W912DW19R0014_Amendment_0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Amendment 0001

(Please see continuation sheet)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 19

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 02-Aug-2019

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 W912DW19R0014

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

28-Jun-2019

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 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

02-Aug-2019

CODE

USA ENGINEER DISTRICT, SEATTLE

ATTN: CENWS-CT

4735 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH, BLDG. 1202

SEATTLE WA 98134-2388

W912DW 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912DW19R0014

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0001

1. This amendment provides for the following changes:

a. Section L is revised

b. Section M is revised.

2. The bid submittal time and date of 7 Aug 2019 at 1:00 PM PT is CHANGED to 21 Aug 2019 at 1:00 PM PT.

3. Section 12 of the SF 33 is revised as follows: In compliance with the above, the undersigned agrees, if this offer is accepted within 120 calendar days from the date for receipt of offers specified above, to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the designated point(s), within the time specified in the schedule.

4. The attached revised sections are to be replaced in their entirety. All portions of the revised sections shall apply whether or not changes have been indicated.

5. A second amendment is expected to be issued.

6. NOTICE: Bidders must acknowledge receipt of this amendment by number and date on offer.

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 07-Aug-2019 01:00 PM to 21-Aug-2019 01:00 PM.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

1. INTRODUCTION

Your firm is invited to submit a proposal in response to Request for Proposal (RFP) Number W912DW19R0014 for the project entitled “Albeni Falls Dam Main Unit Transformer Supply, Seattle District: Albeni Falls Dam, U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)”. The Government intends to procure this requirement on a competitive basis in accordance with the provisions set forth in FAR Part 15 Contracting by Negotiations and within this Request For Proposal (RFP).

The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted in hard copy, with accompanying digital copies, as set forth below. The RFP shall provide the Government address and receipt date for proposal submittal.

The offeror’s proposal shall consist of three (3) volumes. The Volumes are 1 – Proposal Compliance, 2 – Technical Proposal, and 3 – Price Proposal.

The use of hyperlinks in electronic proposals is prohibited.

Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

2. GENERAL PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Binding

Each volume shall be submitted in a separate three-ring binder, of standard letter (8 ½ x 11-inch) size and hardback construction. Any pages that are changed (as a result of negotiations or proposal revisions) should be of a different color and have changed information clearly marked by a vertical line in the right margin of the page. The revised pages shall be dated. Each binder shall be clearly labeled with its Title and a copy number (e.g., copy 1 of 5) on both the cover and the spine.

2.2 Organization – Volumes

The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

a. Volume 1: Proposal Compliance

b. Volume 2: Technical Proposal

c. Volume 3: Price Proposal

2.3 Quantity

The following quantities of copies shall be submitted:

a. Volume 1: Proposal Compliance

1 original – clearly marked 4 copies 1 electronic (defined in paragraph 3 of this Section)

b. Volume 2: Technical Proposal

4 copies

c. Volume 3: Price Proposal

2.4 Content – General

The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Proposals must set forth full, accurate, and complete information as required by this RFP. Absence of information will be deemed as if no support for that criterion was provided. Offerors submitting proposals should limit submission to data essential for evaluation of proposals so that a minimum of time and money is expended in preparing information required by the Request for Proposal (RFP). Penalty for making false statements in proposals is prescribed in 18 U.S.C. 1001.

2.5 Table of Contents

A Table of Contents should be incorporated within all Volumes.

2.6 Paper size

Proposals are to be on 8 ½ x 11-inch paper, to the maximum extent practicable. Drawings shall be 11x17-inch paper, folded to the same dimensions as the 8 ½ x 11-inch paper. Elaborate artwork, expensive paper and bindings, and expensive/ extensive visual and other presentation aids are not necessary. Each proposal should address the requests for information in the order identified in Section L.

2.7 Tabs

Contents of binders shall be tabbed and labeled to afford easy identification from the proposal Table of Contents.

Tabs shall extend beyond the edge of the 8 ½ x 11-inch paper. Tabs are further defined in paragraph 4 of this Section.

2.8 Page Numbering

All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and RFP number in the header and/or footer.

2.9 Page Limit

The number of pages for Volume 1 submission is limited to 10 pages (5 pages double sided). Page limit for Volume 2 submission is limited to 50 pages (25 pages double sided), not including the past performance information. Any pages after the 10-page count for Volume 1 and 50-page count for Volume 2 (not including past performance) will not be reviewed. There is no page limit for Volume 3, Factor 5.

3. ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

3.1 File format

The electronic proposal shall be Portable Document Format, filename extension: “.pdf” and suitable for viewing in Adobe Reader. Text must be searchable.

3.2 Number of files

The proposal contents shall be presented as a separate PDF file for each Volume – (1) Proposal Compliance, (2) Technical and (3) Price.

3.3 Method of submission

The electronic version of the proposals shall be submitted on a CD with your proposal:

a. Compact Disc (CD): Suitably protected and submitted with the physical binders. CDs may be placed in the front pocket of the ORIGINAL copy only. Each disc shall be externally labeled with the volume number, date, and the offeror’s name. Zip disks and USB thumb drives are not permitted.

3.4 Content

Content shall match that of the original binder copy. Page numbers shall match the original binder copy. If the hard-copy proposal differs from the electronic version, the hard copy will govern.

3.5 Bookmarks

Electronic Proposals shall be bookmarked. At a minimum, bookmarks shall be provided to match the tabs used in the physical copy. Bookmark titles shall match the tab numbering and labels and the volume table of contents.

Additional bookmarks may be provided, but shall be nested under the appropriate tab bookmark.

3.6 Hyperlinks

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

3.7 Attachments

Attachments to the electronic copy are not permitted.

4. TABS

Tabs shall match the following numbering and title, and shall be reflected in the table of contents. Additional tabs are allowed, but not necessary. Additional tabs shall be alpha characters.

REQUIRED TABS FOR VOLUME 1: PROPOSAL COMPLIANCE

Table of Contents

Factor 1 (Tab 1): Nameplate Drawings and Data of Proposed Units

REQUIRED TABS FOR VOLUME 2: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Factor 2 (Tab 1): Experience

Subfactor 1 (Tab 1): Site Assembly and Erection Experience

Subfactor 2 (Tab 1): Transformer Manufacturing Facility Experience

Factor 3 (Tab 2): Efficiency

Subfactor 1 (Tab 2): Load Losses

Subfactor 2 (Tab 2): No-Load Losses

Subfactor 3 (Tab 2): Sound Level

Factor 4 (Tab 3): Past Performance

REQUIRED TABS FOR VOLUME 3: PRICE PROPOSAL

Factor 5: Price Proposal

Tab 1: SF33, Solicitation, Offer and Award

Tab 2: Cost/Price Schedule

Tab 3: Representations and Certifications

Tab 4: Bid Guarantee

5. DETAILED CONTENT REQUIREMENTS FOR VOLUME 1: PROPOSAL COMPLIANCE FACTOR

Factor 1: Nameplate Drawings & Data (VOLUME 1)

* This Factor only will be rated as Acceptable/Unacceptable. Proposals determined to be Unacceptable on this factor will not be subject to further evaluation.

Offerors shall provide the following transformer nameplate information:

Three phase;

Frequency;

kVA rating at each cooling level;

Winding diagram indicating:

o Voltage of high voltage winding (H);

o Voltage of low voltage winding (X);

o Location of required winding taps;

Class and stages of cooling;

Percent design impedance at the maximum kVA rating;

Basic impulse level (BIL) ratings for primary winding (H), secondary winding (X), and high-voltage neutral (H0).

Offerors shall submit up to six sheets showing the following information. Outline views may be combined on a sheet:

Proposed transformer outline: Plan View Proposed transformer outline: Segment One Elevation View Proposed transformer outline: Segment Two Elevation View Proposed transformer outline: Segment Three Elevation View Proposed transformer outline: Segment Four Elevation View Proposed transformer nameplate, including design impedance, and a winding diagram with taps

Offerors shall submit a description of the proposed construction for the core, lamination thickness, high voltage coil construction, and low voltage coil construction.

6. DETAILED CONTENT REQUIREMENTS FOR VOLUME 2: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Technical Proposal, Volume 2: (one original and four copies and one pdf. file on a CD-ROM) consists of three factors with sub-factors listed in tabular form. Include all information required in Section M. This section shall be specific and complete, demonstrating a thorough understanding of the requirements. It shall include, where applicable, diagrams and/or charts. Repeating or restating the specifications without sufficient elaboration will be determined to show a lack of understanding of the requirement.

Factor 2: Experience (TAB 1)

The offeror shall submit a minimum of three, but no more than five recent and relevant projects for each subfactor.

If the Offeror uses a subcontractors experience to meet the requirements under either subfactor, the Offeror must submit a letter of commitment from the subcontractor. Upon award, subcontractors proposed to be used to complete the assembly, erection, and/or manufacturing portion of the contract shall not be substituted without the Contracting Officer’s written prior approval.

Factor 2: Sub-factor 1 (TAB 1) - Site Assembly and Erection Experience

The offeror shall submit a minimum of three but no more than five recent and relevant projects demonstrating transformer site assembly and erection experience comparable in size, scope, and complexity with the site assembly and erection requirements for this project. Project information for each project submitted shall contain:

Project Name/Title Name of a representative for the project and contact information;

Contract awarded amount;

Project location;

Project start date;

Project completion date; and Transformer manufacturer;

A detailed description of the project and the contractor’s involvement in the project (state percentage performed and whether performed as subcontractor or prime);

Factor 2: Sub-factor 2 (TAB 1) - Transformer Manufacturing Facility Experience

The offeror shall submit the following information for all transformers manufactured, in Sub-factor 1:

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

Single or three-phase;

Rating (in MVA);

Voltage class (kV);

Year manufactured/installed; and Fiber-optic temperature probes embedded in windings.

The offeror shall demonstrate transformer manufacturing experience comparable in size, scope, and complexity with the transformer manufacturing requirements for this project.

Factor 3: Efficiency (TAB 2)

Submit a single sheet noting:

Subfactor 1: Proposed no-load losses, in kW Subfactor 2: Proposed load losses, in kW Subfactor 3: Proposed sound level, in dB

The values submitted on this sheet shall become the manufacturer’s guarantees as tested during the factory acceptance tests.

Factor 4: Past Performance (TAB 3)

If a completed CPARS evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal. If there is not a completed CPARS evaluation, the standard Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for USACE shall be submitted, which is Form PPQ-0 (9/30/11) provided as Attachment A to the solicitation. PPQ-0 is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal under Factor 3, Past Performance, and for which a completed CPARS evaluation is not available. (Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact.) Do not submit a PPQ when a completed CPARS is available.

Completed PPQs 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 (Attachment A), 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, Monique Paano, via email at monique.a.paano@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs; however, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. The offerors shall instruct the clients to refer the solicitation number in the subject line. The PPQs are Source Selection materials. All successfully submitted PPQs will receive an e-mail confirmation upon receipt. If the offeror does not receive the confirmation, it is their responsibility to follow up to ensure the Government has received the information.

Also include performance recognition documents received within the last five years such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition. In addition to the above, 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, including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), FAPIIS, telephone interviews with organizations familiar with the offeror’s performance, Government personnel with personal knowledge of the offeror’s performance capability, and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

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. DETAILED CONTENT REQUIREMENTS FOR VOLUME 3: PRICE PROPOSAL

This volume shall consist of all information, required to support proposed prices. There are no page limitations for this volume.

Factor 5: Price Proposal (TABS 1-4)

TAB 1: SF33, SOLICITATION, ALL AMENDMENTS AND OFFER

This tab will not be rated, but will be evaluated for responsiveness. The SF33 shall be filled out completely by the offeror and signed by an official that is authorized to bind the company. The offeror shall also acknowledge all amendments to the solicitation in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30 in Block 14 and the summary of changes.

TAB 2: PRICE PROPOSAL

Provide a complete Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices.

TAB 3: SECTION K – COMPLETED REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS

The offerors shall complete all Representations and Certifications, and also ensure current registration and updated annual Representations and Certifications on the System of Award Management (SAM) website, https://www.sam.gov.

TAB 4: BID GUARANTEE

A bid guarantee equal to 20% of the total price or $3,000,000.00, whichever is less, shall be submitted with the offer.

7. PROPOSAL SUBMITTALS

Proposals must be received no later than the date and time identified in the RFP. Plainly mark the proposal package “Proposals for Solicitation Number: W912DW19R0014, DO NOT OPEN.” There will not be a public proposal opening. In order for the proposal to be considered it MUST be prepared in ENGLISH, and must be submitted as a hardcopy original (Volumes 1 - 3) and four (4) copies (Volumes 1 and 2 only) with the three (3) required electronic CDs. PDF files MUST have searchable text and bookmarks.

Hand-delivery/Fed-Ex/UPS or other commercial carrier:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District Attn: Monique Paano – CENWS-CTC 4735 E. Marginal Way South Seattle, WA 98134-2388

Mail:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District Monique Paano – Contract Specialist

CENWS-CTC

PO Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124-3755

Note: Commercial carriers will not deliver proposals to P.O. Boxes.

ATTENTION: Due to heightened security, the method of Hand Delivery has changed and takes longer than the previous method of arriving at the Federal Center South building lobby to deliver your Proposal.

Please allow sufficient time to allow for heightened security at Government installations and to get to Building #1202. Allow time to park, pass through a metal detector, sign in, and receive a building pass at the Federal Center South Building. From there, you will be directed to the USACE Oxbow Building (#1202) which sits behind the Federal Center South Building. Allow additional time.

Report to the Security Desk in the lobby of the USACE Oxbow Building (#1202) and call Sonia Frees, Procurement Technician, at 206-764-3516, or Monique Paano, Contract Specialist, at 206-764-6084. A Contracting representative will come down and accept your Proposal.

A proposal is not received by the Government until it is in the physical possession of a representative of the Contracting office. Security guards and other non-contracting personnel are NOT authorized to accept proposals on behalf of the Government. Note that official receipt of a proposal shall be in accordance with FAR 52.215-1.

Note: If delivery is by any means other than Hand Delivery, please check prior to the due date and time to ensure that your Offer, Bid, or Proposal has arrived on time.

Proprietary information must be clearly marked.

PROPOSAL EXPENSES AND PRE-CONTRACT COSTS

The Government is in no way responsible for costs incurred in the preparation and submission of a proposal or for any other costs incurred prior to the execution of a contract.

AWARD AND POST-AWARD PROCEDURES

TECHNICAL EVALUATION

There will be an evaluation of all technical proposals by a Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB).

The Board’s duty is the assignment of a fair, unbiased technical rating for each proposal based solely on the merits of the proposal. Proposals that do not conform to the terms and conditions contained in the RFP, or those that include stipulations or qualifying conditions unacceptable to the Government, are not eligible for award. There will be no consideration of pricing data during the technical evaluation.

DEBRIEFINGS

PRE-AWARD

Offerors excluded from the competition before award will receive a notice and may request a debriefing before award by submitting a written request for a debriefing to the Contracting Officer within three (3) calendar days after receipt of the notice of exclusion from the competition. (FAR 15.505)

POST-AWARD

Unsuccessful Offerors may request a post-award debriefing within three (3) calendar days after the date on which the Offeror received notification of contract award. There will be no point-by-point comparisons with other Offerors’ proposals and debriefings will not reveal any information that is not releasable under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). (FAR 15.506)

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION FACTORS

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

All evaluation factors are detailed in Section M: Evaluation Factors For Award. The following table is a description of the factors and overall relative importance.

Factor/Subfactor Description Relative Importance

FACTOR 1

Nameplate Drawings and Data of Proposed Units

PROPOSAL

COMPLIANCE

FACTOR – This factor will be rated as Acceptable/Unacceptable.

Proposals determined to be unacceptable on this factor will not be subject to further evaluation.

FACTOR 2 Experience Equal to factor 3 and 4, all subfactors are equal to one another

Subfactor 1 Site Assembly And Erection Experience

Equal to Subfactor 2

Subfactor 2 Transformer Manufacturing Facility Experience

Equal to Subfactor 1

FACTOR 3

Efficiency of Proposed Units

Equal to factor 2 and 4, subfactor 2 is more important than subfactor 1.

Subfactor 3 is the least important subfactor.

Subfactor 1 Load Losses Less important than Subfactor 2 but more important than Subfactor 3

Subfactor 2 No-Load Losses More important than Subfactor 1 and 3

Subfactor 3 Audible Sound Level Less important than Subfactors 1 and 2

FACTOR 4 Past Performance Equal to Factor 2 & 3

FACTOR 5

Price (Standard Form 33 and Contract Line Item Schedule) and Representation and Certification

Factors, 2, 3, and 4, when combined, are considered significantly more important than price. Price is least important factor.

SECTION M - Evaluation Factors For Award

DEFINITIONS:

Recent and relevant projects that are those projects completed or substantially completed in the past 7 years that are comparable in size, scope, and complexity.

Substantially completed is defined as having completed more than 75% of the value of the contract work at the time of proposal submission.

Comparable size, scope, and complexity is defined as transformers manufactured with a minimum rating 20 MVA, single or three-phase, and voltage class rated a minimum of 115 kV.

VOLUME 1

Factor 1: Nameplate Drawings & Data of Proposed Unit (VOLUME 1)

Offerors shall provide the following transformer nameplate information along with a description of the proposed construction for the core, lamination thickness, high voltage coil construction, and low voltage coil construction:

Three phase;

Frequency;

kVA rating at each cooling level;

Winding diagram indicating:

o Voltage of high voltage winding (H);

o Voltage of low voltage winding (X);

o Location of required winding taps;

Class and stages of cooling;

Percent design impedance at the maximum kVA rating;

Basic impulse level (BIL) ratings for primary winding (H), secondary winding (X), and high-voltage neutral (H0).

Offerors shall submit up to six sheets showing the following information. Outline views may be combined on a sheet:

Proposed transformer outline: Plan View Proposed transformer outline: Segment One Elevation View Proposed transformer outline: Segment Two Elevation View Proposed transformer outline: Segment Three Elevation View Proposed transformer outline: Segment Four Elevation View Proposed transformer nameplate, including design impedance, and a winding diagram with taps

Offerors shall submit a description of the proposed construction for the core, lamination thickness, high voltage coil construction, and low voltage coil construction.

Rating Methodology and Standard for Factor 1. Table 1 will be used to evaluate Factor 1.

The Government will review the submitted nameplate drawings and data. Offerors who provide nameplate drawings and data indicating all required information will be given an acceptable rating: Three phase; Frequency; kVA rating at each cooling level; Winding diagram indicating:

Voltage of high voltage winding (H); Voltage of low voltage winding (X); Location of required winding taps; Class and stages of cooling; Percent design impedance at the maximum kVA rating; Basic impulse level (BIL) ratings for primary winding (H), secondary winding (X), and high-voltage neutral (H0). Offerors who do not provide all information, or who provide information that does not meet the requirements of the specifications, will be given an unacceptable rating.

Table 1: Factor 1 rating acceptable/unacceptable

TABLE 3: TECHNICAL ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE RATINGS

Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation

VOLUME 2

Factor 2: Experience (TAB 1)

The offeror shall submit a minimum of three, but no more than five recent and relevant projects for each subfactor. If the Offeror uses a subcontractors experience to meet the requirements under either subfactor, the Offeror must submit a letter of commitment from the subcontractor.

Upon award, subcontractors proposed to be used to complete the assembly, erection, and/or manufacturing portion of the contract shall not be substituted without the Contracting Officer’s written prior approval.

Factor 2: Sub-factor 1 (TAB 1) - Site Assembly and Erection Experience

The offeror shall submit a minimum of three but no more than five recent and relevant projects demonstrating transformer site assembly and erection experience comparable in size, scope, and complexity with the site assembly and erection requirements for this project. Project information for each project submitted shall contain:

Project Name/Title Name of a representative for the project and contact information;

Contract awarded amount;

Project location;

Project start date;

Project completion date; and Transformer manufacturer;

A detailed description of the project and the contractor’s involvement in the project (state percentage performed and whether performed as subcontractor or prime);

Factor 2: Sub-factor 2 (TAB 1) - Transformer Manufacturing Facility Experience

The offeror shall submit the following information for all transformers manufactured, in Sub-factor 1:

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

Single or three-phase;

Rating (in MVA);

Voltage class (kV);

Year manufactured/installed; and

Fiber-optic temperature probes embedded in windings.

The offeror shall demonstrate transformer manufacturing experience comparable in size, scope, and complexity with the transformer manufacturing requirements for this project.

Factor 2 Rating Methodology and Standard. Table 2 will be used to evaluate Factor 2.

Subfactor 1: Site Assembly and Erection Experience (Tab 1)

The Government will review the submitted projects to evaluate the extent, relevance, and timing of the offeror’s experience. In determining strengths and weaknesses, the Government will give a higher rating to the following:

Projects more directly related to this Scope of Work.

Larger number of relevant projects.

More recently completed projects.

Projects at hydroelectric sites in the following order of preference: USACE projects, other Federal Hydroelectric projects, other hydroelectric projects.

Experience working with proposed transformer manufacturer.

Subfactor 2: Transformer Manufacturing Facility Experience (Tab 1)

The Government will review the submitted projects to evaluate the extent, relevance, and timing of the offeror’s experience. In determining strengths and weaknesses, the Government will give a higher rating to the following:

Offerors demonstrating more experience in manufacturing transformers similar in size, scope, and complexity to the transformers required by the specifications.

Experience with GSU transformer design.

Projects which include fiber-optic temperature probes embedded in the windings.

Projects which include oil filled transformers rated greater than 115 kV and/or greater than 20 MVA, single or three-phase.

Table 2: Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method Adjectival Rating

Description

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

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

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

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

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

Factor 4 Factor 3: Efficiency of Proposed Unit (TAB 3 2)

Submit a single sheet for your proposed equipment efficiencies on this project noting:

Subfactor 1: Proposed load losses, in kW Subfactor 2: Proposed no-load losses, in kW Subfactor 3: Proposed sound level, in dB

The values submitted on this sheet shall become the manufacturer’s guarantee as tested during the factory acceptance tests.

Rating Methodology and Standard. Table 3 will be used to evaluate Factor 3, Subfactor 1:

Load Losses

The load losses for the transformer shall not exceed 60 kW. A better assigned rating will be given to offerors who propose a transformer with lower than the maximum allowable load losses. Offerors proposing guaranteed load losses of 60 kW will be assigned a marginal rating.

Technical merit that relate to the offeror’s experience in “Efficiency: Load Losses”, which reflects the Government’s confidence in each offeror’s ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the RFP, shall be evaluated based on the following specific criteria:

Table 3: Load Losses - Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Adjectival Rating

Description

Outstanding Guaranteed load loss is less than 45 kW.

Good Guaranteed load loss is between 45 kW and 49.99 kW.

Acceptable Guaranteed load loss is between 50 kW and 54.99 kW.

Marginal Guaranteed load loss is between 55 kW and 60 kW.

Unacceptable Guaranteed load loss is in excess of 60 kW.

Rating Methodology and Standard. Table 4 will be used to evaluate Factor 3, Subfactor 2: No-Load Loss.

The no-load losses for the transformer shall not exceed 25 kW. A better assigned rating will be given to offerors who propose a transformer with lower than the maximum allowable no-load losses.

Technical merit that relate to the offeror’s experience in “Efficiency: No-Load Losses”, which reflects the Government’s confidence in each offeror’s ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the RFP, shall be evaluated based on the following specific criteria:

Table 4: No-Load Losses - Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Adjectival Rating

Description

Outstanding Guaranteed no-load loss is less than 19 kW.

Good Guaranteed no-load loss is between 19 kW and 20.99 kW.

Acceptable Guaranteed no-load loss is between 21 kW and 22.99 kW.

Marginal Guaranteed no-load loss is between 23 kW and 25 kW.

Unacceptable Guaranteed no-load loss is in excess of 25 kW.

Rating Methodology and Standard. Table 5 will be used to evaluate Factor 3, Subfactor 3: Audible Sound Level.

The audible sound level as measured during the design tests shall not exceed 68 dB. Offerors proposing guaranteed audible sound levels of 68 dB will be assigned an acceptable rating. A better assigned rating will be given to offeror’s who propose a transformer with lower than the maximum allowable audible sound level.

Technical merit that relate to the offeror’s experience in “Efficiency: Audible Sound Level”, which reflects the Government’s confidence in each offeror’s ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the RFP, shall be evaluated based on the following specific criteria:

Table 5: Audible Sound Level - Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Adjectival Rating

Description

Outstanding Guaranteed audible sound levels lower than 66 dB.

Good Guaranteed audible sound levels between 66 and 67 dB.

Acceptable Guaranteed audible sound levels between 67 and 68 dB.

Marginal Guaranteed audible sound levels of 68 dB.

Unacceptable Guaranteed audible sound levels are in excess of 68 dB.

Incorporation into technical requirements.

Proposed values for load, no-load, and audible sound level will be incorporated into the technical requirements as the guaranteed values per factory acceptance tests performed after manufacturing.

Factor 3 Factor 4: Past Performance (TAB 23) The past performance evaluation is an assessment of the prime offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the prime offeror’s record of relevant and recent past and current performance information that pertain to the scope of work as outlined in the solicitation requirements.

Each offeror’s past performance will initially be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s current/past performance is recent, and relevant or not relevant to the solicitation. Recent and relevant projects are those projects completed, or at least 75% complete, within the past six (6) years from the solicitation response due date featuring work that is similar in Scope, Magnitude and Complexity to what is required in the solicitation. Next, the past performance will be evaluated to determine how well the offeror performed on the prior contracts. If the proposal is from a Joint Venture or Partnership, Past Performance information for each partner will be reviewed. There is no maximum page limit on submitted Past Performance. Past Performance documentation will not be included in the total page count for Volume I.

At a minimum, the Government will review past performance information from the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), when available.

Additional sources of Past Performance information for evaluation include, but are not limited to, the following:

Offeror may submit past performance information using the attached Past Performance Questionnaire(PPQ) (Attachment A).

The Government may obtain past performance information from other established systems such as the Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS) or other databases;

as well as from other sources available to the Government, such as the Defense Contract Management Agency; and interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials.

The Government may consider a wide array of information from a variety of sources, but is not compelled to rely on all of the information available.

Factor 4 Rating Methodology and Standard. Table 2 will be used to evaluate Factor 4.

Table 2: Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method Adjectival Rating

Description

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

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

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

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

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

* NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

VOLUME 3

Factor 5: Price Proposal Award will be made on the basis of the responsible Offeror whose proposal conforms to the RFP requirements, presenting the most advantageous offer to the Government. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers.

This Source Selection is conducted with the expectation of adequate price competition – normally competition establishes price reasonableness and a comparison of proposed prices will satisfy the requirement to perform a price analysis. A price reasonableness approach will be utilized by the Government to determine that the proposed prices are fair and reasonable as described in FAR 15.305(a)(1).

All offers with separately priced line items or subline items will be analyzed to determine if the prices are unbalanced (FAR 15.404-1(g)). Offers may be rejected if the Source Selection Authority determines the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

There is no maximum page limit for this factor.

(End of Summary of Changes)