Amendment_0003 _W912EF-15-R-0019.pdf

W68SBV43467731

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 solicitation is revised as indicated in the Summary of Changes.

DWORSHAK UNIT 3 STATOR REPLACEMENT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 23

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 10-Jul-2015

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 W912EF-15-R-0019

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

14-May-2015

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

10-Jul-2015

CODE

USAED, WALLA WALLA - CONTRACTING DIV.

PHYLLIS L. BUERSTATTE

201 N. THIRD AVENUE

WALLA WALLA WA 99362-1876

W912EF 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912EF-15-R-0019

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0003

Amendment 0003 Summary of Changes – Dworshak Unit 3 Stator Replacement

CHANGES TO SECTION 00100, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS:

• Paragraph 3, Proposal Files, subparagraph(c)(i)(4), Section 4 Past Performance is revised to state, “Offerors shall submit all Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past six years from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation.”

CHANGES TO SECTION 00700, FAR CLAUSE 52.211-12, LIQUIDATED DAMAGES –

CONSTRUCTION (SEP 2000)

• See revised clause.

CHANGES TO SECTION 00800 WAGE DETERMINATION

• See revised wage decision.

CHANGES TO SPECIFICATIONS

01 22 00.00 28 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT

• Added new requirement to subpart 1.2 to require the price for the payment and performance bonds to be included in CLIN 0001 (Mobilization and Demobilization)

01 33 00 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES

• A new submittal register is provided since there is a new submittal (pole refurbishment facility) for section 48 13 16.00 26 and because the register provided with amendment 0002 only included submittals associated with the sections that had changes for amendment 0002

48 13 16.00 26 UNIT 3 GENERATOR REWIND

• Added new submittal for “Pole refurbishment Facility” to subpart 1.3, SD-01

• Revised subpart 3.7.a to address Epstein test requirements

• Revised subpart 3.19

• Revised subpart 3.19.1

• Added new subpart 3.19.2 (Pole Asbestos Handling)

• Revised subpart 3.19.3 (previously 3.19.2)

CHANGES TO DRAWINGS

None

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS/EVALUATION FACTOR

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value-tradeoff) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four (4) evaluation factors: Technical, Past Performance, Small Business Participation, and Price. All subfactors of Factor I Technical are equally important. Factor 1, Technical is more important than Factor II Past Performance. Factor II Past Performance is more important than Factor III Small Business Participation Plan. When combined, Factors I, II, and III are significantly more important than price.

To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for each technical factor (to include all sub-factors) and the small business participation factor, and no less than a rating of “Limited Confidence” for past performance. Offerors will be made aware that the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (i.e. Offerors are cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offered). The intent of this notice is to make offerors aware that the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint as there may not be an opportunity to revise their proposal.

B. FACTORS AND SUB-FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal: Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors described below.

1. FACTOR I Technical - The technical evaluation will be comprised of three (3) Subfactors.

Risk assesses the degree to which the offeror’s proposed technical approach for the requirements of the solicitation may cause disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Risk will be evaluated as one aspect of the technical evaluation, inherent in the technical evaluation factor or subfactor ratings.

Subfactor A: Technical Work Plan and Capabilities Subfactor B: Unit Stator Winding Replacement and Commissioning

Subfactor C: Management, Quality Control and Schedule

The offeror’s proposal shall address each subfactor as it applies to the scope of work. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach,” Paragraph C of this section. During evaluations of each proposal, the Government will assign each subfactor an adjectival rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings.

2. FACTOR II Past Performance - Each offeror’s current and past performance will be reviewed to determine relevancy and confidence ratings.

3. FACTOR III Small Business Participation - The extent of Small Business Participation will be evaluated for unrestricted acquisitions.

4. FACTOR IV Price - Price reasonableness will be utilized in the evaluation of the proposal.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals will be evaluated by the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB).

1. The overarching evaluation approach for all factors and subfactors is as follows:

a. Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the RFP.

b. Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

2. Factor I Technical - This factor is comprised of the following subfactors:

a. Subfactor A: Technical Work Plan and Capabilities

This subfactor evaluates the offeror’s understanding of the required scope of work and evaluates the offerors capabilities and availability of resources necessary to complete all requirements. The offeror should propose a work plan that clearly defines:

1) Major tasks and outlines all work necessary to complete those tasks.

2) Clearly present the critical path to complete all major tasks.

3) Discuss how work to complete one task may impact or be impacted by work to complete other tasks.

4) Clearly distinguish between work that will be completed on-site versus work that will be completed off-site.

5) Identify any critical assumptions and uncertainties that may impact the completion of work and to identify methods to check assumptions and address uncertainties.

6) Document capabilities and availability of resources necessary to complete all required major tasks.

7) List of all major pieces of equipment and specialty tools necessary and available to complete all major tasks.

8) List any specialty work crews or individuals required to complete unique or special tasks.

b. Subfactor B: Unit Stator Winding Replacement and Commissioning

This subfactor evaluates the experience, approach and capabilities of each offeror and the quality of their proposed technical approach to replace Unit 3 stator windings, core and frame as specified in the requirements. The evaluation will focus on the offeror’s documentation of experience in designing, manufacturing, and installing windings, cores, frames, and rehabilitating rotor poles for the following:

1) Projects that meet the criteria:

A. Generating units that were completed within the last 15 years: 1999 – 2014.

B. Generating units that provided a continuous generator output rating equal to or greater than 233 MVA.

C. The project examples were for a rewind of an existing unit or construction of a new generator that used stator bars.

D. Relevant experience from at least 2 separate job locations that show a minimum of 10 generators (new or rehab).

E. Generating units that are hydro-driven salient-pole machines below 400 rpm.

2) Provide a complete description of the stator core including details such as:

manufacturing process and materials.

3) Provide a complete description of the stator winding and accessories to include:

Bar insulation system (including strand, and groundwall insulation material and thickness, cross sectional dimensions and manufacturing process); designed dielectric stress of the groundwall insulation at rated voltage; and ground wall insulation application method (hand-wound, machine wound with/without scarf joint, etc.).

4) Whether using a subcontractor or prime contractor’s lamination facility, identify the location and name(s) of the owning interest in the lamination manufacturing facility. The manufacturing experience of this facility in fabricating lamination shall be documented.

5) Whether using a subcontractor or prime contractor’s bar manufacturing facility, identify the location and name(s) of the owning interest in the winding manufacturing facility. The manufacturing experience of this facility in fabricating stator windings of this size shall be documented.

6) Present guaranteed combined I2R (R corrected to 75 deg. C), stray load loss for their proposed winding and core in “kw” at 266,316 kVA, 0.95 power factor output.

7) Describe technical approaches and installation processes through standard procedure documents, previous submittals (redacted site information acceptable), or brochures. Include a description of: the stator core and stator winding installation process; details on the side packing system; wedging system including type, dimensions, and materials of wedges; total number of wedges per slot, number of check wedges per slot and end wedge securing method; spring deflection measurement method; brazing method; and stator core installation process including stacking, pressing, alignment methods, and methods for affixing the core.

c. Subfactor C: Management, Quality Control and Schedule

This factor will evaluate the offeror’s proposed management and quality team experience and capabilities, and will evaluate proposed schedules necessary to complete the requirements of this contract. Marginal levels of experience and capabilities as well as inadequate schedule durations and schedule details could indicate a lack of understanding of the requirements, and/or inability to successfully complete the requirements, and may result in the entire proposal receiving an unfavorable rating and/or being eliminated from the competitive range.

1) Identify key management structure and team for completion of all contract requirements to include: Resume that describes the experience and responsibility of key personnel with projects of similar type, size and complexity as that required for this contract. If contractor is proposing two shifts, clearly indicate which employees would comprise that shifts’ team to satisfy the contract requirements for personnel qualifications. These personnel would be expected to participate in this project and set the minimum qualification level for any key personnel substitutions.

2) Description of the offeror’s Quality Control Program given the requirements in Specification 01 45 04.00 28. May include the manufacturing facility’s QCP and also submit an approved onsite QCP from a previous USACE contract to demonstrate your knowledge and development of similar programs for this type of work.

3) Provide a schedule that identifies the planned activities, order of tasks, task dependencies and durations proposed to successfully accomplish the entire project from notice to proceed to final commissioning for unit 3. Assume the Government requires 2 weeks for their own commissioning activities identified in 48 08 00.00 28 after the contractor has considered his activities complete. A baseline schedule will be prepared by the Government and used for comparison purposes. Contractor should assume for evaluation purposes only an award date of 01 Oct 2015. NTP is dependent on contractor’s timely submission of proper bonds.

The Technical Factor Ratings, excerpted below focus on the strengths, deficiencies, weaknesses, risks and uncertainties of the offeror’s proposal. The rating depicts how well the offeror’s proposal meets the Technical subfactor requirements.

Rating Description Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is not awardable.

3. Factor II - Past Performance: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of current and past performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the scope of work.

a. Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this solicitation utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in Appendix D.

b. The Government will focus its inquiries on the offeror’s (and major subcontractor’s) record of performance as it relates to all solicitation requirements, including price, schedule, performance and management of subcontractors. Major subcontractors are defined as members of an offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform ten (10) percent or more of the proposed effort. A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of the work can become an important consideration in the evaluation process. Therefore, offerors are reminded to include the most current and relevant efforts (within the past six years) in their proposal. Absent any current and relevant past performance history or when the performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will be assigned an “unknown confidence rating” and its proposal will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance. The Government may use data provided by the offeror in its proposal and data obtained from other sources, including data in Government files or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor and their current and past performance under Federal, State or Local government or commercial contracts for same or similar services. Data used in conducting performance risk assessments shall not extend past six years prior to the issue date of the RFP, but may include performance data generated during the past six years without regard to the contract award date.

c. Offerors shall submit all Government and/or commercial contract numbers and descriptions for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past six years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this RFP. 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.

d. The past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated record of current and relevant past performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation: relevancy and performance confidence assessment.

e. RELEVANCY: The Government will conduct a performance assessment based on the relevancy of the Offeror's current and relevant past performance, as well as that of its major subcontractors, as it relates to the probability of successful accomplishment of the required effort. These efforts include all aspects of schedule, performance and customer support, including the Offeror’s submitted subcontracting plan for this project and the Offeror’s record of:

1) Conforming to specifications and standards of good workmanship;

2) Maintaining program execution within price;

3) Adherence to contract schedules, including the administrative aspects of performance;

4) Ability to resolve technical and manufacturing problems quickly and effectively;

5) Businesslike concern for the interest of its customers;

6) Establishing and maintaining adequate management of subcontractors; and

7) Compliance with subcontracting plans submitted on previous projects.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition Very Relevant Current/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

Somewhat Relevant Current /past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Current /past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

f. QUALITY ASSESSMENT: The Government will conduct a quality assessment based on the quality of the offeror’s past performance on those current efforts that were determined relevant by determining how well the contractor performed on the contracts.

Documented results from Past Performance Questionnaires, interviews, CPARS, and other sources form the support and basis for this assessment.

g. PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT: The final step is for the team to arrive at a single consensus performance confidence assessment for the offeror, selecting the most appropriate rating from the chart below. This rating considers the assessed quality of the relevant/current efforts gathered.

Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Definition Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s 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 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 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 relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

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

4. Factor III - Small Business Participation: All offerors (both large and small businesses) will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of small businesses in the performance of acquisition (as small business prime offerors or small business subcontractors) relative to the objectives and goals established herein. The government will evaluate:

a. The extent to which such firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in proposals;

b. The extent of commitment to use such firms (and enforceable commitments will be considered more favorably than non-enforceable ones);

c. Identification of the complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform;

d. The extent past performance in compliance with FAR 52.219-8 “Utilization of Small Business” and maximizing opportunities for U.S. Small Business Subcontractors.

e. The Offeror’s proposal must meet the minimum Total Small Business Participation goal of 3% (through collective small business participation from any type of small business or sub-category of small business) of total contract value. The Government will evaluate the proposals to determine reasonableness of the portion of work to be subcontracted for each sub-category. The work to be performed directly by the Offeror will also be evaluated as Small Business Participation. The goals are:

• Total SB (any type of small business) 3% of total contract value

• Sub-category Small Business o HUBZONE Small Business >0.5% o Woman Owned Small Business (WOSB) 1% o Service-Disabled Veteran Owned SB (SDVOSB) >0.5% o Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) 1% o HBCU/Minority Institutions 0%

Small Business Participation Factor Rating Definitions

Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

5. Factor IV - Price: The contract will be a Firm Fixed-Price Contract. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by evaluating the prices proposed in the Bid Schedule. The Offeror must provide a price proposal by completing the Bid Schedule as instructed in Section 00100.

a. The RFP requires firm fixed-price contract line items. A price reasonableness approach will be utilized by the Government to determine that the proposed prices offered are fair and reasonable and that a “buy-in” or unbalanced pricing between CLINs is not occurring.

b. The Government will examine price proposals for artificially low unit prices. Offers found to be unreasonably high, unrealistically low (an indication of “buy–in”), or unbalanced, may be considered unacceptable and may be rejected on that basis.

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. Introduction. The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted in hard copy, with accompanying electronic 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 two (2) volumes. The Volumes are:

Volume I - Technical and Past Performance Volume II - Price, Small Business Participation, and Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations

Files shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

Proposals must be submitted in hard copy AND electronically. The electronic files shall contain identical information as the hard copy files.

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform.

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

2. Proposal Submission Requirements.

a. Each volume shall be submitted in a separate three-ring binder. 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).

b. Printing should be single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscape.

c. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

VOLUME TITLE PRINTED

COPIES

ELECTRONIC

COPIES

I – Technical & Past Performance Original + 6 1 II – Price, SB Participation, Documents Original + 6 1

3. Proposal Files

a. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. 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. A Table of Contents should be created using the Table of Content feature in MS Word. MS Word (doc) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1” From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5” Page Size, Width – 8.5” Page Size, Height – 11”

NOTE: 11X17 folded pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations.

The following additional restrictions apply:

b. File Packaging. All of the proposal files shall be compressed (zipped) into one file entitled proposal zip using WinZip version 6.2 or later, or as separate uploads in their native format, i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc., and provided on CDs or DVDs. Zip disks are not permitted. Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. All price breakdown information to aide in the Price evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format and viewable in Microsoft Excel 2007. Each disc shall be externally labeled with the volume number, date, and the offeror’s name. **Please note – Self extracting exe files are not acceptable. It is the responsibility of the offeror to ensure that both the electronic and hard copies are identical. SSEB members may use either format during the evaluation process. **If the hard-copy proposal differs from the electronic version, the electronic version will govern.

c. Content Requirement. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file.

Proprietary information shall be clearly marked. The following shall be included in the Narrative discussion:

(i) VOLUME I –Factor I Technical and Factor II Past Performance. The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Section 1- Subfactor A: Technical Work Plan and Capabilities

(2) Section 2- Subfactor B: Unit Stator Winding Replacement and Commissioning

(3) Section 3- Subfactor C: Management, Quality Control and Schedule

(4) Section 4- Past Performance

Section 4 shall contain past performance information regarding similar contracts.

This section shall not exceed 25 pages plus five pages for each major subcontractor, excluding Past Performance Questionnaire Forms. Offerors shall submit all Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past six years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Relevant efforts are defined as services/efforts that are the same as or similar to the effort required by the RFP. Data concerning the offeror shall be provided first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor, in alphabetical order. The Offeror shall also submit the written consent of its major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of its subcontractor’s past performance information to the Offeror. In addition, letters of commitment shall be included for all major subcontractors for their past performance to be considered. This volume shall be organized into the following subsections:

(1) Subsection 1 – Contract Descriptions. This section shall include the following information in the following format.

(a) Contractor/Subcontractor place of performance, CAGE Code and DUNS Number. If the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and Point of Contact (POC) within the prime contractor organization (name, and current address, e-mail address, and telephone and fax numbers).

(b) Government contracting activity, and current address, Procuring Contracting Officer’s name, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

(c) Government’s technical representative/COR and current email address, telephone and fax numbers.

(d) Government contract administration activity and the Administrative Contracting Officer’s name, current e-mail address, telephone and fax number.

(e) Government contract administration activity’s Pre-Award Monitor’s name, and current e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

(f) Contract Number and, in the case of Indefinite Delivery type contracts, GSA contracts, and Blanket Purchase Agreements, include Delivery Order Numbers.

(g) Contract Type (specific type such as Fixed-Price (FP), Cost Reimbursement (CR), Time & Material (T&M), etc.). In the case of Indefinite Delivery contracts, indicate specific type (Requirements, Definite Quantity, and Indefinite Quantity) and secondary contract type (FP, CR, T&M, etc.).

(h) Awarded price.

(i) Final or projected final price.

(j) Original delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion or work.

(k) Final or projected final, delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

(2) Subsection 2 – Performance. Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed in Subsection 1, Contract Description, describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirement of this RFP.

(a) For any contracts that did not/do not meet original schedule or technical performance requirements, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence. The offerors shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary. All Requests for Deviation and Requests for Waiver shall be addressed with respect to causes and corrective actions. The offerors shall also provide copy of any Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action implemented by the offeror or proposed subcontractor. The offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination.

(b) For all contracts, the offeror shall provide data on all manufacturing warranty returns. Data shall delineate total number of warranty returns, number of Could Not Duplicate (CND), number of failures attributable to GFE component failures, and number and nature of failures attributable to the offeror’s delivered product.

(3) Subsection 3 – Subcontracts. Offerors shall provide an outline of how the effort required by the RFP will be assigned for performance within the offeror’s corporate entity and among the proposed subcontractors. The information provided for the prime offeror and each proposed major subcontractor must include the entire company name, company address, CAGE Code, DUNS Number and type of work to be performed by citing the applicable Government PWS subparagraph number. This includes all subcontractors who will be providing critical hardware/services or whose subcontract is for more than 10% of the total proposed Price. This section will further include written consent of major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of their subcontractor’s past performance information to the Offeror.

In addition, letters of commitment shall be included for all major subcontractors.

(4) Subsection 4 – New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its officers and employees.

However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information should be included in the files described in the sections above. Letters of Commitment shall be included in the proposal for these employees in order to be considered.

(5) Past Performance Questionnaire. For all contracts identified in Subsection 1, Contract Descriptions, a Past Performance Questionnaire must be completed and submitted. The offeror shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire and e-mail the questionnaire to both the Government contracting activity and technical representative responsible for the past/current contract. The POCs shall be instructed to electronically complete Part II of the questionnaire and e-mail the entire questionnaire to the Contracting Office no later than the proposal due date, to Phyllis.L.Buerstatte@usace.army.mil. The offeror shall submit, with the proposal, a list of all the POC’s who were sent a questionnaire. The Government must receive this list no later than the proposal due date. The POC List shall be submitted in Word for Windows Table Format to include the following fields: Solicitation Number; Company Name; Contract Number; Government Agency;

POC Last Name, First Name; POC Title; POC Telephone Number;

POC E-mail Address; and Date E-Mail to POC (month/day).

Submissions. Offerors are discouraged from providing points of contact with another contractors’ facility, i.e., in case an offeror (or one of his/her team members) is in a subcontract with another contractor who has submitted a proposal on the same requirement. Offerors shall provide and submit the prime contract number and all Governmental agency POC in lieu of subcontract numbers or prime contract POCs in situations as described above.

(ii) VOLUME II – Price, Small Business Participation, and Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations. This volume shall consist of all information required to support proposed prices. Certified cost and pricing data are not currently required; however, the Government reserves the right to request such data prior to award. There are no page limitations for this volume.

(1) The offeror shall ensure that the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and fully supports the amounts set forth in the SF1442 and continuation sheets.

(2) Small Business Participation Plan. All Offerors shall complete and submit the form titled, “Small Business Participation Plan.”

(3) Certifications and Representations – Each offeror shall complete (fill-in and signatures) the solicitation sections indicated below using the file (without modification to the file) provided with the RFP. An authorized official of the firm shall sign the SF 1442 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission.

Section 00100 – Standard Form 1442 (SF 1442), Solicitation, Offer and Award Section 00600 – Representations, Certification and Other Statements of Offerors

Solicitations, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations shall not be addressed separately from that submitted in VOLUME II.

E. DISCUSSIONS

1. GENERAL INFORMATION. In accordance with FAR 15.306(d), discussion sessions may be held.

SECTION 00700 - CONTRACT CLAUSES

52.211-12 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES--CONSTRUCTION (SEP 2000)

(a) If the Contractor fails to complete the work specified in subparagraph (c)(1) of FAR Clause 52.211-10, COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK, within the time specified in the contract, the Contractor shall pay liquidated damages to the Government in the amount of $2,611.00 for each calendar day of delay until the work is completed or accepted.

(b) If the Government terminates the Contractor's right to proceed, liquidated damages will continue to accrue until the work is completed. These liquidated damages are in addition to excess costs of repurchase under the Termination clause.

(End of clause)

SECTION 00800 - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

WAGE DETERMINATION

General Decision Number: ID150065 07/10/2015 ID65

Superseded General Decision Number: ID20140065

State: Idaho

Construction Type: Heavy HEAVY CONSTRUCTION, Including water and sewer line construction and heavy construction projects on treatment plants and industrial (power plants, manufacturing plants, processing plants, etc.) sites

Counties: Benewah, Clearwater and Latah Counties in Idaho.

Note: Executive Order (EO) 13658 establishes an hourly minimum wage of $10.10 for 2015 that applies to all contracts subject to the Davis-Bacon Act for which the solicitation is issued on or after January 1, 2015. If this contract is covered by the EO, the contractor must pay all workers in any classification listed on this wage determination at least $10.10 (or the applicable wage rate listed on this wage determination, if it is higher) for all hours spent performing on the contract. The EO minimum wage rate will be adjusted annually. Additional information on contractor requirements and worker protections under the EO is available at www.dol.gov/whd/govcontracts.

Modification Number Publication Date 0 01/02/2015 1 07/10/2015

CARP0001-045 06/01/2013

Rates Fringes

CARPENTER (Form Work Only).......$ 30.66 12.87

* ELEC0073-011 07/01/2015

Rates Fringes

ELECTRICIAN......................$ 31.00 16.68

ENGI0370-035 06/01/2013

Rates Fringes

POWER EQUIPMENT OPERATOR:

Backhoe (45,000 gw & under), Cranes (25 tons & under), Drill (8 in bit and over

GROUP 5....................$ 26.81 12.85

Backhoe (45,000-110,000 gw), Crane (25-45 tons), Bulldozer (D-6 and over), Grader/Blade, Front-End Loader(4-8 yds), Paver, Scrapers (all)

GROUP 6....................$ 27.09 12.85

Backhoe (over 110,000 gw), Cranes (45-85 tons), Heavy Duty Mechanic, Front End Loader (8-10 yds)

GROUP 7....................$ 27.36 12.85

Bulldozer (up to D-6)

GROUP 3....................$ 26.49 12.85

Cranes (85 tons & over), Front End Loader (10 yds & over)

GROUP 8....................$ 28.46 12.85

Front End Loader (under 4 yds)

GROUP 4....................$ 26.65 12.85

Rollers (all)

GROUP 1....................$ 25.56 12.85

ZONE PAY:

ZONE CENTERS: SPOKANE, PASCO, LEWISTON

ZONE 1: 0-45 Miles: Free ZONE 2: 45 Miles & Over: $2.00

BOOM PAY (ALL CRANES):

(A): 180'-250': $.50 over scale (B): over 250': $.80 over scale

IRON0014-006 07/01/2013

Rates Fringes

IRONWORKER, REINFORCING AND

STRUCTURAL.......................$ 31.60 21.35

LABO0238-028 02/01/2012

Rates Fringes

LABORER (PIPELINE ONLY)

COMMON......................$ 24.69 9.95

LABO0238-031 06/01/2014

Rates Fringes

LABORER

Asphalt Includes Raker, Shoveler, Spreader, and Distributor Group 4....................$ 24.89 10.95 Flagger Group 1A...................$ 23.25 10.95

Zone Differential (Add to Zone 1 rates): Zone 2 - $2.00

BASE POINTS: Spokane

Zone 1: 0-45 radius miles from the main post office.

Zone 2: 45 radius miles and over from the main post office

PLAS0072-003 06/01/2014

BENEWAH, BONNER, BOUNDARY, CLEARWATER, IDAHO (NORTH OF THE 46TH

PARALLEL), KOOTENAI, LATAH, LEWIS AND NEZ PERCE AND SHOSHONE

COUNTIES

ZONE 1:

Rates Fringes

CEMENT MASON/CONCRETE FINISHER...$ 26.41 12.44

Zone Differential (Add to Zone 1 rate): Zone 2 - $2.00

BASE POINTS: Spokane, Pasco, Lewiston, Wenatchee

Zone 1: 0-45 radius miles from the main post office

Zone 2: Over 45 radius miles from the main post office

PLUM0044-015 06/01/2013

Rates Fringes

PLUMBER

Zone 1......................$ 35.81 17.34

TEAM0690-002 01/01/2014

Rates Fringes

TRUCK DRIVER (DUMP)

6 yds and under.............$ 22.94 15.19 over 6 yds..................$ 23.38 15.19

SUID2010-058 08/08/2012

Rates Fringes

CARPENTER, Excludes Form Work....$ 29.92 5.20

LABORER: Common or General......$ 23.75 8.98

LABORER: Landscape..............$ 22.13 11.13

LABORER: Pipelayer..............$ 17.67 7.26

OPERATOR: Bobcat/Skid Steer/Skid Loader................$ 20.97 0.00

OPERATOR: Concrete Batch Plant............................$ 24.94 11.96

OPERATOR: Forklift..............$ 21.20 0.00

TRUCK DRIVER: Lowboy Truck......$ 21.00 12.10

TRUCK DRIVER: Water Truck.......$ 24.48 11.67

WELDERS - Receive rate prescribed for craft performing operation to which welding is incidental.

Unlisted classifications needed for work not included within the scope of the classifications listed may be added after award only as provided in the labor standards contract clauses (29CFR 5.5 (a) (1) (ii)).

The body of each wage determination lists the classification and wage rates that have been found to be prevailing for the cited type(s) of construction in the area covered by the wage determination. The classifications are listed in alphabetical order of "identifiers" that indicate whether the particular rate is a union rate (current union negotiated rate for local), a survey rate (weighted average rate) or a union average rate (weighted union average rate).

Union Rate Identifiers

A four letter classification abbreviation identifier enclosed in dotted lines beginning with characters other than "SU" or "UAVG" denotes that the union classification and rate were prevailing for that classification in the survey. Example:

PLUM0198-005 07/01/2014. PLUM is an abbreviation identifier of the union which prevailed in the survey for this classification, which in this example would be Plumbers. 0198 indicates the local union number or district council number where applicable, i.e., Plumbers Local 0198. The next number, 005 in the example, is an internal number used in processing the wage determination. 07/01/2014 is the effective date of the most current negotiated rate, which in this example is July 1, 2014.

Union prevailing wage rates are updated to reflect all rate changes in the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) governing this classification and rate.

Survey Rate Identifiers

Classifications listed under the "SU" identifier indicate that no one rate prevailed for this classification in the survey and the published rate is derived by computing a weighted average rate based on all the rates reported in the survey for that classification. As this weighted average rate includes all rates reported in the survey, it may include both union and non-union rates. Example: SULA2012-007 5/13/2014. SU indicates the rates are survey rates based on a weighted average calculation of rates and are not majority rates. LA indicates the State of Louisiana. 2012 is the year of survey on which these classifications and rates are based. The next number, 007 in the example, is an internal number used in producing the wage determination. 5/13/2014 indicates the survey completion date for the classifications and rates under that identifier.

Survey wage rates are not updated and remain in effect until a new survey is conducted.

Union Average Rate Identifiers

Classification(s) listed under the UAVG identifier indicate that no single majority rate prevailed for those classifications; however, 100% of the data reported for the classifications was union data. EXAMPLE: UAVG-OH-0010 08/29/2014. UAVG indicates that the rate is a weighted union average rate. OH indicates the state. The next number, 0010 in the example, is an internal number used in producing the wage determination. 08/29/2014 indicates the survey completion date for the classifications and rates under that identifier.

A UAVG rate will be updated once a year, usually in January of each year, to reflect a weighted average of the current negotiated/CBA rate of the union locals from which the rate is based.

WAGE DETERMINATION APPEALS PROCESS

1.) Has there been an initial decision in the matter? This can be:

* an existing published wage determination

* a survey underlying a wage determination

* a Wage and Hour Division letter setting forth a position on a wage determination matter

* a conformance (additional classification and rate) ruling

On survey related matters, initial contact, including requests for summaries of surveys, should be with the Wage and Hour Regional Office for the area in which the survey was conducted because those Regional Offices have responsibility for the Davis-Bacon survey program. If the response from this initial contact is not satisfactory, then the process described in 2.)

and 3.) should be followed.

With regard to any other matter not yet ripe for the formal process described here, initial contact should be with the Branch of Construction Wage Determinations. Write to:

Branch of Construction Wage Determinations Wage and Hour Division U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20210

2.) If the answer to the question in 1.) is yes, then an interested party (those affected by the action) can request review and reconsideration from the Wage and Hour Administrator (See 29 CFR Part 1.8 and 29 CFR Part 7). Write to:

Wage and Hour Administrator U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20210

The request should be accompanied by a full statement of the interested party's position and by any information (wage payment data, project description, area practice material, etc.) that the requestor considers relevant to the issue.

3.) If the decision of the Administrator is not favorable, an interested party may appeal directly to the Administrative Review Board (formerly the Wage Appeals Board). Write to:

Administrative Review Board U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20210

4.) All decisions by the Administrative Review Board are final.

END OF GENERAL DECISION

(End of Summary of Changes)

SUBMITTAL FORM,Jan 96 PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE PAGE 1 OF 15 PAGES

Dworshak Unit 3 Stator Replacement

01 11 01.00 28 SD-01 Preconstruction Submittals

1.5 I CEquipment List

1.10 I CPre-Work Survey

1.13 G CAir Purity Control Program

1.16 G CProject Superintendent

1.9 G CRecord of Parts Removed from

the Site

1.21 G CScaffolding and Special Tools

1.22 G CTool and Parts Accountability

Program SD-07 Certificates

1.17 G CKey Personnel Substitution

SD-11 Closeout Submittals

1.10 I CPost-Work Survey

01 14 00.90 28 SD-01 Preconstruction Submittals

1.2 I SLEAnti Terrorism (AT) Level 1

1.4 I SLEiWATCH And/Or CORPS

WATCH Training

1.5 I SLELevel 1 OPSEC training

1.6 I SLEPre-Screening Of Contractor

Employees 01 32 01.00 28…