Solicitation Amendment W912EF25RA0100005 SF 30.pdf

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offers 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 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication 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 letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication 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 NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, 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.)

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

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Section 00 00 00 - Procurement and Contracting Requirements

The following changes have been made:

Miscellaneous text in this section has been added to:

Summary of Changes Lower Granite Turbine Intake Gate Hydraulic System Upgrades (W912EF25RA010) Amendment 0005

Specifications:

01 22 00.00 28 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENTS

1.3.8: Revised to exclude complete hydraulic cylinder assembly from CLIN 0011

35 05 40.14 26 HYDRAULIC POWER SYSTEMS FOR CIVIL WORKS STRUCTURES

- Changed "i.e." to "e.g" in paragraphs 1.5.1, 2.3.2.1.c, 2.5.1.b, 2.7.1.c.1), and 3.3.5.8b

Drawings:

M-504

Section 00 21 16 - Instructions to Proposers

Miscellaneous text in this section has been modified to:

BASIS FOR AWARD

The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value-tradeoff) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the three (3) evaluation factors: Factor 1 Technical Approach, Factor 2 Past Performance, and Factor 3 Price.

W912EF25RA0100005

Factor 1 Technical Approach and Factor 2 Past Performance are equally important. When combined, the non-price factors (Factors 1 and 2) are significantly more important than Factor 3 Price. Contract award will be made to one offeror.

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 discussion guidance.

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

FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

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

1. FACTOR 1 - Technical Approach

Each offeror's proposed technical approach for meeting the requirements of the solicitation will be evaluated to determine the offeror's capabilities (including strengths, weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies), personnel qualifications, and availability of resources, in conjunction with technical risk, the degree to which the proposal may cause disruption of schedule, increased price, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

2. FACTOR 2 - Past Performance

The past performance evaluation factor assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an offeror's ability to meet the requirements of the solicitation, based on a demonstrated record of performance. Each offeror's current and past performance will be reviewed to determine recency, relevancy, and quality.

3. FACTOR 3 - 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.

The overarching evaluation approach for all factors is the 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 Request for Proposal (RFP). The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the RFP. Marginal levels of overall detail could indicate a lack of understanding concerning the requirements and may result in the entire factor receiving an unfavorable rating or the Government eliminating the offeror's proposal from the competitive range.

1. Factor 1 Technical Approach

This factor evaluates the offeror's understanding of the required scope of work and capabilities and availability of resources necessary to complete all requirements. This factor also evaluates whether the proposal may result in disruption of schedule, increased price, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

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

Proposals must be as specific as possible; outlining the exact methods to be used, addressing logistics, and describing equipment and personnel.

Offerors must submit the following for Factor 1:

a. SECTION 1: SCHEDULE-Submit a schedule that meets the requirements described in detail below.

The schedule must reflect the planned activities, including identifying the order of major tasks, task dependencies, and durations proposed to successfully accomplish the entire project from Notice to Proceed to final commissioning. Schedule must comply with Specification Section 01 12 16.00 28:

WORK SEQUENCE and FAR Clause 52.211-10 COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK (APR 1984) clauses for unit outage restrictions.

1) Adhere to the following requirements and assumptions when developing the schedule:

a. Offerors must assume, for evaluation purposes only, a non-binding Notice to Proceed (NTP) date of 19 August 2025.

b. Clearly identify the critical path.

c. Format the schedules as a Gantt Chart, formatted to 11" x 17" sized paper. Schedule must be no longer than 3 single-sided pages.

2) For each line or activity on the schedule, identify:

a. Activity name and/or description

b. Start and end dates.

c. Duration in days.

d. Running count of total schedule float (in days)

e. For On-Site Activities Only: Anticipated on-site work schedule including use of overtime, if any.

Include proposed work schedule (e.g. 4-10s, 5-10s, double-shift).

3) The following milestones must be clearly represented on the schedule:

a. Notice to proceed

b. Mobilization and demobilization dates

c. Pre-main unit outage phase start and end dates

d. Main unit outage start and end dates

e. Contract completion

4) The following phases or specific tasks must be represented on the schedule:

a. Preconstruction activities, including, but not limited to, preparation of submittals and Government review of submittals (accounting for contract defined review periods).

b. Equipment procurement and delivery, identifying items with particularly long lead times.

c. On-site activities for pre-main unit outage, including testing and commissioning.

d. On-site activities for each main unit outage, including testing and commissioning. Clearly identify each main unit outage by main unit numbers (1 through 6).

e. On-site activities for Post-main unit outage, including testing and commissioning.

f. Postconstruction activities, including but not limited to, training of Government personnel, and preparation and submission of operations and maintenance manuals.

b. SECTION 2: WORK PLAN -Submit a work plan, that explains the Offeror's approach to completing the work. The work plan must:

1) Discuss the schedule provided under Factor 1, Section 1, including, but not limited to:

i. The details of the Offeror's schedule management approach to ensure successful completion of the project;

ii. How work to complete one task may impact or be impacted by work to complete other tasks, including risks to the critical path

iii. Procurement of long-lead time items

iv. On-site work schedule and coordination with Government staff

2) Show understanding and details on how the hydraulic system will be accessed, how parts will be removed, how parts will be repaired or replaced, and how the system will be tested and commissioned.

3) Identify resources, equipment, and personnel necessary to complete all required major tasks indicated above, including whether offeror has such existing resources, equipment, and/or personnel available or committed or whether these will need to be acquired prior to commencing work. For personnel, identify roles or skilled crafts that require licensure or certification and, if they are available or committed to the proposal, identify the personnel and their relevant qualifications and capabilities.

4) List all major subcontractors with their respective role and responsibility to complete all major tasks and provide a letter of commitment for those proposed subcontractors. Major subcontractors are defined as members of an offeror's overall team who will complete any of the following work items:

i. Construction management (superintendence, quality control, safety management)

ii. Site work including installation and demolition of the hydraulics and control systems.

iii. Design of the new hydraulic cylinders

iv. Design and integration of the new hydraulic power system and controls

v. Fabrication of the new hydraulic cylinders,

vi. Fabrication of the hydraulic power system.

5) 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.

c. Evaluation Methodology for Factor 1 Technical Approach

The Technical Approach 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 Approach requirements.

Table 1: Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Adjecti val Rating

Description

Outstan ding

Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

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

Accepta ble

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

Margin al

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

Unacce ptable

Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

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 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.

Offerors must demonstrate technical experience by providing at least two (2) and no more than six (6) examples, performed within the past ten (10) years that collectively demonstrate recency, relevancy, and quality as identified below. If more than six (6) examples are provided, only the first six (6) examples will be evaluated. All submitted projects must be substantially completed within the last ten (10) years from issue date of the Request for Proposal. If a subcontractor is identified in Factor 1 to perform work on the hydraulic system, the experience of that subcontractor must be represented in the submitted project information.

In accordance with Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 215.305(a)(2)(A), offerors must submit information regarding their past performance in complying with the requirements of FAR clause 52.219-8 Utilization of Small Business.

Project experience must include adequate detail to demonstrate the relevancy of the scope of work for comparison to that required in this solicitation.

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.

b. Offerors are reminded to include the most recent and relevant efforts 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 a "neutral confidence rating" and its proposal will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. However, a Substantial Confidence or Satisfactory Confidence rating is worth more than a Neutral Confidence rating in the total evaluation of the proposal.

c. 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) 237990, Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction. Data submitted by the offeror or gathered from other sources by the government in conducting performance risk assessments must 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 six

(6) years. Offerors should provide additional performance data for projects beyond six (6) years.

d. Offerors must submit all Government and/or commercial contract numbers and descriptions for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past ten years, from the issue date of this request for proposal, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation.

e. 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.

f. RECENCY: The Government will evaluate recency by examining the offeror's record of past performance and to assess the time period during which the offeror's past performance is considered relevant (see b. above).

g. 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 for this project and the Offeror's record of:

1) Conformance 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.

h. Evaluation Methodology for Evaluating Relevancy. The combined submitted project information will be assigned a rating for relevancy in accordance with the table below. When evaluating the strengths and weakness of each proposal, the Government will consider the following.

1) Submitted projects that demonstrate experience with the following aspects of hydraulic power systems may be considered more relevant than projects involving other types of work:

a. Design, including but not limited to, system design and integration of sub-components, selection of off the shelf components such as valves, configuration of manifolds and control panels, design, configuration of hydraulic power units and integration of PLC based controls.

b. Fabrication of custom hydraulic components or systems, such as: hydraulic power units, manifolds and control panels, large hydraulic cylinders.

c. Installation, of the equipment referenced above.

d. Shop testing, of the equipment referenced above.

e. Field commissioning, of the equipment referenced above.

2) Proposals that demonstrate experience with hydraulic power systems that use environmentally acceptable lubricants (as defined in the technical specifications) as a hydraulic fluid may be considered more relevant than proposals that demonstrate experience with hydraulic power systems that use conventional hydraulic fluids.

3) Projects that involve the use of hydraulic systems in water control structures--such as turbine intake gates, spillway gates, regulating outlet gates or valves, and navigation lock gates-- will be considered more relevant than projects that involve the use of hydraulic systems in other types of equipment.

4) Projects that involve work on or with hydraulic systems with a rated operating pressure at or above 3000 psi will be considered more relevant. Projects that involve work on or with hydraulic systems with a rated operating pressure between 1000 psi and 3000 psi will be considered relevant. Projects that involve work on or with hydraulic systems with a rated operating pressure below 1000 psi will be considered less relevant.

i. Experience with mobile hydraulics is considered significantly less relevant than experience with industrial hydraulics. Submitted projects that include hydraulic cylinders with a stroke length of over 20 feet will be considered more relevant than projects that include cylinders with a shorter stroke.

Table 2: 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.

j. 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. More favorable ratings will be given for offerors that provide the following:

a. Conformance to specifications and standards of good workmanship;

b. Maintaining program execution within price;

c. Adherence to contract schedules, including the administrative aspects of performance;

d. Ability to resolve technical and manufacturing problems quickly and effectively;

e. Business like concern for the interest of its customers;

f. Establishing and maintaining adequate management of subcontractors; and

g. Compliance with subcontracting plans submitted on previous projects.

k. 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 must 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.

Table 3: 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.

NOTE: In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance information is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past contract performance (see FAR 15.305[a][2][iv]). In this case, the offeror's past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of "Neutral."

For this source selection, a "Substantial Confidence" or "Satisfactory Confidence" past performance rating is worth more than a "Neutral Confidence" past performance rating.

3. Factor 3 - 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 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.

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

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

The offeror's proposal must consist of two (2) volumes. The Volumes are:

Volume I - Technical Approach, Past Performance Volume II -Price, Solicitation, Bid Bond(s), Offer and Award Documents, and 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 must 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 must 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 must be dated.

b. Printing must be single spaced. Each paragraph must 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 must be submitted:

VOLUME TITLE PRINTED COPIES ELECTRONIC COPIES

Volume I Printed copies are not required. 1

Volume II Printed copies are not required. 1

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

f. Submitting proposals electronically:

i. Electronic copies of each volume must be submitted via email to the following individuals no later than the date and time established in Block 13 of the Standard Form (SF) 1442 or Block 14 of the most recently issued SF30, as applicable.

Primary Contract Specialist: Preston Jones, Preston.E.Jones@usace.army.mil.

Alternate Contract Specialist: Leanne.R.Walling@usace.army.mil

Proposals submitted by mail or hand-carried will not be evaluated. Proposals sent through proprietary or third-party File Transfer Protocol (FTP) sites or DoD SAFE will not be retrieved. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to confirm receipt of proposals. All proposals received after the exact time specified for receipt must be treated as late submissions and will not be considered except under facts and circumstances allowed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). Failure to provide the requested information in digital copy via email with the offer, may render the offer nonresponsive and NOT eligible for award.

ii. Offeror should enter a description for every file submitted. For files over 8 megabytes (MB) the Offeror must break the file(s) into smaller files sent via separate emails with each email marked to identify which number the email is relative to the total number of emails submitted (i.e. "email one of four"). Once all of the emails submitted have been received the Government will confirm receipt via a responsive email. If an Offeror submits multiple offers the Government will only consider the last offer submitted prior to the due date and time.

iii. Do not assume submission will be instantaneous. File size and number of files submitted must be considered.

iv. Electronic submission of offers satisfies the requirement set forth in Block 13A of the SF 1442 ('...in original and 0 copies..."). Additionally electronic submission of the offer guarantee, when an offer guarantee is required, is due with the offer submission. Mailing an offer guarantee for submission is not allowed.

It is the Offeror's responsibility to obtain written confirmation of receipt of all electronic files of the full proposal by the USACE Walla Walla District Contracting office. Offerors are responsible for ensuring electronic copies are virus-free and must run an anti-virus scan before submission. Electronic files must be clearly identified for each volume, section, and item.

SUBMISSION DEADLINE - Proposals must 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 timestamp given by the Outlook email system to the email(s) received. Late proposals may not be accepted.

3. Proposal Files

a. Format The submission must be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume must be clearly identified and must begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume must 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 (docx) files must 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:

b. File Packaging. All of the proposal files must be in read-only format, using PDF files or as separate attachments in their native format, i.e. docx, xlsx, pptx, etc., and submitted electronically via the Offerors email(s) submitted. All price breakdown information to aid in the Price evaluation must be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format. **Please note - Self-extracting .exe files are not acceptable.

Content Requirement. All information must be confined to the appropriate file. The offeror must 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 must consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section must contain a brief abstract of the file. Proprietary information must be clearly marked.

i. VOLUME I, TAB 1 - Technical Approach. This tab must contain the Technical Approach information, to include Section 1 Schedule and Section 2 Work Plan. The work plan must not exceed 12 pages.

ii. VOLUME I, TAB 2 - Past Performance. This tab must contain current and past performance information regarding similar contracts. Offerors must submit Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major contract 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 must be provided first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor, in alphabetical order. The Offeror must 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 must be included for all major subcontractors for their past performance to be considered. This tab must be organized into the following sections:

(1) Section 1 - Contract Descriptions. This tab must include the following information in the following format. Ensure all information is current and accurate.

(a) Contractor/Subcontractor place of performance, CAGE Code and SAM UEI. 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 of work.

(k) Final or projected final, delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

(2) Section 2 - Performance. Offerors must provide a specific narrative explanation of each project that includes the following:

(a) For any submitted projects 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 must 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 must be addressed with respect to causes and corrective actions. The offerors must 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 must indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination.

(3) Section 3 - Subcontracts. Offerors must 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, as defined in Factor 1, must include the entire company name, company address, CAGE Code, SAM UEI, 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 must 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 must 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 must complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire and E-mail the questionnaire to the technical representative responsible for the contract. The Points of Contact (POCs) must 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 Preston.E.Jones@usace.army.mil. The offeror must submit, with its proposal, a list of all the POCs who were sent questionnaires. The POC List must be submitted as a table in Word for to include the following fields: Windows Table Format

Solicitation Number ; Company Name (of the project in question, if relevant) (the prime contractor or ; Contract Number subcontractor being evaluated in the Past Performance Questionnaire) (of the project

; ; in question, if relevant) Government Agency Entity submitting the Past Performance Questionnaire) POC Last Name, First Name; POC Title; POC Telephone Number; POC E-mail Address; and Date E- Mail to POC (month/day).

Offerors may utilize past performance questionnaires for both Ice Harbor Dam Intake Gate Hydraulic System Upgrades, W912EF25RA001, and Lower Granite Dam Intake Gate Hydraulic System Upgrades, W912EF25RA010. No additional steps beyond what is already required above for all Past Performance Questionnaires provided in response to this solicitation are necessary to utilize a Past Performance Questionnaire for multiple solicitations.

(6) Section 6 - Submissions. Offerors are discouraged from providing points of contact at another contractors' facility, i.e., in case an offeror (or a team member) has a subcontract with another contractor who is submitting a proposal on the same requirement. Offerors must provide and submit the prime contract number and all Governmental agency (or other contractee) points of contact (POC) in lieu of subcontract numbers or prime contract POCs

DO NOT SUBMIT PRICING INFORMATION IN VOLUME I.

iii. VOLUME II, TAB 1 - Price. This tab must contain all information required to support the 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 must ensure that the information submitted in this tab is consistent with and fully supports the amounts set forth in the SF1442 and continuation sheets.

iv. VOLUME II, TAB 2 - SOLICITATIONS, BID BOND, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS, AND CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS

Certifications and Representations - Each offeror must complete (fill-in and provide signatures) the solicitation sections indicated below using the file (without modification to the file) provided with the RFP. An authorized official of the firm must sign the SF 1442 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file must 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

Bid Bond, Solicitations, Offer and Award Documents, and Certifications/Representations must not be submitted separately from that submitted in VOLUME II - SOLICITATIONS, BID BOND, 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.

KO CONTRACTING DIVISION, 201 NORTH 3RD AVE

WALLA WALLA, WA 99362-1876

UNITED STATES

PRESTON JONES, EMAIL: PRESTON.E.JONES@USACE.ARMY.MIL TELEPHONE: (509) 527-7206

AdminBy:

SCD: PAS: