A.07.24_Amendment_0001_W912EF-16-R-0026.pdf

W68SBV60285931

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 make changes to the specifications, notify the offerors that Appendix C & D are posted to fbo.gov w ith the solicitation, revise the past performance criteria and extend the due date to 2:00 PM PST on 27 July 2016.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 15

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 14-Jul-2016

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-16-R-0026

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

17-Jun-2016

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

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

14-Jul-2016

CODE

USAED, WALLA WALLA - CONTRACTING DIV.

KENT R. BERNARD 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-16-R-0026

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 20-Jul-2016 02:00 PM to 27-Jul-2016 02:00 PM.

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0001

1. Revised the following Specifications:

a. SECTION 01 32 01.00 28 PROJECT SCHEDULE

Revised the following paragraph:

3.3.9 Milestones

b. SECTION 41 01 20.72 26 BRIDGE CRANE MECHANICAL AND STRUCTURAL

MODIFICATION

Revised the following paragraph:

2.9 WHEELS

2. Revised Evaluation Criteria:

a. Past Performance has been changed from 6 years to 10 years.

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The existing 350T bridge cranes were originally constructed in 1953. They have a 350 ton capacity with a span of 78 feet. Both cranes were rehabilitated in 2005 which included replacement of the existing CMAA A3 bridge drive configuration with a new CMAA A4-four corner configuration, including complete replacement of the drive and idler end trucks. The current drive arrangement on each crane includes two 40 HP Magnetek Impulse G+ Series-2 VFDs and four 20 HP SEW Eurodrive MC3PEHT05- DV160L4BMGHR gearmotor assemblies. One VFD drives two gearmotors on the A girder and a second VFD drives two gearmotors on the B girder. The VFDs are configured in open loop vector. The end truck drive wheel axle is directly inserted into the hollow shaft output of the gearmotor (i.e. direct drive). All driven wheels are 27” diameter taper tread (4 per crane) and all idler wheels are 27” diameter flat tread (12 per crane).

Both cranes experience excessive skewing problems due to the improperly designed bridge drives (two taper drive wheels being driven by one VFD configured in open loop vector). Some of the drive and idler crane wheel flanges have worn excessively, and the crane frame is visibly wracking during bridge travel.

Cracks have formed in the end-tie connections as a result of the crane frame wracking and the crane operating in a skewed state for an extended period. In order to improve the skewing condition of each crane, new VFDs will be installed for each drive motor to allow independent control of the bridge motors.

The new drive controllers must communicate with the existing Allen Bradley PLC and HMI system already installed on the crane. The communication interdependence will be met by installing new Magnetek Impulse G+ drives to be compatible with what is currently installed on the crane. Additionally, laser anti-skewing equipment and programming will be installed to assist with the proper tracking of the bridge crane along the rails. New flat tread drive and idler wheel-axle assemblies will be installed at each corner truck. New right-angle drive gearmotors will be installed with encoder motors and torque-arm assemblies. The end-tie beams will be reinforced.

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) technical evaluation factors: Experience, Past Performance, Work Plan, and Small Business Participation. Factor I Experience is approximately equal to Factor II Past Performance. Factor III Work Plan is approximately equal to Factor IV Small Business Participation. Factors I and II, when combined are significantly more important than Factors III and IV, when combined. When combined, the non-price factors (Factors I, II, III, and IV) are significantly more important than Factor V, 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 TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation 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 described below.

1. Volume I, FACTOR I – Experience - 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 rating.

Evaluation of the offeror’s proposal shall address this factor as it applies to the scope of work defined in this solicitation. During evaluations of each proposal, the Government will assign this factor an adjectival rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings.

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

3. Volume I, FACTOR III – Work Plan - The Offeror shall submit a work plan consisting of a detailed schedule and a project management plan.

4. Volume I, FACTOR IV – Small Business Participation – Offerors shall submit a Small Business Participation Plan.

5. Volume II, FACTOR V – 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).

The overarching evaluation approach for all factors 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.

1. Volume I, Factor I – Experience

Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated on the breadth and depth of relevant project experience that is comparable in technical scope to what is required by this solicitation.

Submit information for those projects that affirmatively demonstrate the Offeror’s specialized training, expertise, and ability performing work similar in size, scope, and complexity to this project. This project will consist of design, fabrication, installation of new bridge drives and controls upgrades to correct skewing on two (2) 350 Ton powerhouse bridge cranes at McNary Lock and Dam.

Relevant experience is defined as follows:

A crane must have traveled on rails to be relevant. Fully Relevant projects that demonstrate the Offeror’s Experience should include the following:

1) Complete design, fabrication, installation, assembly, factory testing, and field testing/load testing aspects of new or rebuilt bridge drives and controls upgrades on bridge cranes with a capacity of at least 100 tons and a minimum span of 60 feet. Demonstrating bridge drive skewing/control measures similar in complexity as required in the solicitation. Demonstrate experience with designing measures to maintain crane alignment on rails (bridge drive open loop vs. close loop configurations, flat vs. taper tread wheel type, alignment tolerances for crane frame, anti-skewing measures etc). Experience on bridge drive control and machinery is considered more relevant.

2) Projects that required design calculations and drawings from a registered professional engineer(s) that incorporates many of the following items: motors, brakes, communication and control systems, electrical power, bridge drive equipment or machinery (including drive and idler trucks), using live, dead, and variable loads.

3) Crane frame, end truck and wheel alignment experience for new or rehabilitated bridge cranes including assessment of crane skewing conditions using alignment measurements, analysis of results, and modifications to end trucks similar in scope and complexity as required in the solicitation.

Offerors shall submit project experience information for at least two (2) projects and no more than four (4) COMPLETED within the past ten (10) years that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to this project. If more than four projects are submitted, only the first four projects will be evaluated for experience.

Use Attachment “Offeror Experience Form” in Appendix C to describe the projects in which the Offeror has relevant crane design, fabrication, installation, assembly, factory testing, and field testing/load testing experience. Project experience shall include adequate detail such as equipment types, ratings, capacities, and configuration to demonstrate the relevancy of the scope of work for comparison to that required in this solicitation.

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 Experience Factor 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.

Offerors that claim the experience of the subcontractor or supplier, i.e. a firm that is not the prime contractor or part of the joint venture, shall submit a letter of commitment signed by the subcontractor and the prime contractor. The letter of commitment must be submitted even if the firm is in some way related to a joint venture partner (for example, the subcontractor is a subsidiary of a joint venture partner, or a subsidiary of a firm to which the joint venture partner is also a subsidiary). If an Offeror submits projects demonstrating experience by a subcontractor, a subsidiary, or a supplier, as opposed to the prime or one of the joint venture partners, the Offeror MUST submit a signed letter of commitment from the contractor who performed the completed work. If a letter of commitment is not submitted, the experience will not be considered or evaluated.

2. Volume I, 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.

The Offeror shall provide past performance information for each project listed by the Offeror under Factor 1: Experience. Recent and relevant projects are those projects completed in the past ten (10) years that are comparable in size, scope, and complexity with this project. Each offeror’s current and past performance will be reviewed to determine relevancy and confidence.

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

b. The Government will focus its inquiries on the offeror’s (and major subcontractors’) 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 or who will be providing critical hardware/services.

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 ten 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 ten years prior to the issue date of the RFP, but may include performance data generated during the past ten 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 ten 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, 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.

(ii) 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.

3. Volume I, Factor III – Work Plan - This Factor evaluates the Offeror's capability (evaluating their approach and reasonableness) to prepare a work plan, including detailed schedule and project management plan, that covers all aspects and elements related to this project. The Offeror must demonstrate an understanding of the scope of work and capability to perform the required work.

a. The offeror should propose a Work Plan Schedule that includes the following:

A detailed schedule presented in Gantt chart format using Microsoft Office Project format (minimum accepted format).

o The schedule demonstrates a thorough comprehension of the

3.1.2 General Sequence of Work (Section 41 01 20.72 26)

needed to complete the project, realistic duration for each work task, and work task sequencing in a logical order. For evaluation purposes only, the Offeror should use the arbitrary, non-binding Notice to Proceed date of 8 September 2016.

b. The offeror should propose a Work Plan that includes the following:

Demonstrate an understanding of the scope of work and the capability to perform the required work.

Include a detailed narrative discussing design, existing crane inspection and surveying, shop fabrication and testing, field installation and alignment, and acceptance and load testing.

Identify risks and risk management for unforeseen issues and delays, for example manufacture and delivery of long lead items or items supplied by subcontractors, and describe a plan to mitigate risk and a plan for schedule recovery.

Identify tasks associated with the offeror, proposed vendors, and subcontractors.

Provide a list of major equipment and special tools to be used on this job (including mobile crane types, load ratings, jacking, etc).

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 Work Plan Factor requirements.

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.

4. Volume I, Factor IV – Small Business Participation - Offerors shall submit Attachment D, Small Business Participation Plan, for Factor 4 to address the Small Business Participation in this contract.

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

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

d. The extent of small business prime offerors and small business subcontractors in terms of the percentage of the value of the total acquisitions. The Government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror meets or exceeds the goals: Goals for this procurement are –

- Small Business: (8%) of the total contract value;

- Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB): (2%) of the total contract value;

- Woman Owned Small Business (WOSB): (1%) of the total contract value;

- Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUB Zone) Small Business: (.5%) of the total contract value;

- Veteran Owned Small Business (VOSB): (1%) of the total contract value;

- Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB): (1%) of the total contract value.

(Note, for example, that a participation plan that reflects (1%) of the contract value for WOSB would also count towards the overall Small Business Goal; and percentages for SDVOSB also count towards VOSB).

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 small business Factor requirements.

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.

5. Volume II - Factor V – Price - The contract will be a Firm Fixed-Price Contract. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). 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. GENERAL PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

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 – Experience, Past Performance, Work Plan, Small Business Participation Volume II - Price, and Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations.

The Offeror’s proposal shall be organized into the following Volumes and separated by TABs as defined below.

REQUIRED TABS FOR VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Table of Contents Factor 1 – Tab 01: Experience Factor 2 – Tab 02: Past Performance Factor 3 – Tab 03: Work Plan Factor 4 – Tab 04: Small Business Participation Plan

REQUIRED TABS FOR VOLUME 2: PRICE PROPOSAL

Table of Contents

Factor 5 – Tab 01: Price Proposal

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 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. General 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 4).

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 +4 1 Volume II Original 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 aid in the Price evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format. 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. **Both electronic and hard copies must be the same.

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 –Technical. The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Factor I – Experience

(2) Factor II – Past Performance

(3) Factor III – Work Plan

(4) Factor IV – Small Business Participation

(ii) VOLUME I,– Past Performance This volume and TAB shall contain current and past performance information regarding similar contracts. This volume 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 contract currently in performance or awarded during the past ten 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 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) 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 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. This section will further include written consent of major subcontracts 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) 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. The letters of Commitment have to be signed by the officer or employee and the President or equivalent managing member to be considered.

(4) Section 4-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 Kent.R.Bernard@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).

Section 5-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 –Price This 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 volume.

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.

(II) VOLUME II – 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, discussion sessions may be held.

(End of Summary of Changes)