NWD Crane MATOC Amendment 0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Northw estern Division Crane MATOC

The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate the change outlined below .

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 12

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 23-Apr-2021

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 W912EF21R0012

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

16-Apr-2021

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

23-Apr-2021

CODE

USAED, WALLA WALLA - CONTRACTING DIV.

HILLARY A. MORGAN

201 N. THIRD AVENUE

WALLA WALLA WA 99362

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912EF21R0012

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The MATOC awards and Task Order 0001 will be made based on the best value to the Government by using the Best Value trade-off source selection process in FAR Part 15 and two-phase design-build procedures in FAR Part 36.3. The total contract dollar capacity shared among firms will not exceed $99,900,000. Any unused capacity in one period may be carried over into the subsequent contract period. The minimum guarantee amount for the entire life of the contract for each IDIQ awardee is $10,000. The minimum Task Order value is $2,000 and the maximum Task Order value is $20,000,000. The Government intends to award up to five IDIQ contracts to the offeror(s) whose proposal, conforming to the RFP, will be most advantageous to the Government resulting in the Best Value. Task Orders may be issued either as Design Build or Design-Bid Build projects. Task Orders will be primarily awarded on a firm-fixed price basis; however, task orders may be awarded on a Time and Materials (T&M) or Labor Hour basis if necessary to address unusual circumstances.

The government will initially evaluate offerors’ proposals submitted in response to Phase One of this solicitation. After evaluation of Phase One, the government will select up to five of the most highly qualified firms to submit Phase Two proposals. Upon the conclusion of Phase One, the solicitation will be amended to include the Phase Two evaluation factors including price and the scope of work for the first Task Order 0001 that will be awarded along with the MATOC IDIQ contracts. Phase One submissions and evaluations will not be carried over into Phase Two. All offerors selected to propose for Phase Two will be evaluated only on the Evaluation Factors outlined in the Phase Two RFP. PHASE 1 DOES NOT INVOLVE ANY SUBMISSION OF PRICING

INFORMATION.

Phase Two of the solicitation will include the informational plans (floor plan, cross section, and elevation), Statement of Work, and the specifications for Task Order 0001. The estimated construction magnitude for Task Order 0001 is between $5,000,000 and $10,000,000. A pre-proposal conference/site visit may be conducted during Phase Two. Phase Two offerors will have a minimum of 30 days to submit their proposals.

Phase Two evaluation factors are as follows:

Factor 1- Design Experience Factor 2- Project Management Factor 3 – Small Business Participation Factor 4- Price

During Phase Two, the government will provide submission requirements and specific information pertaining to the Phase Two evaluation factors which will be based on the requirements for Task Order 0001.

Additionally, the relative importance of the Phase Two factors both to each other and to price will be identified in the Phase Two solicitation. The seed project for phase two will be a rotating crane with a boom. All offerors selected as most highly qualified and invited to Phase Two source selection will be required to submit a proposal for all evaluation factors in order to be considered both for the seed project and to be a MATOC holder. Further, any deficiency in the Phase Two source selection will render the proposal unawardable both for the seed project and the overall MATOC.

The government may award the MATOC contracts and Task Order 0001 on the basis of initial offers received in Phase Two, without discussions; therefore, an offeror’s proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint.

The price proposal will not be assigned a rating for evaluation. The government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest prices offered. Awards will be made based on the proposals found to be the most advantageous to the government considering the technical and price proposals.

The government will evaluate offerors’ proposals based on how well the proposals address each of the

Evaluation Factors provided below for Phase One and the Evaluation Factors that will be provided in more detail for Phase Two. The evaluation process includes an assessment of the offerors’ strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, risks and uncertainties in addressing the government’s requirements as specified in the RFP.

B. SCOPE OF WORK

Task Orders will primarily be for providing new cranes, hoists and lifting devices, which may be a replacement, and the rehabilitation of various types of cranes, hoists and lifting devices at locks and dams. Project locations are within the states of Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming. The equipment will include but is not limited to the following:

• Overhead Bridge Cranes (typical capacity may range from 15 tons to 600 tons)

• Gantry Cranes (typical capacity may range from 15 tons to 480 tons)

• Underhung Monorail Cranes (typical capacity may range from 5 tons to 15 tons)

• Derrick/Pedestal Cranes (typical capacity may range from 10 tons to 200 tons)

• Below-the-hook devices

• Base/wall mounted jib hoists/booms

Rehabilitation work may consist of construction, repairing, replacing, and/or upgrading worn components of crane and hoist systems to make the equipment fully functional for support of mission requirements. Components may include lifting beams and/or lifting devices, hoist machinery such as wire rope drums, speed reducers and open gearing, load brake systems, motors, brakes, wire rope, load blocks, load indicating systems (load cells), structural repairs, crane rails, crane access/egress and safety upgrades, operator cabs, painting, control systems (including variable frequency drives (VFDs) and programmable logic controllers (PLCs)), warning/alarm systems, electrical systems, electric rail feeders, and may include similar crane projects that fall under NAICS 238290. Rehabilitation and replacement crane and hoist work may require analysis, design, and documentation of new and existing components, stability calculations, capacity uprating, load tests, supporting and securing structures, and crane components by registered engineers.

Activities may include removal of metals based paint (which includes lead), asbestos, and other hazardous material;

painting; final inspections and testing services; and classification/ marking of final product. Work areas may be difficult to access, requiring entrance of confined spaces, traffic control, construction of scaffolding, or facilitation of access by crane/lift.

Task orders may be Hybrid supply-construction, Design-Bid-Build or Design-Build in which the contractor is required to act as the Engineer of Record for the design and construction services. (See ER 1110-1-12, Paragraph 8- 2). Design-Bid-Build task orders may be performance and include plans and specifications detailing the performance metrics of the rehabilitation or replacement, for which the Contractor may be required to provide manufacturing, installation, testing, training, submittals for approval, and incidental design. Rehabilitation and replacement efforts may include some or all of the following: design, manufacturing, fabrication, supply, installation, testing, and certification. Logistic support of individual tasks will include spares determination and inclusion and statements of intended availability of spare parts by the original equipment manufacturer.

C. PHASE ONE FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

1. Evaluation Factors. The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal. All three Phase One evaluation factors are of approximately equal importance.

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE

FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL APPROACH

FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE

The Government will evaluate and assess the extent of an offeror’s relevant Construction and Design-Build experience and proposed team’s experience (design firm and major subcontractors) on crane and hoist projects completed in the last fifteen (15) years or at least 50% complete at the time proposals are due. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s depth and breadth of relevant crane and hoist design, manufacturing, and installation experience. The Government will evaluate no more than eight (8) projects. The combined experience demonstrated by the submitted projects must address the following:

1. All projects must exceed $750,000 with at least one submitted project exceeding $5,000,000; and

2. Design was facilitated for the end user/customer from design concept through 100% design completion including construction of the design

3. Two crane projects must demonstrate experience with large capacity (minimum of 50 tons) custom hoist and crane system rather than a packaged hoist system and crane components.

4. Include two examples of crane work to include both rehabilitation and new crane work as defined below. A minimum of one (1) example must be new. Projects must demonstrate experience for each of the following types of cranes:

• Overhead bridge cranes with a capacity of 50 tons or more;

• Gantry cranes with capacity of 50 tons of more;

Offerors including new cranes in which structure frame was fabricated by the proposed team will be considered more relevant and rated more favorably.

Offerors demonstrating experience with underhung monorail cranes with a capacity of 5 tons or more, fixed hoist machinery, derrick or pedestal cranes with a capacity of 10 tons or more will be rated more favorably.

Fully completed projects will be rated more favorably than projects that are substantially complete projects.

“Substantially complete” projects are defined as projects that are 100% designed and at least 50% construction progress.

Proposals including multiple new crane designs will be rated more favorably than those including mostly crane rehabilitation projects.

The following parameters apply for evaluation purposes:

“Design-Build” construction is defined as a civil-works type project in which the contractor is provided less than a full design and is required to: complete the design with a licensed Architect Engineer (A-E);

participate in design review; and accomplish full construction of the designed project.

“New” is defined as not as existing before or complete replacement of the entire crane to the tracks or support.

“Custom hoist and crane system” is demonstrated by design calculations and detail shop drawing development for custom designed hoist and crane systems that included but not limited to gantry frames, bridge crane, trolley frames, end trucks, speed reducer, gearing, hoist drums, and load blocks; where components are NOT commercial off the shelf items.

“Packaged hoist and crane system”: Example of packaged hoist and crane systems include but not limed to designs that only include component sizing of standard catalog items of commercial off the shelf components;

custom design calculation and detail shop drawings development are omitted.

Experience provided for proposed design firm and major subcontractors will only be evaluated if a letter of commitment is signed by each proposed firm and submitted with the proposal. A letter of commitment is not required if the offeror is a joint-venture and the firm is part of the joint-venture agreement.

FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL APPROACH

The government will evaluate and assess the offeror’s understanding of the requirements, feasibility of the proposed technical approach, and risks and mitigation in the execution of task order projects wherein the Government provides minimal or limited design consisting of informational drawings and functional/performance specifications. The purpose of this factor is to determine whether the offeror has appropriate understanding of the design-build process and is not intended to limit an offeror to any proposed technical solution or to allow an offeror to provide less than the minimum requirements for Phases One and Two of the solicitation.

Based on your understanding of the MATOC scope of work, describe your technical approach for design-build task order projects wherein the Government provides minimal or limited design consisting of informational drawings and functional/performance specifications. This narrative shall not exceed fifteen

(15) pages. Pages in excess of this limitation will be removed and not evaluated by the Source Selection Evaluation Board.

Address the following areas in your technical approach to include any risks and the proposed approach for risk mitigation:

Organization. Provide an organizational chart showing the reporting structure and lines of authority for the proposed team key functions such as project manager, superintendent, lead designer, safety manager, and others.

Without identifying by name, describe the role of the key functional members during design and construction.

Cost effectiveness and expedited completion. Describe your process for providing a task order proposal that is cost-effective and will allow you to expedite completion of the project. Describe your approach to streamlining design and construction resulting in reduced costs and achievement of aggressive schedules with consideration to operational or environmental restraints.

Communication and coordination. Describe your communication and coordination approach within the design-build team, and with the government during the design and construction phases. Describe your approach to facilitate design and construction submittal reviews. Describe in detail the Designer of Record’s involvement throughout the entire project period.

Quality control. Describe your approach for quality control for both design and construction. Include:

quality control organization; review of design; verification of construction materials; construction inspection; permit compliance; project documentation; and change request process.

Technical Factor Ratings for Factors 1 and 2: ratings outlined 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 factor 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 un-awardable.

FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE

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

a. The Government will focus its inquiries on the offeror’s (and major sub-contractors’) 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. Therefore, offerors are reminded to include the most current and relevant past performance efforts (within the past fifteen 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 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 fifteen years prior to the issue date of the RFP, but may include performance data generated during the past fifteen 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 6 years.

b. Offerors should submit all Government and/or commercial contract numbers and descriptions for the prime offeror and each major sub-contractor in performance or awarded during the past fifteen years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this RFP.

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 evaluate those aspects of an offeror’s history of contract performance that would provide the most context and give the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will successfully satisfy the current requirement. This evaluation will include all aspects of the offeror’s execution of schedule, performance, customer support and subcontracting plan for these projects 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 sub-contractors; 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 evaluation conducted gathers information from the 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.

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT: Because this source selection requires a greater level of discernment with the past performance evaluation, the SSEB shall use all ratings in the chart below and reach a single consensus performance confidence assessment for the offeror, selecting the most appropriate rating below. This rating considers the assessed quality of the relevant efforts gathered (documented results from Past Performance Questionnaires, interviews, CPARS, and other sources form the support and basis for this assessment). The rationale for the conclusions reached by the SSEB will be included in the SSEB report.

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 low expectation that the offeror will be able to 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.

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

1. Introduction. The offerors proposal shall be submitted electronically. Files shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited. Only Phase 1 (Volumes I & II) Should Be Submitted During Phase 1. Proposals shall conform to the solicitation requirements to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required of this solicitation.

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. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and RFP number in the header and/or footer. All files created in MS Word (doc) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

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

NOTE: 11 X 17 folded pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations.

. The following additional restrictions apply:

a. 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..

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.

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 volume of the proposal shall consist of a Cover Letter, Table of Contents and Summary Section. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

(i) VOLUME I, TAB 1 –Experience

(ii) VOLUME I, TAB 2 – Technical Approach

(iii) VOLUME I, TAB 3 – 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 contract currently in performance or awarded during the past fifteen (15) years, from the issue date of this solicitation, 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 and fabricators 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. 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 offerors delivered product.

3. Section 3 – Subcontracts. Offerors shall provide an outline of how the effort required by this RFP will be assigned for performance within the offerors 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, fabricators, and suppliers who will be providing critical hardware/services or whose subcontract would be for more than 10% of the total proposed Price on any task order. 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.

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.

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. USACE requests that the client completes this questionnaire and submits directly back to the offeror. The offeror will submit the completed questionnaire as part of the submitted proposal. Clients are highly encouraged to submit questionnaires directly to the offeror. However, questionnaires may be submitted directly to USACE.

In this circumstance where the client does not provide input or prefers to send completed questionnaires directly to USACE, 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 Hillary.A.Morgan@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 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.

(iv) VOLUME II, TAB 1– 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.

To submit proposals electronically via DoD SAFE, email Contract Specialist, Hillary Morgan at Hillary.a.morgan@usace.army.mil for a unique code with valid email address and point of contact for your mailto:Phyllis.L.Buerstatte@usace.army.mil company. Ms. Morgan 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: Hillary Morgan, Hillary.a.morgan@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 Hillary Morgan.

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: Hillary Morgan whose email address is Hillary.a.morgan@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.

Please make allowances for delays in transmittal. Electronic Proposals shall be received via DoD SAFE no later than (NLT) the date and time indicated in Block 13 of the SF 1442 for this solicitation or as identified in subsequent amendments.

The Government will not be responsible for proposals delivered to any location or to anyone other than those designated to receive proposals on its behalf. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that the proposal is submitted so as to reach the designated recipient and is responsible for allowing sufficient time for the proposal to be received in accordance with the information provided.

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE, Submission Requirements:

For each project submitted, the offeror shall provide an Experience Information Form (EIF). Additional lines may be added as necessary not to exceed one additional page total per EIF. Offerors are responsible for providing project descriptions in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of project relevancy and may provide additional descriptive information on each form beyond what is required in the attachment. One page of photographs per project may be provided in order to provide clarity to the project description and do not count against the page limit per EIF. Information provided on the EIF will be evaluated for this Factor 1, and will also be used to support the evaluation of Factor 2, Past Performance.

C. DISCUSSIONS

1. GENERAL INFORMATION. In accordance with FAR provision 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors-- Competitive Acquisition, 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)