W912BV22R0032_0002.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

1. This amendment provides revisions to Section 00 22 11 “Evaluation Criteria and Basis of Aw ard”. Please see the revised Section 00 22 11 for full details.

2. The POC for this amendment is the Contract Specialist: Tyler Godw in, tyler.l.godw in@usace.army.mil, 918-669-7281

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 22

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 15-Jul-2022

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W912BV22R0032

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

27-Jun-2022

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

15-Jul-2022

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:

W912BV22R0032

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SECTION 00 11 00 - SF 1442 AND CLIN SCHEDULE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 22 11 - PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, EVALUATION CRITERIA, BASIS OF

AWARD ONE-STEP-BEST VALUE, DESIGN-BUILD (SINGLE AWARD)

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION CRITERIA

SECTION 00 22 11

EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS OF

AWARD

*AM0002

1.0 OVERVIEW

This is a competitive best value solicitation for a construction contract for the FY 22 Copan Dam Toe Drain Replacement project located at Copan Dam in Copan, Oklahoma. The Government will evaluate proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein and award a firm fixed-price contract to the responsible firm whose proposal conforms to all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and is determined the overall best value to the Government.

The selected contractor shall construct the project in accordance with the plans and specifications.

1.1 WHO CAN SUBMIT

a. Firms formally organized as construction contractors, firms associated specifically for this project, or any other interested parties may submit proposals. Associations may be as joint ventures or as key team subcontractors.

b. Organization Conflicts of Interest (OCI) Disclosure: The Offeror shall provide a disclosure statement with its proposal which concisely describes all the relevant facts concerning past or present organizational conflicts of interest relating to work on this project. In the same statement, and if applicable, the Offeror shall provide information to assure the Government that the conflicts of interest have been mitigated and/or neutralized to the maximum extent possible. If a conflict of interest is discovered after award of this contract, the Contracting Office will make a decision whether to terminate the contract.

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

The Contracting Officer intends to award a firm fixed-price contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, considering all non-price factors described herein, and price. All evaluation factors, other than price, when combined, are considered more important than price. The intent of this solicitation is to obtain the best proposal for the required work. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers. The Government will not award a contract if the proposal contains a deficiency, as defined in FAR 15.001. The Government reserves the right to reject any offer if the offer is not in the best interest of the Government.

3.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS

3.1 REQUIREMENT FOR SEPARATE PRICE AND TECHNICAL PROPOSALS

3.1.1 Each Offeror must submit both a Price Proposal and a Technical Proposal. The price proposal and the technical proposal must be submitted as separate volumes. Ensure that the outside of each separate volume is clearly marked to indicate its contents and the identity of the Offeror. Additionally, clearly identify the “original” price proposal and the “original” technical proposal on the outside cover.

3.1.2 The price proposal and the technical proposal must be received by the closing date and time set for receipt of proposals.

3.1.3 No dollar amounts from the price proposal are to be included in the technical proposal.

3.1.4 All information intended to be evaluated as part of the technical proposal must be submitted as part of the technical proposal (Volume 1). Do not merely cross-reference similar material in the price proposal, or vice versa. Also, do not include links to websites in lieu of incorporating information into your proposal.

3.1.5 Deviations, Exception and Assumptions

Deviations and exceptions to the terms and conditions of the solicitation are not allowed. Should the offer include any standard company terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation, the proposal may be deemed “unacceptable” and thus ineligible for award. Any questions related to specific terms and conditions of the solicitation must be resolved prior to submission of the proposal. If the Offeror must make any assumptions prior to submitting the proposal, the Offeror shall list and describe in detail the assumptions on the first page of each tab. All assumptions shall be fully supported with the offeror’s rationale and shall fully explain the impact, if any, on the performance and/or specific requirement of the RFP. The offeror shall clearly describe on the proposal cover sheet submitted with the price proposal any assumptions made concerning contractual and/or technical terms and include the monetary impact on the solicitation with the price proposal. This information will not be evaluated separately but may impact the evaluation of other factors.

3.2 DISCUSSIONS

The Government does not intend to enter into discussions with offerors prior to making an award. Offerors are encouraged to present their best technical proposal and prices in their initial proposal submission. However, in accordance with FAR Part 15.306, should discussions become necessary, the Government reserves the right to hold them. If this occurs, a competitive range will be determined, and offerors will be notified. The competitive range may be limited for purposes of efficiency in accordance with (IAW) FAR Part 15.306(c)(2).

3.3 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS.

3.3.1 Submit only the electronic files specifically authorized and/or required elsewhere in this section. Do not submit excess information, to include audio-visual materials, electronic media, etc. All pages should be numbered and include working bookmarks.

3.3.2 Electronic copies of each volume shall be submitted through the Solicitation Module of the Procurement

Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) suite at https://piee.eb.mil/ using the applicable solicitation number.

Proposals submitted by mail or hand-carried will not be evaluated. Proposals sent through proprietary or third-party File Transfer Protocol (FTP) sites or DoD SAFE will not be retrieved. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to confirm receipt of proposals. All proposals received after the exact time specified for receipt shall be treated as late submissions and will not be considered except under facts and circumstances allowed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). For instructions on how to post an offer, please refer to the Posting Offer demo: https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf.

It is the Offeror’s responsibility to obtain written confirmation of receipt of all electronic files of the full proposal by the DTRA Contracting office. In the event that the Solicitation Module is down, the alternate method for proposal submission is via email to: dtra.belvoir.al.mbx.fbo-notices@mail.mil ONLY. The Offeror must obtain prior approval from the Contracting Officer to use the alternate submission method. Offerors are responsible for ensuring electronic copies are virus-free and shall run an anti-virus scan before submission.

Electronic copies of each volume shall be compatible with the following software products: Adobe Acrobat Reader 11 and Microsoft Office Suite 2016. Narrative portions of the proposal shall be in Adobe Acrobat portable document file (pdf) searchable text format. Offerors shall not embed sound or video (e.g., MPEG) files into the proposal files. Electronic files shall be clearly identified for each volume, section, and item. 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.

3.3.3 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. Proposals shall not exceed page limitations as defined in the individual Factor limitations noted in the paragraphs below, excluding the cover sheet and Table of Contents. A page is defined as text or information on one side of the paper. The Government will not evaluate any information beyond the total page limitations noted 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.

3.3.1 “Confidential” projects cannot be submitted to demonstrate capability unless all the information required for evaluation as specified herein can be provided to the Government as part of the Offeror’s technical proposal.

Proposals containing information that is not to be disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, must be clearly marked in accordance with the instructions at FAR 52.215-1, “Instructions to Offerors— Competitive Acquisition,” paragraph (e), “Restriction on disclosure and use of data.”

3.3.2 For submissions with page limitations, the pages will be counted as follows: one side of the paper is one page; information on both the back and front of one sheet of paper will be counted as two pages. Where authorized, fold-out pages (11" x 14" or 11" x 17") will count as one page. Tables of content, proposal cover letters, and tabs between proposal information do not count toward any page limitations in the proposal.

3.3.3 Proposal revisions 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; be clearly marked “REVISED;” show the date of revision; be submitted in appropriate number of copies (e.g., if two (2) copies of the original page was required, then two (2) copies of the revised page will also be required); and shall be a different color than the original pages they are to replace.

3.4 SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (VOLUME 1)

3.4.1 Number of Sets of the Technical Proposal. The Offeror shall provide the complete Technical Proposal electronically and the complete Price Proposal in a separate electronic document. The submission shall contain the entire Technical Proposal in .pdf format using Adobe Acrobat software; do NOT scan the document(s) into a .pdf file. The text portion of the complete Technical Proposal shall be contained as a single .pdf file and Sections of the proposal shall be bookmarked (linked to the index) in logical order.

3.4.2 Format and Contents of the Technical Proposal and List of Tabs. The original copy of the technical proposal will be appropriately labeled as such. Each set shall be organized using the tabs specified in the chart below.

3.4.3 Page Limitations. The following page limitations are established for each Factor/Subfactor: Factor 1 – Performance Capability:

Subfactor 1 – Specialized Experience – Limited to 30 pages. 2 pages per project and a maximum of 5 forms per contractor/subcontractor (See paragraph 5.1.1).

Subfactor 2 – Technical Approach – Limited to 20 pages Subfactor 3 – Key Personnel – Limited to 2 pages for each resume provided Subfactor 4 – Organization– Limited to 5 pages

Factor 2 – Proposed Contract Duration and Summary Schedule - No page limit Factor 3 – Past Performance – No page limitation

3.5 SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PRICE PROPOSAL (VOLUME 2)

3.5.1 Number of Sets of the Price Proposal. Submit one ORIGINAL of the Price Proposal electronically.

3.5.2 Size Restrictions and Page Limits. The following are established for each

Factor/Subfactor: Factor 4 – Section 00 11 00 Pricing Schedule

Use only 8 ½” x 11” pages. There are no page limits set for the Price Proposal. However, limit your response to information required by this solicitation. Excess information will not be considered in the Government’s evaluation.

3.5.3 Format and Contents of the Price Proposal and List of Tabs. The Price Proposal shall be appropriately labeled as such and shall be organized as indicated in the following chart. Note: If the Offeror is not required to submit any information under a listed Tab (such as a JV Agreement) in accordance with the instructions below, that tab can be omitted. However, do not renumber the subsequent tabs.

4.0 PROPOSAL CONTENTS AND RELATED EVALUATION FACTORS

VOLUME 1 – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Factor / Subfactor / Element

Location Description Relative Importance

FACTOR 1 PERFORMANCE

CAPABILITY

Most Important Factor (equal to Factors 2, 3 & 4 combined)

Subfactor 1 Vol 1 Tab A Specialized Experience Most Important Subfactor (less important than Subfactors 2, 3, & 4 combined)

Subfactor 2 Vol 1 Tab B Technical Approach 2nd Most Important Subfactor (more important than Subfactors 3 & 4 combined)

Subfactor 3 Vol 1 Tab C Key Personnel 3rd Most Important Subfactor

Subfactor 4 Vol 1 Tab D Organization 4th Most Important Subfactor

FACTOR 2 Vol 1 Tab E PROPOSED CONTRACT

DURATION AND

SUMMARY SCHEDULE

Less Important than Factor 1 and equal to Factor 3; More Important than Factor 4

FACTOR 3 Vol 1 Tab F PAST PERFORMANCE Less Important than Factor 1 and equal to Factor 2; More Important than Factor 4

VOLUME 2 – PRICE PROPOSAL

Factor / Subfactor / Element

Location Description Relative Importance

N/A Vol 2 Tab 1 Proposal Cover Sheet Not Rated

N/A Vol 2 Tab 2 Signed Letter Responding to RFP, SF1442 and Acknowledgement of Amendments

Not Rated

FACTOR 4 Vol 2 Tab 3 SECTION 00 11 00, PRICING

SCHEDULE

All technical factors, when combined, are more important than price

N/A Vol 2 Tab 4 Bid Guarantee (Bid Bond) Not Rated

N/A Vol 2 Tab 5 Representations & Not Rated

N/A Vol 2 Tab 6 JV Agreement (if applicable) Not Rated

5.0 VOLUME 1 – FACTOR 1 – PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY

Most Important Factor (equal to Factors 2, 3 & 4 combined)

5.1 VOLUME 1 – TAB A: SUBFACTOR 1 - SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE

Most Important Subfactor (less important than Subfactors 2, 3, & 4 combined)

5.1.1 Submission Requirements:

Demonstrate the specialized experience of the Offeror and/or proposed team, including sub-contractors, on projects same/similar in size and complexity to that described in the solicitation for same/similar construction services. If using subcontractors as part of the proposed team to demonstrate experience, describe the role they will play in this project and the percentage of work they will perform.

The Contractor shall complete a minimum of three (3), but no more than five (5), “Experience Information” forms, attached at the end of this section (Attachment 1), in response to this factor. All blocks must be filled in and all data should be accurate, current, and complete. All projects submitted must be at least 50% complete within the last 5 years. At least two (2) of the projects provided must be valued at over $2,000,000.

5.1.2 Evaluation Criteria:

a. The Government will evaluate the extent of recent, related experience of the offeror in regard to their role on this project. 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. Offerors demonstrating experience with projects of similar size and complexity will be viewed more favorably by the Government.

(1) The Offeror must submit the requested information to demonstrate a record of recent, related experience in construction, for the project (which may include similar state or local government or private counterparts) included in this solicitation. Recent experience includes projects well underway (see above criteria) or those completed and turned over within 5 years of the proposal issue date for this RFP for construction experience. Joint Venture partners should each demonstrate experience commensurate with their role on this project or how their experience qualifies them for their role on this project. If any of the information required is not included in the form (Attachment 1), then the Contractor will be considered non- responsive and evaluated as unacceptable for this Subfactor.

(2) The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects by reviewing the Federal Government’s Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), 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.

(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.

(4) 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:

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

(b) Dates (well under way or completed no more than 5 years preceding date of

Solicitation).

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

5.2 VOLUME 1 - TAB B: SUBFACTOR 2 - TECHNICAL APPROACH

2nd Most Important Subfactor (more important than Subfactors 3 & 4 combined)

5.2.1 Submission Requirements: Limit the information to 20 pages or less; clearly but concisely describe the technical approach to execution.

a. Offeror's Understanding - Describe challenges, risks, and constraints associated with the project and how the offeror intends to address each with means and methods, resources, or internal organizational processes. Include a description of means and methods to be employed to minimize the impacts of the variability in river flows and tail water elevations to work execution.

*AM0002

b. Floating plant - List the type, length, capacity, speed, and availability of any self-propelled plant or vessel planned to move any non- self-propelled plant to be used. Include the river flow reading in cubic feet per second at which the floating plant must be moved away from the dam to safe areas and how the offeror arrived at that value. Define the minimum qualifications required for the Officers and crew of any floating plant to be utilized. The Offeror shall be required to provide the proposed floating plant for construction.

c. Work Platforms - Describe the method(s) to be utilized by the offeror to deliver personnel, equipment, and materials to the gates to perform the work as well as the type of work platforms intended to be utilized. If the work platform is intended to be a scaffolding system supported by the dam structure provide a sketch showing the concept including details of attachment to the structure and a narrative as to how the contractor will ensure the scaffolding will be structurally sufficient to support the work. Define the water flow and elevation that would require workers begin removing equipment from any scaffolding system as well as the water flow and elevation at which no personnel would be allowed on the work platform.

d. Gate stability - Describe the means and method(s) that the offeror will utilize to measure and document the existing gates stability, location, and dimensions prior to work, how the offeror intends to support the gate during construction including a narrative describing how water elevation, flows, and protection from floating debris was considered as well as a conceptual drawing of the support that clearly identifies the bottom elevation of the gate in the supported position and any attachments of the support system to the structure, how the offeror will ensure the gate maintains stability, location, and its dimensions during construction, how the offeror intends to control weld distortion, and how the offeror will address any changes to the gate location or dimension that do occur as a result of the repair process.

e. Means and methods - Describe in narrative format the means and methods for the various repairs not already addressed in paragraph a - d. Outline the proposed sequencing approach for construction, equipment to be used, etc.

f. Self-Performed Work - Generally describe the items the offeror will self-perform to comply with the requirements in Section 00 72 00 for self-performed work.

5.2.2 Evaluation Criteria:

a. The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, and any deficiencies in the plan. The Government will evaluate the firm’s understanding of the requirements described in Division 01 plans and technical specifications of the Solicitation and the capability to execute the project. The Government places a higher value on an offer that clearly shows an understanding of the challenges, risks, and constraints associated with the project and has a clearly defined plan to address them. Some specific evaluation considerations are listed above in Section 5.2.1 a thru e;

although, this is not an all- inclusive list.

b. Self-Performed Work: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposal to ensure that the self- performed work complies with the requirements of Section 00 72 00 for self-performed work.

5.3 VOLUME 1 - TAB C: SUBFACTOR 3 - KEY PERSONNEL

3rd Most Important Subfactor

5.3.1 Submission Requirements:

The Offeror shall 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, 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:

a. Name and title

b. Project assignment

c. Name of firm with which associated

d. Years’ experience in the role identified.

e. Years’ experience with this firm and with other firms

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

g. Active professional registration, year first registered, if applicable

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

Minimum experience requirements for personnel shall be in accordance with Division 01 sections. Unless otherwise specified in Division 01, each individual shall have a minimum of seven years of experience in their respective position.

The contractor shall obtain the Contracting Officer's written consent before making any substitution for these designated in-house personnel, subcontractors, associates, or consultants. If the Contractor proposes a substitution, it shall submit the same type of information that was submitted in the accepted proposal to the Contracting Officer for evaluation and approval. The level of qualifications and experience submitted in the accepted proposal or that required by the solicitation, whichever is greater, is the minimum standard for any substitution.

5.3.2 Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate the required information to determine how well the Offeror identifies and demonstrates that its key personnel meet or exceed minimum qualifications necessary to perform construction.

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. If alternates are proposed for key positions, the evaluation rating will consider the lesser qualified or experienced person, if there is a difference.

5.4 VOLUME 1, TAB D: SUBFACTOR 4 - ORGANIZATION

4th Most Important Subfactor

5.4.1 Submission Requirements:

a. Provide information that describes the offeror’s organizational approach to executing the construction contract per the detailed requirements herein. Limit the information to 5 pages or less;

clearly but concisely describe the organizational and technical approach to project management and execution.

b. Organization: Describe what firms, their resources and how their resources will be utilized, their roles and responsibilities and any contractual arrangements that have been established. Clearly describe any teaming or joint venture arrangements, including a clear description of each firm’s roles and responsibilities on the project. A copy of the teaming or joint venture agreement(s) may be appended to the plan (not included in the page limitation). Include a simple organizational chart, illustrating the organization, including the proposed quality control group(s). Present a matrix of responsibilities for each firm in executing the key work breakdown structure activities of the project, including construction activities for each major feature. Identify the firms chosen for the project if not to be self- performed. The Offeror shall be required to obtain the Contracting Officer’s approval for any substitution of firms listed. Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing how the construction process will be managed and the authorities and the delegations of authority within the team. Include a key personnel organization chart that clearly depicts the key positions and the names of the personnel, their firm affiliations and their job locations, their job/position title within the organization. The key personnel organization chart shall be consistent with the corporate organization chart, with the matrix of responsibilities assigned to the firms, and with the list of key personnel to be provided under the Tab, “Key Personnel.”

c. Quality Control: Describe the team’s quality control approach, corporate systems and capabilities to maintain quality control of the construction. Describe the proposed quality control organization, including the proposed staffing plan. Provide information on how you will handle internal and external requests for information, shop drawings, progress meetings, site visits, contract completion, closeout, as built, and completion documentation. 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.

d. Safety Plan: 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. The intent is to provide enough detail to demonstrate the Offeror’s understanding of the project; however, it is not the intent for the Offeror to provide the amount of detail that will be required in the pre-work submittals contained in Division 01 of this RFP.

5.4.2 Evaluation Criteria:

a. The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the plan. The Government will evaluate the firm’s understanding of the requirements described in Division 01 plans and technical specifications of the Solicitation and the capability to execute the project. Some additional specific evaluation considerations are listed below. This list is not all-inclusive.

b. Organization. The Government will evaluate the clarity and strength of the overall organization and how well it is organized, structured and staffed to execute the entire scope of work. If applicable, joint venture participants’ contribution to the organization should be commensurate with their skills and background.

c. Quality Control. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s capabilities and understanding of the contractually required quality control processes for construction. The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the staffing plan to cover all required tasks and responsibilities.

d. Safety Plan: The Government will evaluate the narrative for realism, logic, and understanding of the contractual requirements in regard to the safety plan.

6.0 VOLUME 1 - TAB E: FACTOR 2 - PROPOSED CONTRACT DURATION AND

SUMMARY SCHEDULE

Less Important than Factor 1 and equal to Factor 3, More Important than Factor 4

6.1 Submission Requirements:

a. The offeror shall propose a contract duration in the appropriate location on the pricing schedule not to exceed the maximum contract duration specified in the Special Contract Requirement (SCR) entitled COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK. The proposed duration, if accepted, shall become the required contract duration.

b. The offeror shall provide a narrative to describe how they will utilize the schedule to manage the project, how they will address delays, and how they will phase the work. (up to 2 pages)

c. Submit a summary level schedule for construction including any construction phasing. Schedules or diagrams may be provided separately in a size that is easily read and shall be bound and clearly labeled as Tab 2. This summary schedule will, after contract award, be replaced with a project schedule as required by Specification Section PROJECT SCHEDULE. The summary schedule shall be task oriented, indicating the number of calendar days, after notice to proceed, by which milestones are to be achieved. Offeror may use a critical path or other method of his choice;

however, schedules shall be graphically represented. The proposed summary schedule shall reflect the proposed contract duration.

Give attention to the following features:

(1) Show the overall construction phase for all major item(s).

(2) Show milestones for completion of any mandatory sequenced activities.

(3) Show completion, inspection, acceptance, and turnover of each gate.

(4) Show turnover of the project. Identify any proposed phased turnovers (if applicable). The time to complete the project and turnover to the Government must consider the requirement for the Contractor’s CQC completion inspection and the subsequent joint Contractor-Government turnover inspection.

(5) Show as-built submissions.

(6) Constraints: Offeror must demonstrate the capability and flexibility to plan and schedule the complete project to meet the proposed contract completion period. Clearly identify any constraints on the schedules presented (e.g., labor or material availability, permits, weather, etc.). Indicate the anticipated overall critical path on the schedule.

The intent is to provide enough detail to demonstrate the offeror’s understanding of the project; however, it is not the intent for the Offeror to provide the amount of detail that will be required in the pre-work submittals contained in Division 01 of this RFP.

6.2 Evaluation Criteria:

6.2.1 Proposed Contract Duration: The proposed contract duration, if accepted, will become the contractually binding completion period. The Government will evaluate the contract duration, as proposed by the Offeror in the Pricing Schedule, not to exceed the maximum allowed duration shown in the SCR entitled COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION AND COMPLETION OF WORK. In assessing the reasonableness of the proposed contract duration, the Government may consider how well the proposed summary schedule supports the proposed duration, as well as use other information, such as but not limited to independent judgment concerning logic, constraints and typical construction durations. A proposed contract duration shorter than the maximum allowed duration will receive additional rating consideration, provided it is realistic and deemed to be achievable. The Government will consider an unreasonably condensed contract duration, which places additional cost or schedule risk on the Government, or which may create a risk of contract or performance failure, as a significant weakness or a deficiency, depending upon each evaluator’s judgment. During the subsequent comparison between proposals, differences between proposed contract durations of at least three weeks (differences of 21 calendar days between proposed contract durations) will be considered an advantage to the Government, with greater differences also considered, accordingly. No advantage will be considered between proposals for differences less than 21 calendar days.

6.2.2 Schedule Management: The Government will evaluate the summary required in 6.1 b above.

A proposal providing a solid understanding of construction phasing and schedule management shall be given preference.

6.2.3 Summary Schedule: The Government will evaluate the summary schedule for construction. The length of the schedule must match the proposed contract duration. If it is shorter than the proposed contract duration, it offers no advantage to the Government because it is non-binding, only representing a preliminary planned schedule. A schedule shorter than the proposed contract duration may indicate the Offeror is placing additional risk on the Government for any delays between the scheduled completion date and the required contract completion period. Both parties shall assume field overhead costs are included in the contract price for the full proposed contract duration. Therefore, the Government believes that there is no valid need to shorten the schedule less than the full proposed contract duration.

The Government will evaluate the schedule to assess project scope depth of understanding and restrictions which must be considered in the schedule, e.g., permitting, long lead items, phasing, etc. The Government will evaluate the strength of understanding of events associated with coordinating submittals, the firm's capability to schedule the complete project within the proposed contract duration and the realism of the schedule. A schedule that offers advantage(s) to the Government over one that merely indicates an adequate understanding of the scope, restrictions, major milestones and general understanding of the various events that can affect start and completion of construction, will receive additional consideration.

7.0 VOLUME 1 -TAB F: FACTOR 3 - PAST PERFORMANCE

Less Important than Factor 1 and equal to Factor 2, More Important than Factor 4

7.1.1 Submission Requirements:

a. For the projects listed under Factor 1, Subfactor 1 – Experience, the Government will query the

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) to validate past performance ratings on Department of Defense contracts and any other past performance information the Government deems necessary to evaluate a contractor’s past performance.

b. For each project that does not have a CPARS evaluation, Offerors shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included at Attachment 2 to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance under such contracts. The Past Performance Questionnaire 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, Subfactor 1 – Experience. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires shall be submitted with your proposal. This does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

c. The information contained in the questionnaires will be used to evaluate the offeror’s past performance. If any negative past performance information is received, the contractor will be given an opportunity to provide rebuttal. Each contractor shall provide at least three (3) past performance ratings. Any rating an offeror has in PPIRS for the projects listed under Factor 1, Subfactor 1 – Experience will count toward this requirement. The offeror is responsible for ensuring that the Contracting Officer (KO) has received a minimum of three (3) questionnaires prior to the proposal due date/time or has provided written notification to the KO that they have current applicable ratings in PPIRS. Entities that have no past customers shall notify the KO in writing, prior to the date and time established for the RFP closing, that they have had no previous clients and that the minimum number of questionnaires cannot be provided. It is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure that the reference documentation is provided, as the Government may not make additional requests for past performance information from the references. Do not request past performance questionnaires on projects that have final PPIRS evaluations. If a past performance questionnaire is received on a project where a final PPIRS evaluation exists, the PPIRS evaluation will serve as the official rating of record for evaluation purposes.

d. The Government may contact references provided as part of Factor 1, Subfactor 1 – Experience for information regarding the Offeror’s past performance on a 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.

e. 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 PPIRS and/or System for Award Management (SAM), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate);

inquiries of owner representative(s); Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS); Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS); and any other official source available to the Government.

f. 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.

7.1.2 Joint Venture Submission Requirements. Offerors submitting proposals as a Joint Venture (JV) shall obtain a DUNS number and be registered in the CCR and/or SAM 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 by paragraph 5.1 “Specialized Experience.”

a. If the JV Offeror cannot provide a sufficient number of projects to meet the minimum requirement, the JV Offeror must provide "recent," "relevant" projects performed by 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 the minimum requirement of three (3) projects, to include any performed as the JV.

b. If the JV Offeror 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 that reflect the JV member's ability to perform the work required in this solicitation as required by paragraph 5.1 “Specialized Experience.”

c. In addition to the examples of "Company Specialized Experience" and "Past Performance

Surveys", the Joint Venture shall provide a brief narrative not to exceed two (2) pages 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.

d. Verification: The Government reserves the right to verify the experience record of cited projects or other recent projects not submitted by reviewing the 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 that the Offeror has not had an opportunity to previously address.

7.2 Evaluation Criteria:

7.2.1 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 team’s recent (well under way or turned over no longer than five (5) 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.

7.2.2 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 projects will include those submitted under the Specialized Experience Factor as well as from other sources described above. The past performance relevancy rating 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

Not Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of

7.2.3 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. 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 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 places 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.

Substantial Confidence: Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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

Limited Confidence: Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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

Unknown Confidence (Neutral): No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

7.2.4 Each entity (firm) will be rated on its own performance or that of its predecessor, as defined in FAR 52.204-20, if relevant. An entity may establish past performance based on the past performance of its proposed key personnel, apart from that of the entity. 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”.

8.0 VOLUME 2 – PRICE PROPOSAL

4th Most Important Factor

8.1 GENERAL

Submit the price proposal (Volume 2) in a separate pdf file labeled “Volume 2 – Price Proposal”.

8.1.1 Submission Requirements:

a. Volume 2, TAB 1: Proposal Cover Sheet.