Amendment_0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate the changes to the solicitation as outlined in the summary of changes.

The date and time for proposal submission remains unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 22

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 09-Oct-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-0040

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

01-Oct-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

09-Oct-2015

CODE

USAED, WALLA WALLA - CONTRACTING DIV.

HILLARY A. MORGAN

201 N. THIRD AVENUE

WALLA WALLA WA 99362

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-0040

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS AND EVAL FACTORS

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 three (3) evaluation factors: Technical, Price, and Past Performance.

All subfactors of Factor I, Technical, are equal in importance to each other. Factor I, Technical, is more important than Factor II, Past Performance. When combined, the non-price factors (Factors I and II) are approximately equal in importance to Factor III, Price. As proposals become more equal in their technical (non-price) merit, the evaluated price becomes more important in determining the best value proposal.

B. FACTORS AND SUB-FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors and sub-factors 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 sub-factors described below.

1. FACTOR I Technical - The technical evaluation will be comprised of two (2) Sub-Factors.

Risk assesses the degree to which the offeror’s proposed technical approach for the requirements of the solicitation may cause disruption of schedule, increased price, 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: Electrical and Controls Construction Experience Subfactor B: Mechanical Construction Experience

The two (2) subfactors are of equal importance.

Evaluation of 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.

3. FACTOR III Price - The resulting award will be a firm-fixed price contract. 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. Marginal levels of overall detail could indicate a lack of understanding concerning the requirements and may result in the entire factor receiving an unfavorable rating and/or being eliminated from the competitive range.

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

a. Subfactor A: Electrical and Controls Construction Experience

Offerors shall submit the following for Subfactor A:

Proposals will be evaluated to determine electrical and control construction experience for relevant projects of the scope and complexity required in this solicitation. Offerors must demonstrate relevant electrical and controls construction experience of at least three (3) projects within the last five (5) years that include the installation, replacement, or upgrade of power and control features for hoisting systems. Each reference project used to demonstrate electrical and controls construction experience must include relevant scope of work, but is not required to involve all of the fully relevant elements defined in this subfactor. Proposals will be determined to be acceptable if three (3) reference projects combined demonstrate fully relevant experience, as defined in this subfactor. Proposals that demonstrate fully relevant experience across more than three (3) projects will be considered more favorable.

Offerors must demonstrate that the proposed manufacturer of the control and equipment panels is a UL-certified panel shop with a minimum of five (5) years experience in the manufacture of products similar to the type and complexity required by this solicitation.

Use Attachment “Offeror Experience Form” to describe the projects in which the Offeror has relevant electrical and controls construction experience. Provide a description of relevant projects to include the title and location of the project, contract amount, the start and completion dates (or anticipated completion date) of the construction phase of the project, a brief description of the work, the offeror’s specific role on the project, and a point of contact for the project customer/client that includes the person’s name, title, and current phone number. Project descriptions shall include adequate detail to demonstrate the relevancy of the scope of work for comparison to that required in this solicitation.

If the prime contractor proposes self-performing the electrical and controls construction, ensure the proposal is clear that the Offeror will be performing this function. If the prime contractor proposes to use a subcontractor for electrical and controls construction experience, the offeror must submit a Letter of Commitment from the subcontractor with the proposal.

If a subcontractor is proposed, the proposal will be considered more favorable if the proposal contains evidence of the prime and subcontractor working successfully together previously on relevant projects, than an offer with a prime and subcontractor with no prior experience working together on relevant projects.

If a joint venture is proposed, the proposal will be considered more favorable if the proposal contains evidence of the joint venture entity working successfully together previously on relevant projects, than an offer with a joint venture with no prior experience working together on relevant projects.

Fully Relevant Technical Experience for this sub-factor is defined as projects including all of the following:

i. At least 50% physically complete at the time of proposal submission or was completed within the last five (5) years.

ii. Electrical and controls construction which required the installation, replacement, or upgrade of power and control systems for hoisting gates, bridges, or similar structures weighing a minimum of 75 100-tons.

iii. Controls installation, replacement, or upgrade involving: 480V Variable Frequency Drives (VFD) rated 40-200 HP, Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC), Human Machine Interfaces (HMI), synchronization of hoist drive equipment, position indication equipment, and system controls software.

b. Subfactor B: Mechanical Construction Experience

Offerors shall submit the following for Subfactor B:

Proposals will be evaluated to determine mechanical construction experience for relevant projects of the scope and complexity required in this solicitation. Offerors must demonstrate relevant mechanical construction experience of at least three (3) projects within the last ten (10) years. Each reference project used to demonstrate mechanical construction experience must include relevant scope of work, but is not required to involve all of the fully relevant elements defined in this subfactor. Proposals will be determined to be acceptable if three (3) reference projects combined demonstrate fully relevant experience, as define in this subfactor. Proposals that demonstrate fully relevant experience across more than three (3) projects will be considered more favorable.

Offerors must demonstrate relevant experience of at least five (5) years for the proposed designer and manufacturer of pinion gears and shafts. Proposals shall include relevant experience with design and fabrication of gears in accordance with American Gear Manufacturers Association (AGMA) standards. Offerors shall demonstrate relevant experience with laser alignment of equipment shafts and open gear alignment to verify gear tooth contact at working loads.

Offerors must demonstrate relevant experience of at least five (5) years for the proposed source to perform hoist cable tensioning and load balancing with vibrating wire load cells.

Use Attachment “Offeror Experience Form” to describe the projects in which the offeror, subcontractors, and suppliers have relevant mechanical construction experience. Provide a description of relevant projects to include the title and location of the project, contract amount, the start and completion dates (or anticipated completion date) of the construction phase of the project, a brief description of the work, the firm’s specific role on the project, and a point of contact for the project customer/client that includes the person’s name, title, and current phone number. Project descriptions shall include adequate detail to demonstrate the relevancy of the scope of work for comparison to that required in this solicitation.

If the prime contractor proposes self-performing the mechanical construction, ensure the proposal is clear that the offeror will be performing this function. If the prime contractor proposes to use a subcontractor for mechanical construction experience, the offeror must submit a Letter of Commitment from the subcontractor with the proposal.

If a subcontractor is proposed, the proposal will be considered more favorable if the proposal contains evidence of the prime and subcontractor working successfully together previously on relevant projects, than an offer with a prime and subcontractor with no prior experience working together on relevant projects.

If a joint venture is proposed, the proposal will be considered more favorable if the proposal contains evidence of the joint venture entity working successfully together previously on relevant projects, than an offer with a joint venture with no prior experience working together on relevant projects.

Fully Relevant Technical Experience for this sub-factor is defined as projects including all of the following:

i. At least 50% physically complete at the time of proposal submission or was completed within the last ten (10) years.

ii. Mechanical construction which required the installation, replacement, or upgrade of hoist machinery for gates, bridges, or similar structures weighing a minimum of 75 100-tons.

iii. Design and fabrication of gears larger than 8 inches in diameter in accordance with American Gear Manufacturers Association (AGMA) standards.

iv. Design and fabrication of shafts larger than 4 inches in diameter.

v. Hoist machinery installation, replacement, or upgrade involving: two-point lift configuration, skew control, tensioning and load balancing for multiple hoist cables, laser alignment of equipment shafts, and gear alignment for open gear sets measuring a minimum of 5 ft center to center.

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 past and current 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 plan utilizing the attached forms and questionnaires set forth in Appendix D.

b. The Government will focus its inquiries on the offeror’s (major subcontractors’ and fabricators’) 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 will be reminded to include the most current and relevant past 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 as compared to the North American Industry Classification System NAICS 237990, Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction. 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 current and relevant past record of 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.

(i) RELEVANCY: The Government will conduct a performance assessment based on the relevancy of the Offeror's current and past performance, as well as that of its major subcontractors and fabricators, 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.

(i) 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 (documented results from Past Performance Questionnaires, interviews, CPARS, and other sources form the support and basis for this assessment).

Ensure the rationale for the conclusions reached are included.

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 - 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.

Firm Fixed Price Requirements

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 digital copies, as set forth below. The RFP shall provide the Government address and receipt date for proposal submittal.

The offeror’s proposal shall consist of two (2) volumes. The Volumes are:

Volume I - Technical, Past Performance Volume II - Price, 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 in electronic format. The electronic files shall contain identical information to 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

Volume I Original +5 1 Volume II Original + 5 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. All files created in 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 aid 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. **If the hard-copy proposal differs from the electronic version, the electronic copy 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, TAB 1 -Technical. The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Section 1 - Subfactor A: Electrical and Controls Construction Experience

(2) Section 2 - Subfactor B: Mechanical Construction Experience

(ii) VOLUME I, TAB 2 – Past Performance. This tab volume shall contain current and past performance information regarding similar contracts. This tab volume shall not exceed 25 pages plus five pages for each major subcontractor and fabricator, excluding Past Performance Questionnaire Forms. Offerors shall submit all Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major contract currently 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 tab volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Section 1 – Contract Descriptions. This section shall include the following information in the following format. Ensure all information is current and accurate.

(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, (or private firm) and current address, Procuring Contracting Officer’s name, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

(c) 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 point of contact 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) Section 2 – Performance. Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed in Section 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) Section 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 technical specification. This includes all subcontractors who will be providing critical hardware/services or whose subcontract is for more than 10% of the total proposed Price.

(4) Section 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) Section 5-Past Performance Questionnaire. For all contracts identified in Section 1

- Contract Descriptions, a Past Performance Questionnaire, Appendix D, 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 current and past contract. The Point of Contacts (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 Hillary.A.Morgan@usace.army.mil. The offeror must submit, with its proposal, a list of all the POCs who were sent questionnaires. 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).

(6) Section 6-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 points of contact (POC) in lieu of subcontract numbers or prime contract POCs in situations as described above.

(iii) VOLUME II, TAB 1 – Price. This tab volume shall consist of all information, required to support proposed prices. Certified pricing data is not currently required;

however, the Government reserves the right to request such data prior to award. There are no page limitations for this tab volume.

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

(v) VOLUME II, TAB 2– SOLICITATIONS, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS

AND CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS

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 00010 – Standard Form 1442 Solicitation, Offer and Award (Construction, Alteration or Repair)

Section 00600 – Representations, Certification and Other Statements of Offerors

Solicitations, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations shall not be submitted separately from that submitted in VOLUME II – SOLICITATIONS, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS

/REPRESENTATIONS.

E. DISCUSSIONS

1. GENERAL INFORMATION. In accordance with FAR provision 52.215-1, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors. Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary.

OFFEROR EXPERIENCE FORM

Technical Subfactor: __________ Subfactor Title: ___________________________

Name of Offeror: ______________________________

Project Title: _________________________________________________________________

Contract/Project Number: _________________________

Project Location: _________________________________

Total Contract Value: $_______________

(Final value if completed, current value if not completed)

If Offeror performed as Subcontractor, Value of Subcontract: $_______________

Construction Phase Start Date: ___________________________________

Construction Phase Completion Date: ______________________________

(Actual date if project has been completed, anticipated date if project is not complete)

Name of Customer/Client: ______________________________________________________

Telephone Number of Customer/Client: __________________________________________

Email Address of Customer/Client: ______________________________________________

Description of Project’s Scope:

Offeror’s role and responsibility during construction of the project:

(Indicate whether your firm performed as a prime or subcontractor.)

Describe the relevancy of the reference project with the scope required in this solicitation:

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE FORM

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0) CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS.

CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO USACE. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR USACE POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner.

There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory

Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not Applicable

No information or did not apply to your contract

Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts E VG S M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance

E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E VG S M U N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes; responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines

E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes

E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)

E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client

E VG S M U N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E VG S M U N

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section.

Yes No

e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.

Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues? (Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.

E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

E VG S M U N

b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues)

E VG S M U N

c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below)

Yes No

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor.

E VG S M U N

Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks.

Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary):

(End of Summary of Changes)