page shall be identified with the appropriate page number centered at the bottom of the page. Sheet size of the proposal contents shall be 8-1/2 inches x 11 inches where sheets are prepared specifically for this proposal, unless another paper size is specifically authorized elsewhere in this section for a particular submission. Do not use alternative paper sizes (e.g., 11” x 14” or 11” x 17” sheets) unless specifically authorized in this section for a particular submission.

Do not use a font size smaller than 10, an unusual font style such as script, or condensed print for any submission. All page margins must be at least 1 inch wide, but may include headers and footers. Phase 1 proposals shall not exceed 37 single-sided pages, excluding the cover sheet and Table of Contents. A page is defined as text or information on one side of the paper. Factor 2 – Past Performance will not be counted towards this page limitation, nor will the resumes submitted for key personnel, nor the letters of commitment for individuals or teaming subcontractors. The Government will not evaluate any information beyond the total page limitation noted above and in the individual Factor limitations noted in the paragraphs below. The Government will not review any information submitted in an appendix or attachment to the proposal. The Offeror shall not submit verbatim sections of this solicitation as part of their proposal. Offers that do not meet these requirements may be subject to rejection.

2.6.2 The proposals shall contain a detailed Table of Contents.

2.6.2.1 Proposals shall contain the entire proposal in .pdf format using Adobe Acrobat software to print to a .pdf file; do NOT scan the document(s) into a .pdf file. The text portion of the complete proposal shall be contained as a single .pdf file, and the “find” function must be usable. The technical proposal will be appropriately organized using the tabs specified in the chart below. The Pro Forma requirements shall be submitted as a separate file as required by paragraph 2.2.1 above.

2.6.2.2 A cover sheet identifying the Offeror (name, address, point of contact), project description, and solicitation number shall be provided. The second sheet shall be a Table of Contents. Offers that violate these rules unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and may be rejected by the Government after the initial evaluation without receiving any further consideration.

2.6.2.3 Sections of the proposal shall be bookmarked (linked to the index) as detailed in this section. The SF 1442 may be scanned and shall be *Optical Character Recognition (OCR) compatible. All text must be legible and easily read. Submit the SF 1442, completed and signed by a person authorized by the Offeror. A page is defined as text or information on one side of the paper.

*OCR is a common method of digitizing printed texts so that they can be electronically searched, stored more compactly, displayed on-line, and used in machine processes such as machine translation, text-to- speech, key data extraction and text mining.

2.6.2.4 Each Volume of the proposal shall be identified by the Solicitation Number (W912BV19R0036), project title (Crane MATOC), name, address, and telephone number of the Offeror, and the following on the volume in bold letters:

Phase 1 - Volume 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

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

A revised copy of the entire proposal in .pdf format shall be provided.

3.0 PHASE 1 PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL SUMMARY

The Phase 1 proposal shall be tabbed and submitted in the following format. Submission Requirements and Evaluation Criteria for each Tab are included in the following paragraphs. All information shall be provided within these tabbed sections and shall not be included as an appendix or attachment. Cost information will limited to Bonding Capacity as part of the Phase I submittal.

Location F actor/ D escription Relative Importance

TAB A N/A SF 1442

Proposal Data Sheet

Not Rated

TAB B Factor 1 Specialized Experience Most Important Factor

TAB C Factor 2 Past Performance 2nd Most important factor

TAB D Factor 3 Design Support 4th(slightly less important than Factor 4 )

TAB E Factor 4 Management Effectiveness 3rd (slightly less important than Factor 2)

TAB F N/A Financial Capacity Go/No Go

4.0 TAB A - STANDARD FORM 1442 AND PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

4.1 Submit the SF 1442, completed and signed by a person authorized by the Offeror. Include the completed proposal data sheet (See attachment 1, provided at the end of this Section).

5.0 TAB B – FACTOR 1 - SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

t ypes of crane and fixed hoist-related work, including new construction, alterations, renovations and repairs, and design-build construction of c ranes and fixed hoists. The following list is indicative of the variety of work that may be performed by task orders under this contract:

• SAFETY - Life safety upgrades, industrial safety, hazardous materials, protection of work sites and property, a nd protection of workers.

materials to support crane and fixed hoist rehabilitation work.

• STRUCTURAL – Ability to perform and provide structural engineering-related repairs and/or modifications to support new and rehabilitated crane and fixed hoist work.

• INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROLS - Instrumentation and control systems for repairs and/or modifications to support new and rehabilitated crane and fixed hoist work.

• ELECTRICAL - Ability to perform and provide electrical engineering-related repairs and/or modifications to support new and

Offerors will be evaluated on their experience in two areas: experience with task-order-type contracts and experience in various

• ENVIRONMENTAL – Ability to provide removal and disposal of asbestos, lead-based paint, and other hazardous rehabilitated crane and fixed hoist work.

• MECHANICAL – Ability to perform and provide mechanical engineering-related repairs and/or modifications to support new and rehabilitated crane and fixed hoist work.

5.1 OFFEROR’S SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.1.1 The Contractor shall demonstrate recent, relevant experience on similar projects, using the Project Information Worksheet form (Attachment 2), at the end of the section. Offerors may identify state and local government and private contracts that are similar to the Government’s requirements as outlined in Section 00 21 00 para 1.1. General Description of Work in INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS. If the O fferor is a joint venture, each firm shall provide information, demonstrating experience relevant to their role on this project. Offeror shall provide a copy of the joint venture agreement or letters of commitment for all teaming contractors, agreements and letters of commitment will not count towards the page limitations. Submit projects that are currently well underway (designed and at least 50% construction progress completed) or completed and turned over no longer than six (6) years preceding the date of this solicitation. Offerors shall provide project information on a minimum of three (3) but no more than six (6) completed or substantially complete projects, of which two (2) projects submitted can be currently under construction, that reflect experience in the construction elements referenced in Section 01 00 00 SUMMARY OF WORK, paragraph 1.1. Project examples must include one (1) project with a contract value equal to or greater than $5,000,000; all other projects must have a contract value equal to or greater than $700,000. Provide two (2) crane rehabilitation projects in an occupied facility; one (1) design-build new crane installation project. As a minimum, the Contractor shall provide the data specified in the attached “Project Information” Worksheet. Each project submitted shall be limited to two (2) page per project.

5.1.2 The Offeror may provide a supplemental narrative (not project lists), not to exceed two pages, explaining how any corporate e xperience that is not directly related to the specific projects above is applicable to this project and how the Government will b enefit.

5.1.3 The Offeror should describe any previous teaming experience between current team members, if not described in the p roject list. The above information is limited to projects that are well underway or that have been completed and turned over no llonger than the past six (6) years preceding the date of this solicitation.

5.1.4 Total page count for Factor 1 shall not exceed 12 pages.

5.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

The Government will review the projects provided by the Offeror to evaluate and rate the recent relevant specialized experience of the Offeror with similar projects. Experience with task order contracts may be demonstrated by provision of individual task orders in the experience form that meets the submission requirements as outlined in paragraph 5.1.1. If the Offeror cannot provide suitable relevant experience and the evaluators consider the information provided indicates that the Offeror has no relevant experience, a determination will be made as to the risk this lack of corporate experience presents to the Government;

and the proposal will be evaluated accordingly. The experience of individuals will not be evaluated under this factor.

The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, related experience of the Contractor in crane construction and/or design-build projects. Experience on the similar projects identified in Section 01 00 00 SUMMARY OF WORK will receive more consideration than experience provided in the supplemental narrative. The Government will place greater importance on projects performed as a prime contractor than as a subcontractor.

To determine strengths and weaknesses, the agency will give more consideration to the following:

a. Projects designed for and constructed for the Corps of Engineers.

b. Projects with a value of $4 million or greater.

c. Fully completed projects rather than substantially complete projects. Per paragraph 5.1.1 above, "substantially complete" projects represent "...designed and at least 50% construction progress

d. Projects completed after 2017.

e. Projects that demonstrate experience of the prime contractor personnel proposed in Factor 4 in the same role as their proposed role on this MATOC.

f. Project examples demonstrating prior teaming experience of the prime construction contractor and the design firm to include demonstrated experience of the designer’s personnel proposed in Factor 3 in the same role as their proposed role on this project.

5.2.1 The Offeror must submit the requested information to demonstrate a record of recent, related experience which may include similar state or local government or private counterparts, as described in 00 10 00 SUMMARY OF WORK, paragraph 1.1. Recent experience includes projects well underway (see above criteria) or those completed and turned over within six (6) years of the proposal issue date for this RFP. Joint Venture partners or teaming partners should each 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. If any of the information required is not included in the forms, then the Contractor will be considered non-responsive and evaluated as unacceptable.

5.2.2 The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), other databases; or interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency or to interview owners or references. The Government may check any or all cited references to verify supplied information.

5.2.3 To receive credit for extent (amount) of experience, the Offeror shall demonstrate a history of recent, relevant experience. A firm will not receive credit under this factor for the relevant experience of key personnel proposed for this project. If Offeror represents the combining of two or more companies for the purpose of this RFP, the proposal shall clearly identify the contractual responsibilities of each firm and the work to be performed by each; describe the nature of the association; indicate whether the firms have experience working together in construction ventures, including how long and how many projects. In addition, each company, including joint ventures, shall list their Government contract experience. Provide a copy of the commitment letter of the firms (see Attachment 5) or the Joint Venture Agreement.

5.2.4 The Government will consider extent of recent experience, degree of relationship of such experience to the projects as described in 00 10 00 SUMMARY OF WORK, paragraph 1.1, demonstrated familiarity with applicable codes and local conditions.

Some examples of relevancy to this project may include, but not be limited to:

a. Number, size, type work, complexity, location.

b. Dates (well under way or completed no more than 6 years preceding date of this solicitation).

c. Firm's role and extent of work self-performed (brokering out all work and simply “placing the sidewalks” on a cited project are examples of less relevant experience).

5.2.5 Projects submitted have the following characteristics (combined between all projects submitted):

Five (5) or more disciplines/trades;

Included design, manufacturing, and installation experience as defined in this RFP and as described in Section 01 00 00 SUMMARY OF WORK paragraph 1.1;

Included painting (including lead paint) experience;

5.2.6 Previous design-build experience is not necessary for an acceptable rating. The Government may consider previous DB experience a strength. Similarly, the Government may consider previous recent teaming experience among the team members as value added. The more relevant the experience, the more credit will be given.

6.0 TAB C – FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

6.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

6.1.1 There is no page limit for this factor. For each of the projects submitted under Factor 1, to ensure the agency has all relevant past performance information, the offeror shall submit copies of Federal/DoD/Navy/Army performance reviews that are likely already in the agency’s databases or likely within the agency’s arm’s reach, i.e. Contractor’s copy of CCASS or CPARS evaluations.

6.1.2 For each project under Factor 1 that does not have a CPARS evaluation, offerors shall provide a Past Performance Questionnaire form PPQ-0 (Attachment 2) to a representative of the owner that can provide the owner’ s opinion of the offeror’ s past performance for the project. The Past Performance Questionnaire (Form PPQ-0) included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Offerors should organize all Past Performance Information based on the Factor 1 Projects, which normally have project titles and are numbered 1-5, so that reviewers can match the owner’ s opinion with the corresponding Subfactor 1 Project.

6.1.3 Form PPQ-0 at Attachment 2 shall be utilized and offerors shall submit the PPQ with their proposal submission to the Contracting Office designated proposal submission location. The contract specialist or Contracting Officer will not require the PPQ to be sent directly from the client. The offeror may submit the completed PPQ-0. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’ s point of contact Shawn Brady via email shawn.brady@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. If you have questions regarding the attached questionnaire, or require assistance, please contact the Contract Specialist at 918-669-7670.

6.1.4 Offerors should organize all Past Performance Information based on the Factor 1 Projects, which normally have project titles and are numbered 1-5, so that reviewers can match the owner’s opinion with the corresponding Factor 1 Project. No additional information may be submitted under this factor, unless the Offeror is submitting proposals as a Joint Venture in which case the offeror shall provide the brief narrative as described in paragraph 6.1.15 below. Inclusion of additional information or failure to organize the past performance information in the same order as submitted under Factor 1 will result in the contractor being found unacceptable and may result in the contractor being removed from further consideration.

6.1.5 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.

6.1.6 The offeror is responsible for ensuring that the completed questionnaires are submitted by the closing date.

6.1.7 The Government will evaluate the responses from the customers from which Past Performance Questionnaires have been received. The Government may contact and interview points of contact on the Past Performance Questionnaires. The Government reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the listed references, if the listed reference is not available. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance.

6.1.8 Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency.

6.1.9 To improve accuracy of database searches, the offeror will also provide the CAGE Codes for the prime contractor and all teaming partners, i.e. key subcontractors, Joint Venture Partners, whose experience is being relied on in Factor 1.

6.1.10 The Government may contact references provided as part of Factor 1 – Experience, for information regarding the Offeror’s past performance on the project and for the purposes of assessing and verifying the scope of the work performed. Offerors should provide accurate, current, and complete contact information for references provided in the project descriptions.

6.1.11 No additional past performance information shall be submitted under this Factor. Offers that violate this rule unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and will be evaluated as unacceptable and may result in the contractor being removed from further consideration.

6.1.12 Joint Venture Submission Requirements:

6.1.13 Offerors submitting proposals as a Joint Venture (JV) shall obtain a DUNS number and be registered in the CCR as the offering Joint Venture. The Offeror must provide three (3) to five (5) "recent", "relevant" projects performed by the JV that reflect the JV's ability to perform the work required in this solicitation as required under Factor 1.

6.1.14 If the Offeror cannot provide a sufficient number of projects as the JV to meet the minimum requirement, the Offeror must provide those "recent", "relevant" projects that it has performed as the JV, and then supplement the record with additional "recent", "relevant" projects performed by each JV member in their individual capacities. In such instance, each JV member must satisfy a minimum requirement of two (2) projects, to include any performed as the JV.

6.1.15 If the JV has no "recent", "relevant" projects performed by the JV, then each member of the JV must provide two (2) to three (3) "recent", "relevant" projects performed by the JV member that reflect the JV member's experience commensurate with their role on this project or how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project as required under Factor 1. In such instances the combined experience projects, submitted by each member of the JV, shall not exceed the maximum number of projects stated in paragraph 5.1.1.

6.1.16 In addition to the examples of "Company Specialized Experience" and "Past Performance Surveys", the Joint Venture shall provide a brief narrative stating the roles that each partner of the Joint Venture will perform on this project and how the presented projects demonstrate the JV member's experience commensurate with their role on this project or how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project. The attached “Specialized Experience" and "Past Performance Survey" forms shall be used by the Joint Venture or the JV partners. Explain how the JV is structured.

6.1.17 Verification: 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. An Offeror will be afforded the opportunity to reply to or explain adverse performance information to which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to address.

6.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

The Government will perform a performance confidence assessment of the Offeror’s probability of successfully meeting the contract requirements, considering the degree of success of the recent (well under way or turned over no longer than six (6) years preceding the date of this solicitation), relevant experience. See explanation of “well underway” and relevancy under the Factor “Specialized Experience”. The Government will assess the past performance on projects submitted under the Specialized Experience Factor 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 the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases, review and/or contact Offeror-furnished references, or to review personal knowledge.

6.2.1 The Government will first assess and rate the relevancy of recent projects accomplished by the Offeror to the scope of this contract for overall application to the performance confidence assessment ratings described hereinafter. The past performance relevancy rating are described below:

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

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

6.2.1.3 S omewhat Relevant. Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities

6.2.1.4 N ot Relevant. Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities

6.2.2 6.2.3. 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. If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, the Government will only evaluate past performance of the division or unit submitting the offer or by the team member. 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 confirming to quality, schedule, cost control, customer satisfaction, level of support for such things 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, for example, but not limited to telephone databases, offeror-furnished references, or personal knowledge. The Government also paces a higher value on projects, which provided particularly difficult or unique challenges and the innovative methods the contractor used to resolve problems successfully.

The rating for this factor will be expressed as a degree of confidence in the offeror’s ability to successfully accomplish the contract requirements. The rating system used for the performance confidence assessment is described below.

6.2.2.1 S ubstantial 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.

6.2.2.2 S atisfactory 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

6.2.2.3 L imited 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.

6.2.2.4 N o 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.

6.2.3 U nknown Confidence (Neutral): No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor as defined in FAR clause 52.204-20 Predecessor of Offeror, if relevant. If the Government does not obtain past performance information for the projects identified by the Offeror 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”.

7.0…