Amendment 0007 W912EF20R0004.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 the follow ing:

See Continuation Sheet for details.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 13

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 13-Apr-2020

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 W912EF20R0004

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

26-Feb-2020

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

13-Apr-2020

CODE

USAED, WALLA WALLA - CONTRACTING DIV.

DAVID C BOONE 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:

W912EF20R0004

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE (SF 30)

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0007

Summary of Changes for Amendment-0007 Ice Harbor Intake Gantry Crane Controls Upgrade

W912EF20R0004

1. Revised the following Specifications:

a. SECTION 00 21 00 INSTRUCTIONS Revised EVALUATION FACTORS, Part D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION to reflect updated electronic proposal submission requirements. Hardcopy proposals are no longer required.

See red text below for updated requirements.

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION 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, based on an integrated assessment, with appropriate consideration given to the presented Experience, Past Performance, Work Plan and Price.

Factor 1, Experience and Factor 2, Past Performance are approximately equal in importance and more important than Factor 3, Work Plan. When combined, the non-price factors (Factors 1, 2, and 3) are significantly more important than Factor 4, Price. However, as proposals become more equal in technical (non-price) merit, the evaluated price will be considered more important in determining the best value proposal.

The following paragraphs B through E cover the Factors to be evaluated, the evaluation approach for each Factor to include factor rating tables, proposal submission requirements and final discussion guidance.

B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal.

1. FACTOR 1 Experience – Each offeror’s proposal will be evaluated to determine the breadth and depth of the offeror’s experience performing crane rehabilitation work that is similar in scope and complexity to the work described in this solicitation.

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

3. FACTOR 3 Work Plan – Each offeror’s proposal will be evaluated to determine the degree to which the work plan demonstrates an understanding of the required scope and the offeror’s capabilities and availability of resources to complete all requirements of the solicitation. The evaluation will consider strengths, weaknesses, and risks of the proposed work plan. 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.

4. FACTOR 4 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 following sections define the information to be provided, and describe how the information for each factor will be evaluated and rated.

Proposals shall conform to the solicitation requirements, to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required of this solicitation.

1. Factor 1 Experience

Proposals will be evaluated to determine the Offeror’s experience performing electrical and mechanical rehabilitation work on cranes that is similar to the scope and complexity required in the solicitation. Offerors shall provide sufficient information to clearly demonstrate the Offeror’s experience performing crane rehabilitation work.

Proposals will be evaluated based on aspects of the Offeror’s presented experience that would give the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will satisfy the requirements of the solicitation. The presented experience will be evaluated based on similarity to this solicitation including: scope of electrical and mechanical work performed, complexity of work performed, duration of contract and onsite construction work, and degree of subcontracting/teaming. Experience (projects) that individually demonstrate all four of the elements below will be evaluated more favorably than individual projects that demonstrate less than all four elements.

Offerors shall submit the following for Factor 1:

I. Offerors shall provide no more than four examples, performed within the past (10) ten years that collectively demonstrate each of the four elements identified below.

1. Performing electrical and mechanical engineering and design for crane systems

2. Performing electrical rehabilitation work on gantry or bridge cranes including, but not limited to:

controls replacement (installation of VFDs), crane function motor replacement, and commissioning of new crane controls

3. Performing mechanical work on gantry or bridge cranes, for example including, but not limited to:

gearbox rehabilitation, work on drivetrain components (including manufacture and installation of new machinery bases), inspection of below-the-hook lifting devices, and addition of fall protection measures (guardrails, anchor points, ladders, etc.)

4. Performing operational and load testing activities of gantry or bridge cranes with a minimum capacity of 15 tons

Offeror is advised to use the attached “Offeror Experience Form” to describe the projects in which the Offeror has relevant installation experience. The Offeror must address all items in the attached “Offeror Experience Form”. Project experience shall include adequate detail to demonstrate the relevancy of the scope of work for comparison to that required in this solicitation. Offerors may include additional sheets, photographs, or drawings for each project submission to provide amplifying information and a visual basis for the written description.

Each project submitted by the Offeror must be substantially complete by the date that the proposals are due.

Substantially complete is defined as being 75% complete. If an Offeror submits a project that it represents is “substantially complete,” the Offeror must provide a narrative to explain why the project is considered at least 75% complete.

Offerors may use the past experience of major subcontractors to demonstrate experience for any of the four elements. 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. 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 firms working successfully together previously on relevant projects, than an offer with a joint venture with no prior experience working together on relevant projects. A letter of commitment is required for the use of any major subcontractor’s past experience as meeting any of the Factor 1 elements. The letter of commitment must be a signed letter of commitment from the subcontractor who is proposed to perform the work. 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 a letter of commitment is not submitted, the experience will not be considered.

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 requirements.

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

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

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

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

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

Proposal is unawardable.

2. Factor 2 - Past Performance

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: Recency, Relevancy (including context of data) and Quality (including general trends in the contractor performance and source of information).

The Offeror shall provide past performance for each project listed by the Offeror under Factor 1 (Experience). 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. 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 sub-contractors. Major sub-contractors are defined as members of an offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform ten (10) percent or more of the proposed effort. 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, signed letters of commitment shall be included for all major subcontractors for their past performance to be considered.

Offerors are reminded to include the most recent and relevant efforts (within the past ten (10) years) in their proposal. Absent any recent 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 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 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) 238290, Other Building Equipment Contractors. Data submitted by the offeror or gathered from other sources by the government in conducting performance risk assessments shall not extend past ten years prior to the issue date of the request for proposal, but may include performance data generated during the past ten years without regard to the contract award date. CPARS data is limited to the past 6 years.

Offeror’s should provide additional performance data for projects beyond six years.

b. 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.

c. RECENCY: The Government will evaluate recency by examining the offerors’ record of past performance and to assess the time period during which the offeror’s past performance is considered relevant.

d. 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 Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

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

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

e. QUALITY: The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. The quality past performance evaluations conducted gathers information from offeror’s customers to determine how well the offeror performed those past contracts. This quality assessment will be reflected in the overall confidence assessment described below.

f. PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT: The final step is for the team to arrive at a single consensus performance confidence assessment for the offeror. Because this source selection requires a greater level of discrimination with the past performance evaluation, evaluators shall use the ratings in 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 recent/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 recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/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 recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

3. Factor 3 – Work Plan

This factor 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 information submitted for Factor 3 (Work Plan) including schedule and work plan exposition shall be limited to thirty (30) pages total. Offerors shall submit the following for Factor 3:

1) Schedule reflecting the planned activities, order of major tasks identified, task dependencies and durations proposed to successfully accomplish the entire project from notice to proceed to final commissioning, and contract close-out. Contractor should assume, for evaluation purposes only, a notice to proceed date of 14 May 2020. At a minimum, the schedule shall include the following:

a. Pre-Construction Submittals submitted/approved

b. Compliance with work sequencing and acknowledgement of crane outage requirements.

c. Major Activities

i. Pre-construction submittals

ii. Pre crane outage work (initial mechanical inspections and work not requiring crane outage)

iii. Below-the-hook lifting device inspections, analysis, and load testing

iv. Off-site manufacturing and procurement of long lead time items

v. Crane outages

vi. Demolition activities

vii. Installation activities

viii. Commissioning activities including load testing

2) Work plan addressing the following items:

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

b. Identify any critical assumptions and uncertainties that may impact the completion of work. For each uncertainty, describe the Offeror’s plan to mitigate the associated risk posed by the uncertainty.

c. Document capabilities and availability of resources (equipment and personnel) necessary to complete all required major tasks identified in the schedule.

d. List all major subcontractors with their respective role and responsibility to complete all major tasks. Refer to the requirement for a letter of commitment for subcontractors in submission requirements for Factor 1 (Past Experience).

e. Explain the communication process between different crews, subcontractors, and managers, including the superintendent, project manager, safety officer and quality control personnel. Include an organization chart to show the communication channels.

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 requirements.

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

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

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

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

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

Proposal is unawardable.

4. Factor 4 – Price

Offerors must submit completed Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) with unit price, quantity, and extended price.

All extensions of the unit prices shown will be subject to verification by the Government. In case of discrepancy between the unit price and the extended price, the unit price will govern. For the purpose of evaluating proposals, the following will be used to resolve arithmetic discrepancies found on the face of the pricing schedule as submitted by the offeror:

a. Obviously misplaced decimal points will be corrected;

b. In a discrepancy between unit price and extended price, the unit price will govern;

c. Calculation errors in extension of unit prices will be corrected;

d. Calculation errors in the addition of lump-sum and extended prices will be corrected.

An evaluation will be performed on the proposed prices. The evaluation will not be assigned an adjectival rating.

However, it will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness in accordance with FAR 15.305 and FAR 15.404.

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. Introduction. The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted electronically, as set forth below. The solicitation shall provide the Government address and receipt date for proposal submission. Files shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

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

Volume I – Experience (Factor 1) Past Performance (Factor 2) Work Plan (Factor 3)

Volume II – Price (Factor 4) Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents Certifications/Representations.

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 as a separate PDF or ZIP file. 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.

b. Printing shall be single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or Times New 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 Printed copies not required. 1 Volume II Printed copies not required. 1

d. Proposals may be rejected for failure to adhere to the proposal preparation requirements.

e. Proposals shall conform to the solicitation requirements to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required of this solicitation.

f. To submit proposals electronically via DoD SAFE, email Contract Specialist, David Boone at david.c.boone@usace.army.mil and Contracting Officer, Hillary Morgan at hillary.a.morgan@usace.army.mil for a unique code with valid email address and point of contact for your company. Mr. Boone will provide you with your unique code, then you will need to go to the following website: https://safe.apps.mil/

At the DoD SAFE website select “Drop-Off, then enter your unique code, and submit your proposal(s). When your proposal is submitted via the DOD SAFE website, the website will provide notification of the submittal to the recipients. For this solicitation, the recipient will be:

David C. Boone, david.c.boone@usace.army.mil

When your files have been “picked-up”, you will receive an email notification. If you have not received a notification, and it has been more than one business day since your “drop-off” – please contact David Boone at david.c.boone@usace.army.mil

For the purposes of determining whether the proposal was received “late” in accordance with FAR 15.208, the date and time the file(s) are uploaded into the DoD SAFE website as identified in the DoD Safe e-mail sent to the Contract Specialist(s)/Contracting Officer will be the time and date the Government received the proposal. Do not assume that electronic communication is instantaneous.

Please make allowances for delays in transmittal.

NOTE: ONLY in the unusual case that the DoD SAFE website is “down” (not operational);

the Offeror should email their proposal to the following individuals prior to the proposal due date and time: David Boone whose email address is david.c.boone@usace.army.mil.

SUBMISSION DEADLINE - Proposals shall be received by the USACE Contracting Activity no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442. Official time will be established by the clock located in the area where proposals are received. Late proposals may not be accepted.

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. Scans must be in color and at least 600 dpi. 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 pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations. The following additional restrictions apply:

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 submitted electronically via DoD SAFE. 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.

**Please note – Self extracting exe files are not acceptable.

b. 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.

Sub-Contractor Identification:

a. Offerors should clearly identify the firm(s) that will be utilized during performance of the contract or work that will be self-performed. Ensure the proposal is clear as to which function the Offeror or subcontractor will be performing. If the prime contractor proposes to use a subcontractor, the offeror shall submit a signed Letter of Commitment from the subcontractor with the proposal.

a. 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.

b. 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.

(i) VOLUME I, TAB 1 – Experience. The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Section 1 – Project 1

(2) Section 2 – Project 2

(3) Section 3 – Project 3, etc.

(ii) VOLUME I, TAB 2 – Past Performance. This tab shall contain current and past performance information regarding similar contracts. Offerors shall submit Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major sub-contractor currently in performance or awarded during the past ten (10) 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, signed letters of commitment shall be included for all major subcontractors for their past performance to be considered.

This tab 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/Task 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 shall 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 and suppliers 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 to demonstrate the relevancy of experience and past performance with this solicitation. Information should be included in the files described in the sections above. Signed Letters of Commitment shall be included in the proposal for these employees in order to be considered. Letters of Commitment must be signed both by the company official and the employee.

(5) Section 5-Past Performance Questionnaire. For all contracts identified in Section 1 - Contract Descriptions, complete a Past Performance Questionnaire for any project that has not received a formal Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation. The offeror shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire and E-mail the questionnaire to the 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 cynthia.h.jacobsen@usace.army.mil and david.c.boone@usace.army.mil. The offeror shall 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 I, TAB 3 –WORK PLAN. This tab shall consist of all information required to support Evaluation Factor 3.

(1) Section 1 – Schedule

(2) Section 2 – Work Plan Exposition

(iv) VOLUME II, TAB 1 – PRICE. This tab 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.

The offeror shall ensure that the information submitted in this tab 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 SF1442 and all certifications requiring original signature.

An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission.

Section 00 21 00 – Standard Form 1442 Solicitation, Offer and Award Section 00 45 00 – 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.

(End of Summary of Changes)