W912EF20R0028-0002.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 adjust proposal submission requirements for the allowance of electronic proposal submission.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 19

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 17-Jul-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 W912EF20R0028

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10-Jun-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

17-Jul-2020

CODE

USAED, WALLA WALLA - CONTRACTING DIV.

KARLYN HOLLAND

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:

W912EF20R0028

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been added by full text:

Summary of Changes for Dworshak Monolith Joint 16/17 Repairs (amendment 0002)

Evaluation Factors:

D. Proposal Submission – Languaged changed to allow for the submission of electronic proposals.

Submission 6 - Removed

Experience Form:

Corrected - Technical Factor 2

Specifications:

No changes

Drawings:

No changes

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, with appropriate consideration given to the four (4) evaluation factors:

Factor 1: Technical Approach Factor 2: Experience Factor 3: Past Performance Factor 4: Price

Relative Importance of Factors

1) Factor 1 Technical Approach and Factor 2 Experience are approximately equal in importance.

2) Factor 1 Technical Approach and Factor 2 Experience are more important than Factor 3 Past Performance.

3) When combined, the non-price factors (1, 2, and 3) are more important than Factor 4 Price.

4) 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

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.

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

1. TECHNICAL - FACTOR 1 Technical Approach & FACTOR 2 Experience – Risk assesses the degree to which the offeror’s proposed technical approach and demonstrated experience 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 approach and experience evaluations, inherent in the factor ratings.

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

2. FACTOR 3 – Past Performance Each offeror’s current and past performance will be reviewed to determine relevancy and confidence

3. 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 shall be subject to evaluation 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.

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. FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH

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 offeror shall demonstrate a technical approach through submission of a narrative outlining the proposed technical approach. There is not a specified page limit for this factor, however the offerors are encouraged to be clear and concise in providing the information requested. The offeror should describe their approach in the following areas as it relates to the requirements of this acquisition:

a) Proposed methods, sequence of work, and types of grout;

a. A complete description detailing the method, sequence, and grout the Contractor shall use to grout and stop the leakage from the joint drain at monolith 16/17. The Contractor shall propose the specific grout they intend to use, and actions that will be taken if the grout is being washed away and not setting.

b. The Offeror’s workplan shall demonstrate how potential water communication between joint drains, foundation drains, or other leakage paths will be addressed and how the offeror will maintain or reestablish the functionality of these drains.

Both the joint drains and foundation relief drains are required to be fully functional upon the completion of work.

c. The Offeror’s workplan shall detail drilling method for grout holes; include details concerning type and size of drill, and method for orienting the drill and ensuring orientation.

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

a. Work plan indicating the exact method of grouting and equipment. Grouting method shall include type of grout and additives (information on grout or additives shall include Manufacturer's brochures, technical data sheets, and MSDS), stage methods, stage lengths, anticipated grouting pressures, and plans for modifying materials and methods if initial grouting attempts are unsuccessful.

Explain how schedule delays would be made up.

c) List all critical subcontractors with their respective role and responsibility to complete all major tasks.

Sub-Contractor Identification:

1) If the prime contractor proposes self-performing the drilling and grout placement, ensure the proposal is clear that the Offeror will be performing this function. If the prime contractor proposes to use a subcontractor for drilling and/or grouting, the offeror must submit a Letter of Commitment from the subcontractor with the proposal. If a letter of commitment is not submitted, the experience and/or certification will not be considered.

2) 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.

3) 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.

2. FACTOR 2 – EXPERIENCE

The offeror shall clearly demonstrate their documented experience and capabilities to perform the work as specified in the solicitation. Demonstrated experience shall be indicated by providing a minimum of 2, but no more than 5 projects over the last 10 years in performing dam grouting. Demonstrated experience that include addresses all items in the Demonstrated Experience Requirements list (below); however, not all items in the list must be present on all jobs but should be demonstrated cumulatively over the submitted experience. Experience may be work performed by the offeror, or a sub-contractor thereof. Work performed by a sub-contractor shall be clearly identified, and the offeror shall demonstrate with a narrative and/or supporting documentation their full understanding and ability to coordinate the sub-contractor’s area of specialty or expertise.

Demonstrated Experience Requirements:

a) Drilling and grouting in concrete dams. Specific items of most relevance to the proposed work are the pressures, leakage flow rates, and water temperatures where ratings will be more favorable for work performed in:

a. higher pressures

b. higher leakage flow rates and

c. lower water temperatures

Sub-Contractor Identification:

1) If the prime contractor proposes self-performing the drilling and grout placement, ensure the proposal is clear that the Offeror will be performing this function. If the prime contractor proposes to use a subcontractor for drilling and/or grouting, the offeror must submit a Letter of Commitment from the subcontractor with the proposal. If a letter of commitment is not submitted, the experience and/or certification will not be considered.

2) 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.

3) 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.

Evaluation Methodology for Factor #1 Technical Approach and Factor #2 Experience

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.

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings 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 un-awardable.

3. FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of past and present 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 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 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.

b.) 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.

c.) 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.

Evaluation Methodology for Factor #3 Past Performance:

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy and quality.

(i) 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.

(ii) 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 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.

(iii) 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.

(iv) 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 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 records 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.

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.

An evaluation will be performed on the proposed prices. The evaluation will not be assigned an adjectival rating, yet it will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness as follows:

a. Completeness - To be complete, the Offeror shall provide all data that is requested and necessary to evaluate the price. The Government will assess the extent to which the proposed prices comply with the content and format requirements set forth in this solicitation.

b. Reasonableness - The Offeror's proposal is evaluated through price analysis techniques as described in FAR Subpart 15.305(a) (1) and 15.404-1(b).

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. Introduction The offerors’ 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 offerors’ proposal shall consist of two (2) volumes. The Volumes are:

Volume I – Technical Proposal

(Technical Approach, Experience and Past Performance) Volume II – Price & Administrative Proposal

(Price, Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations.)

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

Proposals shall be submitted in hard copy and electronic (CD/DVD) OR electronically only.

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. The Government will not make assumptions concerning intent, capabilities or experiences. Clear identification of proposal details shall be the sole responsibility of the offeror. The Government may reject incomplete proposals after initial evaluation without further consideration. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

Any costs related to proposal preparation and submission will not be reimbursed by the Government.

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 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 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 in either hard copy and electronic (CD/DVD) OR electronic format:

VOLUME TITLE

PRINTED

COPIES

ELECTRONIC

COPIES

Volume I – Technical Proposal Original +4 (Not Required)

Volume II – Price & Administrative Proposal

Original (Not Required)

3. Proposal Files

a. Format The submission (hard copy and electronic (CD/DVD) or electronic only) 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 shall 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. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

d. To submit proposals electronically via DoD SAFE, email Contract Specialist, Leanne Walling at Leanne.R.Walling@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. Ms. Walling 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: Leanne Walling, Leanne.R.Walling@usace.army.mil

a. 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 Leanne Walling at Leanne.R.Walling@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: Leanne Walling whose email address is Leanne.R.Walling@usace.army.mil. Email submissions larger than 20MB should be broken into multiple emails to ensure receipt. Separation of files larger than 20MB is the responsibility of the offeror.

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.

In an effort to ensure timely proposal submission, offerors are encouraged to request unique codes not later than two (2) hours prior to the submission deadline. Issuance of unique codes is NOT instantaneous. It is the responsibility of the offeror to ensure timely proposal submission.

NOTE: A submission of CD or DVD without hard copies will be rejected.

(i) VOLUME I, TAB1 – Technical. The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Section 1 – Factor 1: Technical Approach

(2) Section 2 – Factor 2: Experience

(ii) VOLUME I, TAB 2 – Past Performance. This tab shall contain current and past performance information regarding similar contracts. It shall not exceed 15 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 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 shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Section 1 – Contract Descriptions. This tab 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 Tab 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.

(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 any officer or employee’s experience for it to be evaluated and considered.

(5) Section 5-Past Performance Questionnaire. For all contracts identified in Section 1 - Contract Descriptions, a Past Performance Questionnaire, Appendix E, must be completed and submitted. 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 leanne.r.walling@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 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).

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.

DO NOT SUBMIT PRICING INFORMATION IN VOLUME I.

(iii) VOLUME II, TAB 1 – 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.

(iv) 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 00 10 00 – Standard Form 1442 Solicitation, Offer and Award (Construction, Alteration or Repair)

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.

EXPERIENCE FORM

OFFEROR EXPERIENCE FORM

Technical Factor: Factor 2 Factor Title: Experience

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:

The following have been deleted:

(End of Summary of Changes)