RFP Amendment W912DY23R0025 Hawaii U00004.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

The reason for this RFP amendment is to answ er vendor questions and to incorporate a revised PWS dated 30 August 2023.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 17

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 31-Aug-2023

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 W912DY23R0025

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

25-Jul-2023

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 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

31-Aug-2023

CODE

US ARMY ENGINEERING & SUPPORT CENTER

475 QUALITY CIRCLE NW

HUNTSVILLE AL 35806

W912DY 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912DY23R0025

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:

VENDOR QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

1. Is there a Projnet site to ask questions on?

ProjNet is not being used for this solicitation.

2. Is this a NAICS 541330 Brooks Act procurement?

Contracting Response: This is not a Brooks Act Procurement.

3. RFP mentions Key Personnel and requires an org chart – will the Govt identify Key Personnel requirements and qualifications? RFP says Key Personnel will be evaluated but does not specify and positions/quals unless they are all positions listed on the pricing template?

Key personnel:

GIS Analyst that is knowledgeable with Spatial Data Standards for Facilities and Infrastructure (SDSDFIE). In addition to having experience and knowledge of water utility infrastructure, piping, valves, backflow preventors, etc.

Field Personnel:

Knowledge of Water Utility infrastructure for proper identification and classification of features found in field. Experience with toning utilities, specifically water lines and Global Positioning Systems GPS.

Water Engineer that could aid with QA/QC of data, questions, etc.

4. RFP requires 3 PPQs for similar work within 3 years. Is there any requirement to writeup up project summaries as is often the case in this type of work, or is it simply to fill out the PPQ form? Is there a limit on the length of the PPQ form (i.e., by providing a more detailed project description to explain relevance, etc.)

See solicitation section 3 Factor – Past Performance/Experience.

5. Is it possible to provide the reference standards (or a sample) from the prior DMR, TAMC, et effort? It would appear that only those involved in that effort would be able to understand the standard unless it was widely and publicly available, which is does not appear to be. From p6 of 23 “The F2F inventory will be conducted in accordance with the standards established by the previous efforts Spatial Data Standards for Facilities, Infrastructure, and Environment (SDSFIE) for Geographic Information System (GIS) for Dillingham Military Reservation (DMR), Waignai Military Reservation, and Trippler Army Medical Center (TAMC).”

Please reference the following link for additional information, SDSFIE Online - SDSFIE ( www.sdsfieonline.org) Army Adaption of SDSFIE 4.02 is being used.

6. Is there a ROM range for this effort (i.e., typical USACE $500K-$1M, $1M-$5M, etc.) or as a NAICS 541330 Engineering Services requirement is that not provided?

A ROM is not provided for this type of acquisition.

7. The SOW states that WAAF, Fort Shafter, TAMC, and AMR have “F2F already complete or underway”. Please comment if the SOW includes completion of the F2F at these four sub-installations and if not, when the F2F will be complete and available.

SCA report will include WAAF, Fort Shafter, TAMC, and AMR. The complete F2F will be provided and available after award.

Outstanding installations that have yet to been surveyed include AMR, HMR, and FD.

Other installations have either none or limited water (KTA, Mauna Kapu, etc.)

8. The SOW states that Fort DeRussy, DMR, PARC, Makua Training Area, and Kahuku Training Area already have F2F inventories. Please confirm that only condition assessment updates are needed for the GIS at these five sub-installations.

Correct, only condition assessments updates are needed for the GIS at these five -sub-installations.

9. The SOW states “The SCA consists of performing detailed inspections of all above-ground system components…” Please provide quantities of work for above-ground system components such as the number of assets (tanks, booster stations, treatment facilities) and linear feet or miles of pipe for each sub-installation. Quantities are needed to price the effort.

See revised PWS dated 30 August 2023, section 1.0.

10. Are the above-ground assets only limited to tanks, booster stations, and treatment facilities? For example, fire hydrants are omitted from this list. Please provide a full list of assets or asset estimates.

See revised PWS dated 30 August 2023, section 1.0.

11. The SOW states “The SCA consists of performing… representative samples of below ground system component condition through potholing or performance measurement methods...”

Please provide quantities of work such as number of pipe wall thickness tests, linear feet, or miles of pipe for leak detection, number of flow tests, and number of hydrostatic tests per sub-installation. Quantities are needed to price the effort.

If potholing is the approach used a recommendation would be:

See revised PWS dated 30 August 2023 section 1.0.

12. Please provide additional details on the requested hydrostatic testing and quantities of work. Which assets are to be hydrostatic tested?

This requirement has been removed from the PWS, please see revised PWS dated 30 August 2023.

13. Pipe wall thickness measurements require open cut access to the entire exterior of the pipe. How many open cuts per mile of pipe are requested?

Same as above.

14. Please provide details of the dig permit process for each sub-installation.

Dig Permit process will be provided to the awardee.

15. Will each sub-installation provide traffic control during excavations and flow tests?

See revised PWS dated 30 August 2023, section 2.0.

16. The SOW states “To the maximum extent possible, existing condition assessment data will be utilized and incorporated into the SCA report. A literature search will be conducted to obtain available information regarding the condition of the water systems.”

Please comment on the availability of record drawings and reports. Is documentation available electronically for each sub-installation?

All documents will be provided to the awardee.

17. Is GPS locating of assets at each sub-installation requested? If so, please confirm that mapping-grade GIS is sufficient.

No, GIS mapping-grade is not sufficient. A higher level of GPS locating is required.

18. The SOW states “Mechanical system component data for pumps, motors, tanks, valves, and associated assets will be gathered and entered [in] GIS format.”

If GPS asset locating is requested, locations in GIS for interior assets (e.g., inside pump houses) will be estimated.

No objection to this approach if the footprint of the building is clearly documented.

19. Please confirm that the potholing and open cut access points for pipe wall thickness measurements are sufficient to fill data gaps in attribution for water distribution or service mains (exposed and adjacent to) and that no additional excavations will be required to gather missing pipe GIS data.

The Government is unaware if additional excavations will be needed.

20. Is acoustic leak detection for every mile of water main required? Please quantify the effort and provide the breakdown of metallic versus non-metallic pipe material for the system.

This was deleted from PWS. See revised PWS dated 30 August 2023.

21. Please comment on the objective of flow / pressure testing on this project. Is it for testing of all / most fire hydrants per UFC requirements (i.e., UFC 3-601-02, Section 2-2.6, Table 2-4, 5-year flow testing or 20% per year) or more generally for area testing or hydraulic model calibration?

See PWS dated 30 August 2023, section 1.0.

22. The SOW states “The F2F inventory will be conducted in accordance with the standards established by the previous efforts Spatial Data Standards for Facilities, Infrastructure, and Environment (SDSFIE) for Geographic Information System (GIS) for Dillingham Military Reservation (DMR), Waignai Military Reservation, and Trippler Army Medical Center (TAMC).”

Please provide the “standards established by the previous efforts”.

See PWS dated 30 August 2023, section 1.0.

How complete was the effort at DMR, Waignai Military Reservation, and TAMC?

DMR and Waianae Military Reservation water infrastructure surface features were GPSed and lines were toned where possible. There was limited toning success at Waianae and DMR. At Tripler there was more success with toning, limited follow-up investigation work with GPR/AML was done that increased accuracy but awaiting results of effort. Efforts at WAAF, FS, and Schofield have the additional investigation built into to contract.

23. The SOW states “The SCA includes the following: Pre-Site Visit Data Collection – provision of existing GIS and capital project data”.

Please comment on the completeness of the GIS at each sub-installation. This impacts the level-of-effort and pricing.

Exception of Dillingham and Waianae-Kai – estimate the GIS would be close to 85% accurate regarding location after completion of GIS surveys (F2F). Some question on which pipes are abandoned and which ones are in service. Location of abandoned pipe may not be as accurate.

24. The SOW states “The SCA includes the following: Condition Assessment – application of condition codes based on data collected.”

Does the Army have a preferred condition assessment rating criteria or may the offeror propose one (e.g., Navy UICAP criteria)?

Offeror can propose one.

25. The 4-month period of performance is unusually short considering the number of sub-installations and significant amount of field work and reporting. For example, potholing and pipe wall thickness open cuts will require dig permits and clearances and flow testing will require significant coordination with the bases prior to beginning field work. Please consider lengthening the period of performance to 12 months.

The Government has taken this into consideration; however, the 4-month period of performance will remain as stated.

26. Considering the need for response to offers questions (e.g., quantities of work), please consider extending the proposal due date to two weeks beyond the issuance of question responses.

Proposal due date will be extended to 7 Sep 2023.

27. May key personnel resumes be included as an attachment to Factor 2 and be excluded from the page count?

Proposals will be evaluated IAW the solicitation requirements.

28. May CPARS be submitted in lieu of PPQs when available?

PPQ’s shall be submitted IAW the solicitation, CPARS will be retrieved by the Government.

29. PPQ’s shall be submitted IAW the solicitation, CPARS will be retrieved by the Government. The Attachment 4 pricing spreadsheet is pre-populated with six labor categories. Is the offeror limited to only these six categories or may the categories be changed?

All proposed labor categories are at the discretion of the contractor. The Attachment 4 list of labor categories was provided as examples only and are not mandated to any degree.

The contractor shall propose labor categories with associated descriptions that align with their technical approach proposed. The Government is not mandating any particular labor category.

30. The information provided in the RFP on Page 5 and 6. Please clarify the locations that require Fence to Fence (F2F) inventories and System Condition Assessments (SCAs) for an accurate technical approach and up-front costing that will not require change orders later.

Please reference PWS 1.0 Technical support.

31. For pricing purposes can an approximate number of linear feet and pipe sizes be provided for each major and minor sub-installation, or provide the existing fence to fence reports so contractors can develop their own estimate for each location?

The lump sum of pipes (linear feet, pipe sizes) is not available currently.

32. Can the GIS feature class or shapefiles of the property boundaries for the locations that require F2F inventories and SCAs please be provided?

This will be provided to the awardee.

33. What is the horizontal and vertical accuracy required for features and lines for the F2F inventories at the five locations that are required in the RFP?

All documents will be provided to the awardee.

34. On Page 5, the RFP describes a variety of SCA methods that range widely in terms of level of effort and potential disruption to the water system. On Page 6, the RFP further clarifies the SCA process that appears to lean heavily on existing condition assessment data through review of reports and personnel interviews. To help normalize costs can the RFP be clarified as to the approximate percentage of the systems that will require field assessment versus existing data review?

Contractor is responsible to do the field assessment or verification on existing systems based on what was provided.

35. The RFP refers to tank Inspections, please provide additional information on the size, purpose (firefighting, potable water, etc.) and configuration (ground standpipe, elevated, etc.)? Is there a specific DOD or industry standard for the tank inspections?

See revised PWS dated 30 August 2023, section 1.0.

36. Please confirm that the Army owns the entire water systems inside the fence line at the major and minor sub-installation and they are not owned by local utility providers?

Confirming that the water systems are Army owned except for Dillingham.

37. Please confirm that the F2F and SCA work is only required inside Army fence lines and will not be required on non-Army owned property?

No invasive SCA on non-Army property. Electronic records can be relied upon for SCA outside the Army fence line.

38. Please confirm that Template 3 would be required for each water feature and linear segment that receives a SCA?

Yes, see PWS revised 30 August 2023, section 2.0.

39. Would the contractor be required to provide Template 3 if the SCA is provided from existing government data?

Yes, see PWS revised 30 August 2023, section 2.0.

40. The Period of Performance appears very aggressive considering that the contractor will be dependent on the availability of government furnished information and the availability of government personnel to conduct SCA interviews. Would the Army consider extending the period of performance to six months?

The Government has taken this into consideration; however, the 4-month period of performance will remain as stated.

41. In Section 2 Factor, Page 19 of the RFP, you ask for an organizational chart, do you want to see resumes as well? If so, would they count towards the page count or should they be put in an appendix?

Please refer to the requirements for Factor 2.

42. On Page 18 of the RFP, under #11, you mention proposals should be delivered in 4 separate sections for 4 separate evaluation factors. To clarify, would you prefer 3 PDFs (Factor 1, 2 and 3) and 1 excel document (Factor 4) as Final Proposals, or one searchable PDF document with 4 separate sections?

Please refer to Section 12. Page Limits of the solicitation.

43. On Page 19, In Section 3 Factor – Past Performance, would final CPARS ratings be accepted in place of PPQs? Time constraints on submitting have us concerned. Even hard-working clients take vacations, and it becomes somewhat out of our control.

Whereas CPARs is a process that results in a rating from the client in standard format.

Also, PPQs are cumbersome.

Please see solicitation section 3 Factor – Past Performance.

44. Please confirm what section of the proposals should include the small business plan and whether it will be included in the page count limit?

Please submit with your proposal a completed Attachment 3 – SB Participation Plan which was provided with the RFP. No limit to the page count.

45. Please confirm that the Hawaii General Excise tax will be added to the total value of the project at a 4.712% rate.

That is a determination made by the contractor proposing.

SECTION C - DESCRIPTIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS

The following have been added by full text:

REVISED PWS

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

Technical Support Services for Army Utilities Program

Potable Water Systems Condition Assessment At

US Army Garrison Hawaii - Oahu

IMCOM G-4

23 February 2023 30 August 2023

1.0 Technical Support. The Contractor shall provide specialized Utility Program technical support to US Army Installation Management Command (IMCOM) G-4 Public Works Energy Division. Work is to be performed at the US Army Garrison, Hawaii and Oahu. Effort: Conduct fence-to-fence System Inventories (F2F) for select sub-installations and a comprehensive System Condition Assessment (SCA) of the potable water systems at all 7 major sub-installations on the island of Oahu and Minor sub-installations (see below). Any existing F2F (complete or partial) will be provided to the awardee post award of the contract.

Sub-installations that require the F2F and SCA include:

Schofield Barracks (including South Range) East Range Helemano Military Reservation (HMR)

In addition to the sub-installations listed above, the other major sub-installations that require the SCA (F2F already complete or underway) are:

Wheeler Army Airfield (WAAF) Fort Shafter Tripler Army Medical Center (TAMC) Aliamanu Military Reservation (AMR) (Including Red Hill housing)

SCA report will include WAAF, Fort Shafter, TAMC, and AMR. The complete F2F will be provided and available after award.

Minor sub-installations that have F2F inventories require a SCA based on the provided F2F inventories include:

Fort DeRussy Dillingham Military Reservation (DMR) Pililau Army Recreation Center (PARC) Makua Training Area (Inactive) Kahuku Training Area

The SCA consists of performing detailed inspections of all above-ground system components (tanks, booster stations, treatment facilities) and representative samples of below ground system component condition through potholing or performance measurement methods (pipe wall thickness, leak detection, flow/pressure testing., hydrostatic testing).

To the maximum extent possible, existing condition assessment data will be utilized and incorporated into the SCA report. A literature search will be conducted to obtain available information regarding the condition of the water systems. The desired product is the assignment of a condition code (1-5) for each component, or component segment (as appropriate). The condition code process is to be based upon the industry standard approach. Hydraulic model calibration and validating hydrant flow tests are required.

If potholing is the approach used a recommendation would be:

Schofield Barracks: 15 – 20 pothole locations Wheeler Army Airfield: 10 -15 pothole locations Fort Shafter: 10 – 15 pothole locations Tripler Army Medical Center: 10 – 15 pothole locations East Range: 5 – 10 pothole locations Helemano Military Reservation: 5 – 10 pothole locations

Aliamanu Military Reservation: 5 – 10 pothole locations Fort DeRussy: 5 – 10 pothole locations (coordination with NEPA needed) Dillingham Military Reservation: 0 Pililaau Army Recreation Center: 0 due to cultural concerns Makua & Kahuku Training Area: 0 Any other measurement method would be accepted. Contractor must request the data needed.

The SCA includes the following:

Pre-Site Visit Data Collection – provision of existing and capital project data Site Visit – data collection, personnel interviews Data Reduction – initial processing of information, data gap analysis Installation Energy and Water Plan (IEWP) Review – identification of critical loads Condition Assessment – application of condition codes based on data collected Draft SCA Report – solicit input from installation, LHC, and HQDA Final SCA Report – incorporate comments

The F2F inventory will be conducted in accordance with the standards established by the previous efforts Spatial Data Standards for Facilities, Infrastructure, and Environment (SDSFIE) for Geographic Information System (GIS) for Dillingham Military Reservation (DMR), Waignai Military Reservation, and Trippler Army Medical Center (TAMC). Key system data for pipelines include pipe size, material, age (if discernable), and length will be captured in GIS format. Mechanical system component data for pumps, motors, tanks, valves, and associated assets will be gathered and entered GIS format. (SDSFIE Online - SDSFIE ( www.sdsfieonline.org)

Army Adaption of SDSFIE 4.02 is being used. Only condition assessments updates are needed for the GIS at these five -sub-installations.

The standards established by the previous efforts include: DPW GIS standards would be +/-0.5 meter for horizontal and vertical accuracy.

Quantities of work for above-ground system components such as the number of assets (tanks, booster stations, treatment facilities) and linear feet or miles of pipe for each sub-installation are listed below.

Schofield Barracks: 1 booster station, 5 water tanks. All potable and all ground storage. For domestic and firefighting requirements. Two 2Mgal tanks (one is currently offline and being replaced). Three 1Mgal tanks. One of these 1Mgal tanks is mostly underground.

Fort Shafter: 1 water treatment facility, 2 booster stations, 4 water tanks. All potable for domestic and fire-fighting requirements. 0.3Mgal tank and 0.7Mgal tank are mostly underground. The 0.5Mgal and 0.15Mgal tanks are on ground tanks.

Tripler Army Medical Center: 1 water treatment facility, 1 booster station, 2 water tanks. Both potable and for domestic and firefighting requirements. Both 0.5Mgal and mostly underground.

East Range: 1 water treatment facility with 5 aeration towers, 1 booster station and 1 water tank. Potable 0.5Mgal ground storage tank for domestic and firefighting requirements. There is also a 0.5Mgal ground storage tank in Wahiawa that feeds

NCTAMS (Navy installation) that eventually feeds HMR.

Helemano Military Reservation: 1 booster station, two water tanks. Both potable and for domestic and firefighting requirements. 0.5Mgal ground storage tank and a 0.6Mgal elevated tank.

Aliamanu Military Reservation: 2 booster stations and 3 water tanks. All potable tanks for domestic and firefighting requirements. 0.75Mgal tank is on ground. Two 0.1Mgal tanks are mostly underground.

Dillingham Military Reservation: 1 water treatment facility but not owned by the Army.

All documents will be provided to the awardee.

2.0 DETAIL.

2.1 All work performed shall reflect thorough, professional, detailed knowledge of utility industry standards, utility operation and maintenance practices, and GIS systems. Support will be provided under direction of the IMCOM G-4 Energy and Utilities Division Chief within the Public Works Directorate. The Contractor shall also work closely with the USAG-HI DPW staff. A member of the Energy Division of the U.S. Army Engineering and Support Center, Huntsville (CEHNC) will act as the COR on this contract.

2.2 GIS mapping-grade is not sufficient. A higher level of GPS locating is required.

2.3 The contractor is responsible for traffic control.

2.4 Template 3 will be required for each water feature and linear segment that receives a SCA. Contractor shall validate any existing Government Template 3 data.

3.0 DELIVERABLES. Electronic Deliverables – The Contractor shall provide reports and other products as described herein, submitted in electronic digital format (Microsoft Word for reports, analyses, and other text-based deliverables, PowerPoint for all presentations, Excel for system databases, cost estimates, system valuations, contract cost data, and technical data), and Portable Document Format (pdf) for all record images and documents, such as signed contracts. Contractor shall email deliverables to the IMCOM Utility Program Manager with copies to the USAG-HI DPW and the Contracting Officer Representative (COR), to include the following (as required):

3.1 Activity Reports: Due on the 10th of every month. Reports shall detail activities performed during the previous month, the overall completion status of the PWS, with a status narrative addressing each sub-installation.

The report shall describe any anticipated delays in project completion and the contractor’s actions to mitigate such delays. The report shall describe work completed and issues encountered. (ref: Monthly Activity report template).

The Government will evaluate contractor performance for this deliverable monthly in accordance with paragraph 5.0.

3.2 Trip Reports with Preliminary Findings and Recommendations: Due 15 days after a trip is completed.

Reports shall detail activities performed during the trip (ref: Trip Report template). The Government will evaluate contractor performance for this deliverable monthly in accordance with paragraph 4.0.

3.3 Draft SCA Report: Draft SCA Report to include specific details concerning infrastructure that is considered high failure: Due 40 days before the contract expiration date. Report shall detail support for determinations of infrastructure considered high failure (ref: SCA Report template). The Government will evaluate contractor performance for this deliverable in accordance with paragraph 5.0.

3.4 Final SCA Report: Final SCA Report: Due 10 days before the contract expiration date. The Government will evaluate contractor performance for this deliverable in accordance with paragraph 5.0.

4.0 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE. Period of Performance for this PWS is from date of award to four (4) months following award.

5.0 QUALITY MANAGEMENT. The scale below will be used to determine an Exceptional, Satisfactory, or Unsatisfactory performance rating.

Rating Standard Exceptional Performance and deliverables significantly exceed contract requirements to the Government’s benefit. Reports provide an exceptional evaluation based on outstanding understanding of the system and system recommendations.

Satisfactory Performance and deliverables meet contractual requirements.

Reports indicate a thorough evaluation based on an understanding of the system and acceptable system recommendations.

Unsatisfactory Performance or deliverables do not meet contract requirements.

Report does not provide an evaluation that conveys an understanding system condition. Report lacks detail sufficient for customer to develop a plan of action.

6.0 TRAVEL

The Contractor will be required to travel to/from Oahu, State of Hawaii. Contractor will be required to travel to relevant sub-installations to support field work. Travel expenses will be submitted IAW FAR 31.205-46 by routine invoicing procedures. Travel will be substantiated and evaluated for fair and reasonableness using Joint Travel Regulation. The contractor is responsible for not exceeding the dollar amount on the Travel line item with its total travel expenses from all trips combined.

7.0 DISTRIBUTION

All electronic deliverables, except for the Monthly Reports, shall be sent via email to the Utility Program Managers listed below:

Antonio.franco12.civ@army.mil Karl.j.santa.civ@army.mil

All electronic Monthly Reports shall be sent via email to:

Antonio.franco12.civ@army.mil Karl.j.santa.civ@army.mil Barbara.l.osterkamp@usace.army.mil

8.0 PAYMENTS

The Government will make progress payments no more frequently than monthly for a large business, and every two

(2) weeks for a small business, as work progresses under the contract. Payments shall be made against approved progress reports submitted by the Contractor. The Contractor shall provide data in support of their billings which are subject to acceptance by the Contracting Officer or Contracting Officer Representative (COR).

9.0 INVOICING INSTRUCTIONS

Electronic invoice requirements and submission:

Electronic invoices shall be submitted to the COR for processing, and shall include:

- Contractor’s invoice on contractor’s letterhead

- Standard Form (SF) 1034 in accordance with FAR 52.232-1 Payments, and

- ENG Form 93

10.0 REPORT TEMPLATES

Template 1: Activity Report Template 2: Trip Report Template 3: System Condition Assessment

APPENDIX A

ANTITERRORISM/FORCE PROTECTION

1. General security requirements and guidance.

The security requirements described below apply to all contract personnel (including employees of the prime Contractor (“Contractor”) and all subcontractor employees) supporting the performance requirements of this contract.

The Contractor is responsible for compliance with these security requirements. Questions regarding security matters shall be addressed to the designated Government representative (e.g., Contracting Officer Representative (COR), Requiring Activity (RA) representative, or Contracting Officer (if a COR or other RA representative is not appointed)).

Contract personnel are critical to the overall security and safety of US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) installations, facilities and activities, and security awareness training contributes to those efforts. The Department of Defense (DoD) and Army security training requirements specified below, if applicable, are performance requirements;

all applicable contract personnel shall complete initial training within 30 days of contract award or the date new contract personnel begin performance on the contract. Within five business days from the completion of training, the Contractor shall provide written documentation (e.g., email or memorandum) to the Government representative. The documentation shall include the names of contract personnel trained and which training they completed; the Contractor shall maintain training records as part of their contract files and be prepared to provide copies of training certificates to the Government representative. Contractor personnel and vehicles are subject to search when entering federal installations. Additionally, all contract personnel shall comply with Force Protection Condition (FPCON) measures, Random Antiterrorism Measures (commonly referred to as “RAMs”), and Health Protection Condition (HPCON) measures. The Contractor is responsible for meeting performance requirements during elevated FPCON and/or HPCON levels in accordance with applicable RA plans and procedures --this includes identifying mission essential and non-mission essential personnel. In addition to the changes otherwise authorized by the changes clause of this contract, should the FPCON or HPCON levels at any individual facility or installation change, the Government may implement security changes that affect contract personnel. The Contractor shall ensure all contract personnel are aware of their security responsibilities, including any site-specific requirements identified in local policies or procedures.

2. Antiterrorism (AT) Level I training.

All contract personnel requiring routine access to Army installations, facilities, and controlled access areas, or requiring network access shall complete initial and annual refresher AT Level I awareness training. Online AT Level I awareness training is available at https://jko.jten.mil/ (website subject to change).

3. Physical security and access control requirements.

All contract personnel requiring physical access to a federal installation or facility shall comply with the access control procedures of that location. Contract personnel requiring unescorted access to meet contract performance requirements on a DoD installation in the US shall be vetted by the installation/facility Provost Marshal/Directorate of Emergency Services/Security Office using the National Crime Information Center-Interstate Identification Index (commonly referred to as “NCIC-III”) and Terrorist Screening Database (commonly referred to as “TSDB”). Contract personnel shall comply with all personal identity verification requirements specified in installation/facility policies and procedures. Contract personnel who do not meet requirements for unescorted access to USACE facilities shall coordinate escorted access with the Government representative, as needed. Contract personnel who receive keys, access cards, or lock combinations that provide access to government-owned property shall comply with key and lock control procedures of the RA.

4. Suspicious Activity Reporting training (e.g. iWATCH, CorpsWatch, or See Something, Say Something).

All contract personnel shall receive initial and annual refresher training from the RA representative on the local suspicious activity reporting program. This locally developed training provides contract personnel with general information on suspicious behavior, and guidance on reporting suspicious activity to the project manager, security representative or law enforcement entity.

5. Pre-screen candidates using E-Verify Program.

Contractors shall comply with the requirements set forth in FAR clause 52.222-54 Employment Eligibility Verification and FAR Subpart 22.18 in using the E-Verify Program at (https://www.e-verify.gov/) (website subject to change) to meet the contract employment eligibility requirements. Contractors are encouraged to cooperate with Federal and State agencies responsible for enforcing labor requirements to include eligibility for employment under United States immigration laws in accordance with FAR 22.102-1(i). An initial list of verified/eligible candidates shall be provided to the COR no later than three business days after the initial contract award. When contracts are with individuals, the individuals will be required to complete a Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, and submit it to the Contracting Officer to become part of the official contract file.

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The following have been modified:

ATTACHMENT LIST

Attachment 1 – Key Sub-Teaming Ltr of Commitment Attachment 2 – Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment 3 – Small Business Participation Plan – no limit to the page count.

Attachment 4 – Pricing Spreadsheet Attachment 5 – SCA Report Template Attachment 6 – Monthly Activity Report Template Attachment 7 – Trip Report Template

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

Proposal Evaluation Criteria

1. Accuracy

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

2. Assumptions

Offeror should include no assumptions or exclusions that may result in a proposal that is not compliant with the requirement. Instead, Offeror should ask questions during the period available for questions to resolve potential assumptions.

3. Electronic submission

The Offeror shall submit its proposal electronically to the following email addresses: Silke.Ball@usace.army.mil and Jennifer.L.Kelley@usace.army.mil. Due date for proposals is 14 August 2023 at 11:00 AM local time (Central Daylight Time).

4. Questions

Questions may be submitted electronically to the following email addresses:

Silke.Ball@usace.army.mil and Jennifer.L.Kelley@usace.army.mil. Due date for questions is 1 August 2023 by COB.

5. Set-Aside for Small Business Concerns

This action will be competed full and open.

6. North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)

The NAICS code for the requirement is NAICS 541330 Other Management Consulting Services / Utilities Management Consulting Services.

7. Award without Discussions

The Government intends to award without discussions; however, it reserves the right to enter discussions with the vendor, if it determines that doing so is in its own best interest.

The Government also reserves the right to make no award at all, if a fair and reasonable price cannot be obtained.

8. System for Award Management

All offerors shall be registered within the System for Award Management (SAM), http://www.sam.gov to be consideration for award.

9. Preparation Cost

Costs associated with proposal preparation and solicitation responses will not be reimbursed by the Government.

10. Communications During Solicitation

The offeror shall NOT engage in any form of contact with customer for this requirement / services. Communications during the open solicitation period shall only occur between the Offeror and the Contract Specialist or Contracting Officer. Questions shall be in writing to the Government and answers will be provided for all Offerors to be aware of the same information.

11. Proposal Sections

Proposals shall be delivered in word searchable, PDF or Microsoft Word format with the exception of Pricing, which shall be delivered in an Excel Pricing Spreadsheet.

The proposal submission shall consist of four (4) separate sections for four (4) separate evaluation factors. The separate sections shall be marked as follows:

Factor 1 – Technical Approach Factor 2 – Qualifications of Key Personnel and Management Approach Factor 3 – Past Performance/Experience Factor 4 – Price

12. Page Limits

Cover – No page limit Table of Contents – No page limit

Section 1 – Technical Approach– 20 pages Section 2 – Qualifications of Key Personnel and Management Approach Factor – 10 pages Section 3 – Past Performance/Experience – 20 pages Section 4 – Price – No page limit

13. Requirements for each Section

• Font size for all narratives must be Arial 12

• Tables, charts, diagrams and graphics must be Arial 8 or greater

• Page margins must be 1” on sides and 1” on top and bottom

• Each page must be numbered and each chart, diagram or graphic must be labeled

• Page size spreadsheets, table, charts, etc. may be 11” x 17” but will count as 2 pages

• If a proposal Section exceeds the page limit (for those Sections with a page limit), the pages exceeding the limit will not be considered or evaluated

• The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited

Section 1 Factor – Technical:

The term “technical,” as used herein, refers to the non-price elements listed below.

All requirements of each element must be met for the technical factor to be considered acceptable and for the proposal to be considered for award.

Offerors will be evaluated on the Offeror's thorough and complete understanding of the work associated with PWS Section 1.0 Technical Support. It should be concise and should cover every aspect of the work the Offeror will execute under PWS Section 1.0. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed technical approach for accomplishing the technical requirements as outlined in the PWS Section 1.0 Technical Support.

Section 2 Factor – Qualifications of Key Personnel and Management Approach:

Offerors shall provide narrative detailing the proposed management approach for completing the PWS requirements of Section 1.0. Offerors shall provide an organizational chart showing functional areas and positions responsible for performing the tasks required in the PWS section 1.0 Technical Support.

Section 3 Factor – Past Performance/Experience:

Offerors should submit no more than three Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) for performance on separate/different projects within the past three years of the closing date of this solicitation. Offerors should provide responses to the questions as listed on the PPQ. Furthermore, offerors should provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk. Offerors may attach additional pages if necessary.

PPQs should be relevant to the tasks as described in the PWS 1.0 Technical Support and recent past performance information is with three years of the closing date of the solicitation. The PPQs should pertain to similar services outlined in the solicitation requirements. PPQs beyond the three submitted will not be evaluated. Offerors may include federal, state, and/or commercial work.

If Offerors are unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client (previous customer that may be Government or non-Government) before the solicitation closing date, Offerors should submit with its proposal the first page of the PPQ, with Blocks 1-5 completed, providing contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client points-of-contact. Offerors should follow-up with clients/customers to ensure timely submittal of PPQs.

Offerors shall not use only a reference in their proposals to describe PPQs previously submitted for other solicitations. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

Offerors shall provide a narrative demonstrating familiarity, knowledge, and experience with Army-owned, Navy-owned and/or 3rd party owned utility systems on Oahu, Korea and/or Guam. In addition, narrative should capture experience with Utility operations and capital investment strategies in general.

The Government may review multiple sources of information for evaluating past performance. The sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Offeror Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all UEI/CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) if identified in the Offeror’s proposal, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources.

Section 4 Factor – Price:

The successful Offeror’s price will be rated as “Reasonable” or “Not Reasonable” using price analysis techniques as stated in the Federal Acquisition Regulations and including any Not-to-Exceed pricing from the Government. Proposals that exceed any Not-to- Exceed amount (such as for Travel) shown in the RFP will be rated “Unacceptable.”

(End of Summary of Changes)