08-R-0015RFP.pdf

SOLICITATION NO. W912EK-08-0015

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS – ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT

Major Rehabilitation, Stage III-A, Lock and Dam No. 11, Mississippi River ubuque County, Iowa and Grant County, Wisconsins D

Construction Solicitation and Specifications

June 26, 2008

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

W912EK-08-R-0015

MAJOR REHABILITATION, STAGE III-A, LOCK AND DAM 11,

MISSISSIPPI RIVER, DUBUQUE COUNTY, IOWA AND GRANT

COUNTY, WISCONSIN.

• Proposals are Due by 4:00 PM, THURSDAY – AUGUST 12, 2008

• SPECIAL NOTES TO BIDDERS

• Proposals are due by 4:00 pm at the District Office, Clock Tower Bldg. To deliver the proposal in person enter through the front door of the Clock Tower Bldg.

• Offerors are cautioned that due to the heightened security measures being taken on Rock Island

Arsenal, access for proposal delivery may take significantly more time. Despite this, offerors are responsible for ensuring that their proposals arrive prior to the scheduled closing time.

• Visitor Requirements: Enter through Moline Gate, have valid motor vehicle operator’s license, valid photo identification, vehicle registration, proof of liability insurance, and a POC (Rock Island District POC for those delivering proposals is: Contracting Division – telephone 309/794- 5312 or 309/794-5613 or 309/794-5628)

• Vehicles are subject to search. Foreign nationals must be approved at least two weeks in advance by Rock Island Arsenal Security. Clarification or additional information regarding access to Rock Island Arsenal should be addressed to Rock Island Arsenal Security – telephone 309/782-0596.

TECHNICAL MATTERS/QUESTIONS:

Technical questions must be submitted via the internet Q&A web site at http://www2.mvr.usace.army.mil/Contracting/index.cfm

Click on “Contracting Projects Q & A”, select “insert a question/answer”, click on the drop down arrow and select the project. Input your question;

add your email address if you would like an email when your question is answered and click on “Insert This Question”.

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS: Anthony Zemo Phone: 309/794-5259

FAX: 309/794-5172

Internet: Anthony.G.Zemo@usace.army.mil All proposals should be sent to the following mailing and street address:

Rock Island District Corps of Engineers Contracting Division - W912EK-08-R-0008 1450 Rock Island Drive Rock Island, IL 61201 http://www2.mvr.usace.army.mil/Contracting/index.cfm mailto:Anthony.G.Zemo@usace.army.mil

Request for Proposal No. W912EK-08-R-0015

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS

DIVISION 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

00 01 15 LIST OF DRAWINGS

00010 SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD, SF 1442

SCHEDULE OF PRICES

00100 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

00600 REPRESENTATIONS & CERTIFICATIONS

00700 CONTRACT CLAUSES

00 73 05.00 14 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

00 73 46.00 14 WAGE RATES

GENERAL DECISION NO. WI080019

DIVISION 01 – GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 11 00 SUMMARY OF WORK

01 22 00 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT

01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE

01 33 00 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES

SUBMITTAL REGISTER

TRANSMITTAL FORM FOR SUBMITTALS

01 35 29.00 14 SAFETY AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH REQUIREMENTS

01 42 00 SOURCES FOR REFERENCE PUBLICATIONS

01 45 02.00 14 QUALITY CONTROL SYSTEM (QCS)

01 45 04.00 10 CONTRACTOR QUALITY CONTROL

ATTACHMENT A - PREPARATORY PHASE CHECKLIST

ATTACHMENT B - INITIAL INSPECTION CHECKLIST

ATTACHMENT C - CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL

MANAGEMENT REPORT

01 50 00 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES

ATTACHMENT A – CONSTRUCTION PROJECT SIGNS

01 57 20.00 14 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

01 62 35.00 14 RECYCLED/RECOVERED MATERIALS

01 74 19 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE MANAGEMENT

01 78 02.00 10 CLOSEOUT SUBMITTALS

DIVISION 02 - EXISTING CONDITIONS

02 41 00.00 14 DEMOLITION

02 82 14.00 14 REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL OF ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIALS

ATTACHMENT A - NOTIFICATION OF DEMOLITION AND

RENOVATION

02 83 13.00 14 LEAD IN CONSTRUCTION

ATTACHMENT A – LABORATORY SELF-DECLARATION FORM

DIVISION 03 - CONCRETE

03 11 14.00 10 FORMWORK FOR CONCRETE

03 15 15.00 14 CONCRETE AND ANCHOR BOLTS

03 20 01.00 10 CONCRETE REINFORCEMENT

03 31 01.00 10 CAST-IN-PLACE STRUCTURAL CONCRETE FOR CIVIL WORKS

DIVISION 04 Not used.

Request for Proposal No. W912EK-08-R-0015

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 2

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

DIVISION 05 – METALS

05 50 03.00 10 METALWORK FABRICATION, MACHINE WORK, MISCELLANEOUS

PROVISIONS

05 50 04.00 10 METALS: MISCELLANEOUS, STANDARD ARTICLES, SHOP

FABRICATED ITEMS FOR CIVIL WORKS STRUCTURES

05 50 05.00 14 POCKET WHEEL AND CHAIN REPLACEMENTS

05 50 06.00 14 ROLLER GATE HOIST CHAIN REPLACEMENT

05 50 07.00 14 TAINTER GATE TRUNNION PIN REPLACEMENT

DIVISION 06 Not used.

DIVISION 07 - THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION

07 53 23 SINGLE-PLY MEMBRANE ROOFING

07 60 00 SHEET METALWORK

07 92 00 CAULKING AND SEALANTS

DIVISION 08 - OPENINGS

08 11 13 STEEL DOORS AND FRAMES

08 71 00 DOOR HARDWARE

DIVISION 09 - FINISHES

09 97 02 PAINTING: HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES

ATTACHMENT A – LABORATORY SELF-DECLARATION FORM

DIVISIONS 10 THROUGH 25 Not used.

DIVISION 26 - ELECTRICAL

26 20 00 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

26 20 10.00 14 ELECTRIC MOTOR REBUILDING - 3 PHASE SQUIRREL CAGE

INDUCTION POLYPHASE

DIVISIONS 27 THROUGH 34 Not used.

DIVISION 35 - WATERWAY AND MARINE CONSTRUCTION

35 01 42.05 14 ROLLER GATE AND TAINTER GATE GEAR SPEED REDUCERS REPAIR

35 08 40.00 14 COMMISSIONING OF TAINTER GATE MACHINERY

DIVISIONS 36 THROUGH 49 Not used.

End of Project Table of Contents

96514781358616

Major Rehabilitation, Stage III-A, Lock and Dam No. 11, Mississippi River, Dubuque County, Iowa and Grant County, Wisconsin.

Request for Proposal No. W912EK-08-R-0015 dated 26 June 2008.

The physical characteristics of the project are delineated in Section 01 11 00 - SUMMARY OF WORK, paragraph entitled, "Project Description."

Estimated price range of the construction is between $5,000,000.00 and $10,000,000.00.

Competition for this project is unrestricted, in accordance with the Small Business Competitiveness Demonstration Program Act of 1988, Public Law 100-656 (15 U.S.C., 644 note) FAR part 19.

JANET L HANCKS 309-794-5443

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

26-Jun-2008

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance within _______15 calendar days and complete it within ________450 calendar days after receiving award, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________52.211-10

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________ 1 copies to perform the work required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________ 12 Aug 2008 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) work requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______ 60 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due will not be considered and will be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

CLOCK TOWER BUILDING

1450 ROCK ISLAND DR

ROCK ISLAND IL 61204-2004

W912EK

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

04:00 PM (hour) Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

309-794-5172FAX: TEL:309-794-5613 TEL: FAX:

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

Section 00010 Solicitation Contract Form

SCHEDULE OF PRICES

ITEM NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

BASE BID

0001 Temporary Field Office 1 LS XXXXXXXX $

0002 Telephone Bills for Temporary Field Office

0002AA First 1,000.00 Dollars 1,000 DL $ $

0002AB Over 1,000.00 Dollars 100 DL $ $

0003 Tainter Gate Repairs, Chain Guide Assemblies, Connections, and Miscellaneous Metals (Gate Nos. 9 – 16) 1

LS

XXXXXXXX

0004 Tainter Gate Machinery, Remove and Replace Corrugated Metal Roof Panels (Gate Nos. 9 – 16) 1

0005 Tainter Gate Repairs, Pocket Wheels, Chains, and Spares (Gates Nos. 9 – 16) 1

0006 Service Bridge Deck, Remove Wood Planking and Replace with Metal Grating, Below Deck Grating Replacement at Tainter Gate Spans, and Install New Deck Hatches 1

0007 Pier No. 2 Repairs

0007AA Horizontal Concrete, Concrete Removal 13

CF

0007AB Horizontal Concrete, Concrete Placement 1

CY

0007AC Embedded Metals and New Grating 1 LS XXXXXXXX $

0008 Roller Gate and Tainter Gate Machinery, Reline Brake Shoes 1

SCHEDULE OF PRICES (continued)

BASE BID (continued)

0009 Roller Gate and Tainter Gate Machinery, Asbestos Brake Shoes Lining, Removal and Disposal 1

0010 Roller Gate and Tainter Gate Machinery, Remove and Replace Speed Reducer Seals 1

0011 Lockwall Abutment

0011AA Horizontal Concrete, Concrete Removal

CF

0011AB Horizontal Concrete, Concrete Anchors 17 EA $ $

0011AC Horizontal Concrete, Concrete Placement

CY

0011AD Stairwell Roof Structure Demolition 1 LS XXXXXXXX $

0012 Roller Gate Operating Houses (Nos. 5, 6, 7, and 8), Roof System and Door Replacement 1

0013 Roller Gate Operating Houses (Nos. 5, 6, 7, and 8), Disposal of Asbestos-containing Roofing and Caulking 1

0014 Roller Gate Operating Houses (Nos. 5, 6, 7, and 8), Disposal of Lead Flashing 1

0015 Roller Gate Pier and Operating House Hatch Replacement (Nos. 5, 6, 7, and 8) 1

0016 Operating Houses, Concrete Roof Panels

0016AA First 6 Each 6 EA $ $

0016AB Over 6 Each 12 EA $ $

0017 Roller Gate Chains, Appurtenant Items Removal and Reinstallation Work 1

0018 Roller Gate Chains, Install New Chain Anchor Bushings 1

0019 Roller Gate Chains, Spare Components 1 LS XXXXXXXX $

0020 Roller Gate Chains, Lubricate Chains in their Entirety 1

0021 Rebuilding Tainter Gate and Roller Gate Motors 1

BID ONLY ONE OF THE FOLLOWING ALTERNATE BID ITEMS:

ALTERNATE BID ITEM A1: BID ITEM NO. 0022

OR

ALTERNATE BID ITEM A2: BID ITEM NOS. 0023, 0024, 0025, 0026, 0027, 0028, 0029, AND 0030

ALTERNATE BID ITEM A1

0022 New Stainless Steel Roller Gate Chains 3 EA $ $

ALTERNATE BID ITEM A2

0023 Roller Gate Chains, Replace Chain Components, Portions from Pins 1 through 49 With Stainless Steel Chain 3

EA

0024 Roller Gate Chains, Rework Existing Chain Components, Portions from Pins 50 through 91, Normal Side Bars - MK 54/8-14, Build Up Pin Holes with Weld (240 Bars Total in Rework Portion)

0024AA First 204 Each 204 EA $ $

0024AB Over 204 Each 36 EA $ $

0025 Roller Gate Chains, Rework Existing Chain Components, Portions from Pins 50 through 91, Normal Heavy Side Bars - MK 54/8-12, Build Up Pin Holes with Weld (126 Bars Total in Rework Portion)

0025AA First 107 Each 107 EA $ $

0025AB Over 107 Each 19 EA $ $

0026 Roller Gate Chains, Rework Existing Chain Components, Portions from Pins 50 through 91, Normal Pins - MK 54/8- 2, Build Up Shank with Weld (117 Total in Rework Portion)

0026AA First 74 Each 74 EA $ $

0026AB Over 74 Each 43 EA $ $

0027 Roller Gate Chains, Rework Existing Chain Components, Portions from Pins 50 through 91, Long Pins - MK 54/8-1, Build Up Shank with Weld (9 Total in Rework Portion)

0027AA First 6 Each 6 EA $ $

0027AB Over 6 Each 3 EA $ $

0028 Roller Gate Chains, Rework Existing Chain Components, Portions from Pins 50 through 91, Center Rollers - MK 54/8-7, Replace with New Rollers - MK S108-10 (126 Total in Rework Portion)

0028AA First 30 Each 30 EA $ $

0028AB Over 30 Each 96 EA $ $

Roller Gate Chains, Rework Existing Chain Components, Portions from Pins 50 through 91, Outer Rollers - MK 54/8-8, Replace with New Rollers - MK S108-11 (252 Total in Rework Portion)

0029AA First 60 Each 60 EA $ $

0029AB Over 60 Each 192 EA $ $

0030 Roller Gate Chains, Remaining Existing Chains Rework (Dismantle Chain Components; Clean Components; Inspect and Measure Components; Drill New Holes in Side Bars; Turn Pin Shanks to New Diameters; Machine Rollers; Penetrant Test Pin Hole Surfaces; Replace Collar Pins - MK 54/8-16 with New Collar Pins - MK S-108-6 and MK S-108-7; and Reassemble Chain Components) through

Not Used

OPTION A

0100 Tainter Gate Repairs, Chain Guide Assemblies, Connections, and Miscellaneous Metals (Gate Nos. 1 – 5) 1

0101 Tainter Gate Repairs, Pocket Wheels and Chains (Gates Nos. 1 – 5) 1 through

Not Used

TOTAL OF ESTIMATED AMOUNTS – OPTION A

(ITEMS 0100 THROUGH 0199) $

OPTION B

0200 Tainter Gate No. 14, Trunnion Pins and Bushings Replacement 1

TOTAL OF ESTIMATED AMOUNTS – OPTION B

(ITEM 0200) $

TOTAL OF ESTIMATED AMOUNTS – BASE BID, OPTION A, AND

OPTION B (ITEM NOS. 0001 THROUGH 0200, INCL.) $

CF = CUBIC FOOT CY = CUBIC YARD

DL = U.S. DOLLAR EA = EACH

LS = LUMP SUM

PLEASE ENSURE THAT THE UNIT PRICE AND AMOUNT LINES FOR ALL ITEMS

HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.

THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO AWARD ANY OR ALL OPTIONS

WITHIN

240 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF CONTRACT AWARD.

THE OPTIONS ARE NOT LISTED IN ANY PARTICULAR ORDER OF PREFERENCE AND MAY BE

AWARDED SEPARATELY OR IN GROUPS.

COST PROPOSAL FORMAT

In addition to the schedule of prices, the contractor must furnish a price breakdown, itemized as provided below.

The breakdown must be in sufficient detail to permit an analysis of all material, labor, equipment, subcontract, and overhead costs, as well as profit, and must cover all work involved in the line item of the bid schedule. Any amount claimed for subcontractors must be supported by similar price breakdown.

1. All proposals must break down prices by:

a. Labor by craft, hours and rate including fringes and taxes, for all elements of work. Production factors should be provided where applicable.

b. Equipment by type, hours, and rate with production data for all elements. Rented equipment should be identified separately.

c. Materials by quantity, cost, and source.

d. Field overhead should be detailed to show all significant cost items.

e. Home office (G&A) rate with detailed support. (Detailed support not required after agreement of G&A rate).

f. Profit (weighted guideline analysis will be used).

g. Bond.

h. A summary of total costs for each cost element (labor, equipment, materials, subcontracts).

i. Any other data pertinent to the cost proposal.

2. Subcontractor data must conform to the same requirements as the prime contractor.

SAMPLE

COST PROPOSAL

Labor:

2 Carpenters @ 8 hrs = 16 hrs @ $18.00 = $288.00 2 Ironworkers @ 16 hrs = 32 hrs @ $23.00 = $736.00 1 Labor @ 16 hrs = 16 hrs @ $16.00 = $256.00 1 Crane Oprtr. @ 8 hrs = 8 hrs @ $20.00 = $160.00

Labor Cost $1440.00 Taxes & Fringes on Labor – 25% $360.00 (1)

TOTAL LABOR $1,800.00

Equipment:

1 - 30-ton Crane @ $40/hr x 8 hrs = $320.00 1 - 40’ x 100’ Barge @ $10/hr x 8 hrs = $80.00

TOTAL EQUIPMENT $400.00

Material:

10 CY concrete @ $50/CY = $500.00 Form Materials (Lumber) $200.00 50 anchors @ $4.00/EA $200.00

TOTAL MATERIAL $900.00

Subcontract: (2) Electrical $1,000.00 Mechaincal $1,000.00

TOTAL SUBCONTRACT $2,000.00

TOTAL DIRECT $5,100.00

Overhead @ 10% $510.00

(3) Profit for Prime on Subcontractor Work @ 5% $255.00 Profit for Prime on Prime Work @ 10% $510.00

TOTAL PROPOSAL $6375.00

(1) Fringes may be included as part of the hourly rate, if applicable

(2) Provide separate labor, equipment, material breakdown and mark-ups as appropriate

(3) Profit allowable on subcontract work is lower that prime work

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS

CLOCK TOWER BUILDING - P.O. BOX 2004

ROCK ISLAND, ILLINOIS 61204-2004

REPLY TO

ATTENTION OF http://www.mvr.usace.army.mil

SITE VISIT NOTICE

A Site Visit will be held on Thursday, 17 July 2008, at 10:00

A.M. at Lock and Dam No. 11. The meeting is to provide an opportunity for offerors to visit the site at Lock 11. Request for Proposal No. W912EK-08-R-0015.

Offerors are highly encouraged to attend this site visit.

Make arrangements at least 24 hours in advance of the prebid meeting with:

Ms. Barbara Lester, Area Engineer Central Area Office U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 5235 Grand Avenue Davenport, Iowa 52807-1014

Telephone No.: 563/386-0572 or 563/386-0651 (Collect Calls Not Accepted.)

Special Note:

In order to expedite entry, offerors should contact Ms. Barbara Lester no later than COB July 15, 2008. Offerors not providing this information may still attend the prebid meeting.

Section 00100 - Instructions to Bidders

INDEX

Source Selection Criteria

CLAUSES

52.211-5000 Evaluation of Subdivided Items (Mar 1995) MAY 1999 52.214-34 Submission Of Offers In The English Language APR 1991 52.214-35 Submission Of Offers In U.S. Currency APR 1991 52.214-5000 Apparent Clerical Mistakes MAY 1999 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition JAN 2004 52.215-20 Requirements for Cost or Pricing Data or Information Other

Than Cost or Pricing Data

OCT 1997

52.216-1 Type Of Contract APR 1984 52.217-5 Evaluation Of Options JUL 1990 52.225-10 Notice of Buy American Act Requirement--Construction

Materials

MAY 2002

52.225-12 Notice of Buy American Act Requirement - Construction Materials Under Trade Agreements

JAN 2005

52.228-1 Bid Guarantee SEP 1996 52.232-13 Notice Of Progress Payments APR 1984 52.233-2 Service Of Protest SEP 2006 52.236-27 Site Visit (Construction) FEB 1995 52.236-28 Preparation of Proposals--Construction OCT 1997

Section 00100 - Instructions to Bidders

SOURCE SELECTION CRITERIA

ATTACHMENT B - SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION

I. Basis for Contract Award The Government will select the best overall offer, based upon an integrated assessment of Technical Approach, Past Performance, Proposal Risk, and Cost/Price. This is a best-value source selection conducted in accordance with AFARS 5115.101 supplement thereto. A Contract may be awarded to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR (and as supplemented), whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements and is judged, based on the evaluation factors, to represent the best value to the Government. The Government seeks to award to the offeror who gives the Government the greatest confidence that it will best meet or exceed the requirements affordably. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) reasonably determines that the technical superiority and/or overall business approach and/or superior past performance of the higher priced offeror outweighs the cost difference. To arrive at a source selection decision, the SSA will integrate the source selection team’s summary of the evaluation factors. While the Government source selection evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective and, therefore, the selection will be base upon exercising prudent business judgment throughout the process.

A. Basis for Contract Award Award will be made to the offeror deemed to be the most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors described.

B. Importance of Cost/Price In accordance with FAR 15.304(e), the evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost/price. However, the Government will not make an award at a significantly higher overall cost to the Government to achieve slightly superior technical features.

C. Number of Contracts to be Awarded The Government intends to award one contract in conjunction with this RFP. However, the Government is under no obligation to award a contract.

D. Rejection of Unrealistic Offers The Government may reject any proposal that is evaluated and determined to be unrealistic in terms of project commitments, including contract terms and conditions, or unrealistically high or low in cost when compared to Government estimates, such that the proposal is deemed to reflect an inherent lack of competence or failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the project.

E. Correction Potential of Proposals

The Government will consider, throughout the evaluation, the “correction potential” of any deficiency or proposal inadequacy. The judgment of such correction potential is within the sole discretion of the Government. If an aspect of an offeror’s proposal not meeting the requirements is not considered correctable, the offeror may be eliminated from the competitive range.

F. Solicitation Requirements, Terms and Conditions Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as factors and subfactors in order to be eligible for award. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the offeror being removed from consideration for award. Any exceptions to the solicitation’s terms and conditions must be fully explained and justified.

A. Discussions If, during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs), and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision. NOTE: The Government reserves the right to award without discussions. Discussions may be held, however, if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary (see FAR provision 52.215-1, which is incorporated by reference in this Section).

II. EVALUATION FACTOR:

Evaluation Factors are listed in descending order of importance.

FACTOR SUBFACTOR ELEMENT

1: Technical Approach

1.1 Work Plan

1.1.1 – Method and work plan for replacing the trunnion pin and bushing on the #14 tainter gate.

1.1.2 Method and work plan for removing

old and installing the new roller gate chains.

1.1.3 Method and work plan for installing

the tainter gate chains and pocket wheels.

Describe the method used to support the gates and steps to protect the gate from damage while performing the work.

1.1.4 Method and work plan for replacing

the tainter gate and roller gate speed reducer shaft seals.

1.1.5 Detailed Work Plan, Network

Analysis, & Bar Chart for Entire Work Period

1.1.6. Major Plant & Equipment

1.2. Corporate Management

1.2.1. Key Personnel Experience

1.2.2. Prime Contractor and Sub

Contractor Experience

1.2.3. Organization Chart

1.3. Safety Plan

2: Past Performance 3: Proposal Risk 4: Cost/Price 4.1.Price Proposal

4.2. Representations and

Certifications

4.3. Subcontracting Plan

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL APPROACH

Each subfactor within the Technical Approach factor will receive an adjectival rating based on the assessed strengths and proposal inadequacies of each offeror’s proposal as they relate to each of the Technical Approach subfactors. Subfactor ratings SHALL NOT be rolled up into an overall rating for the Technical Approach Factor.

TECHINICAL RATINGS

Rating Description

Outstanding Excellent in all respects; offers one or more significant advantages not offset by disadvantages, very good probability of success in meeting the Government’s requirements.

Above Average High quality in most respects; offers one or more advantages not offset by disadvantages; good probability of success in meeting the Government’s requirements.

Satisfactory Adequate quality; any advantages are offset by disadvantages; fair probability of success in meeting the Government’s requirements.

Marginal Overall quality cannot be determined because of errors, omissions or deficiencies that are capable of being corrected without a major rewrite or revision of the proposal; low to marginal probability in meeting the Government's requirements.

Unsatisfactory A proposal that contains major errors, omissions or deficiencies, or a very low probability in meeting the Government’s requirements;

and these conditions cannot be corrected without a major rewrite or revision of the proposal.

Subfactor 1.1. Work Plan:

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed work plan to determine understanding of and compliance with Government’s requirements. The evaluations will include a focus on a logical work plan from the contractor, evidence of planning, and a thorough understanding of the work scope. The following are the Work Plan areas on which the offeror’s proposal will be evaluated. Elements are listed in descending order of importance.

a. Element 1.1.1 – Method and work plan for replacing the trunnion pin and bushing on the #14 tainter gate. The SSEB will evaluate the description of the plan and how the contractor and subcontractors intend to accomplish the work. Include a description of the system to support the tainter gate, procedure to replace the pins and bushings, and steps to protect the adjacent gates from damage while performing the work.

b. Element 1.1.2 - Method and work plan for removing the old and installing the new roller gate chains. The SSEB will evaluate the description of the plan and how the contractor and subcontractors intend to accomplish the work. Include a description of the system used to support the roller gate to remove and reinstall the chains. Also include a description of the proposed procedure to protect the gate from damage while performing the work.

c. Element 1.1.3 - Method and work plan for installing the tainter gate chains and pocket wheels. The SSEB will evaluate the description of the plan and how the contractor and subcontractors intend to accomplish the work. Describe the method used to support the tainter gates and steps to protect the gate from damage while performing the work.

d. Element 1.1.4 - Method and work plan for replacing the tainter gate and roller gate speed reducer shaft seals. The SSEB will evaluate the description of the plan and how the contractor and subcontractors intend to accomplish the work.

e. Element 1.1.5 - Detailed Work Plan, Network Analysis, & Bar Chart for Entire Work

Period The SSEB will evaluate the description of the plan and how the contractor & subcontractors intend to accomplish the work. This plan should include work sequence and reasoning for activities performed in this time frame; allow for completion of required work in allotted time frame; shop drawing preparation and material approval, procurement and delivery system; identification of critical long lead time materials; utilization of labor, equipment use, and service; staging, parking, and mobilization plan and how it minimizes impact to the navigation & surrounding community/area; description also includes a list of major subcontractors with required coordination and overall job site management.

The SSEB will look for details in the bar chart to include the following items: Activities labeled, interdependence including F-S and S-S, start, critical path, durations, ES and EF, LS and LF, float, dummies, and milestones. All detail activities are shown for shop drawings; fabrication, delivery, and mobilization/demobilization; dewatering/rewatering; vertical concrete and embedded metals; horizontal concrete; mechanical; and electrical. The logic demonstrates major activities placed in logical sequence, minimum number of critical path activities. The durations are set so all activities have assigned durations, major activities have reasonable durations and conform to resources, detail activities have reasonable durations. The resource loading shows major activities supported with manpower and equipment.

The SSEB will look for details pertaining to the following items. A description of measures which effectively deal with potential high water and severe winter weather to allow continuation of construction activities and protection of new and existing features; description includes:

feasible plan with adequate protective structures, protective covers and tarps, use of heaters and/or heating blankets, labor protection, reduced productivity countermeasures, material/concrete protection during and after transportation, concrete curing protection, machinery protection and installation, floating plant use and protection, site safety and accessibility, and snow removal; description includes minimal anticipated or potential weather related delays and shutdowns which could impact the scheduled lock shutdown period.

f. Element 1.1.6. Major Plant and Equipment The SSEB will look for details pertaining to the following items. A comprehensive list of major plant and equipment items which meets the work requirements; includes items for hoisting, dewatering, scaffolding, concrete removal, concrete placement, site work and support; includes description of age, condition, all ratings, capacity and intended use for each item; includes description of effectiveness and any limiting conditions or constraints for each item which may or may not be related to site constraints;

includes availability of backup plant and equipment for critical items.

Subfactor 1.2. Corporate Management The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed Corporate Management to determine compliance with and capability to meet Governments requirements. The following are the Corporate Management areas on which the offeror’s proposal will be evaluated (all elements are of equal importance):

a. Element 1.2.1. Key Personnel Experience The SSEB will evaluate the adequacy and strength of key personnel assignments (prime and subcontractors) to cover the necessary design disciplines and construction staffing requirements. Proposals should provide a description of previous experience on jobs of similar complexity for the key home office and satellite office employees assigned to this contract. Proposals should provide job descriptions (including names and resumes), responsibilities, and authority for key field employees (including, but not limited to, all managers, superintendents, safety officers, and quality control managers that may be utilized on this project). The proposals should provide the qualifications for each type of subcontractor shown on the organization chart. The personnel assigned in the proposal must be utilized on the project. Substitution of any proposed personnel will require prior approval of the Contracting Officer.

b. Element 1.2.2. Prime Contractor and Sub Contractor Experience The SSEB will evaluate Prime Contractor and Sub Contractor experience. Experience prior to ten years will not be given consideration unless key personnel proposed for this project played a significant role AND the project can be shown to be similar to this project considering changes in technology, materials, equipment, codes, etc. Documentation of successful completion of projects similar in nature and scope to this project will be favorably considered in the evaluation. Conversely, proposals that do not include substantial evidence that the offeror has experience, qualifications and production capability to successfully prosecute the proposed project will be unfavorably considered. No previous Lock Rehabilitation experience is necessary to qualify for award;

however, added consideration will be given for recent, successful Lock Rehabilitation experience. The subcontractors described in the proposal must be utilized on the project.

Substitution of any proposed subcontractor will require prior approval of the Contracting Officer.

c. Element 1.2.3. Organization Chart The SSEB will evaluate the organization chart.

The organization chart will list the key personnel (including sub-contractors) and sub-contractor interfaces with the prime-contractor; on-site and management personnel with the lines of authority.

Subfactor 1.3. Safety

The SSEB will evaluate the offeror’s proposal to determine compliance with and capability to meet the Government’s requirements in regards to safety. The SSEB will evaluate the safety plan of each offeror. The plan should provide the detailed description of the organizational safety program for the offeror. Additionally the plan should include the detailed safety plan for projects of similar type and complexity indicating compliance with OSHA and EM 385-1-1. The plan should indicate key safety personnel including experience, education, and training. Also the plan should include the safety record for past years indicating all lost time accidents and list safety awards and acknowledgments.

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

The Past Performance factor represents the evaluation of an offeror's past work record. The Government will evaluate the offeror's demonstrated record of contract compliance in performance risk and performance relevancy to major construction projects in meeting customer needs, including cost and schedule.

a. Past Performance Evaluation The Past Performance Evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing aspects of an offeror's relevant present and recent past performance, focusing on and targeting how well the offeror performed the work, including work quality, which is relevant to Technical Approach subfactors and elements. Recent past performance is defined as projects completed in the last ten years. A relevancy determination of the offeror's past performance, including joint ventures, subcontractors and/or teaming partners, will be made. In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror, teaming partner, or subcontractor whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated.

Higher relevancy will be assessed for contracts that are most similar to the effort, or portion of the effort, for which that contractor is being proposed, and may contribute to an overall higher relevancy score for the offeror. The Government is not bound by the offeror's opinion of relevancy. The following definitions apply:

STANDARDS FOR PAST PERFORMANCE WORKSHEET

PERFORMANCE (Past Performance) ratings assess demonstrated performance on recent, relevant contracts.

ADJECTIVE DESCRIPTION

Outstanding Offeror’s past performance record indicates that the offeror has an outstanding performance on previous projects.

Above Average Offeror’s past performance record indicates that the offeror has an above average performance on previous projects.

Satisfactory Offeror’s past performance record indicates that the offeror has a satisfactory performance on previous projects.

Marginal Offeror’s past performance record indicates that the offeror has a marginal performance on previous projects.

Unsatisfactory Offeror’s past performance record indicates that the offeror has an unsatisfactory performance on previous projects.

STANDARDS FOR PAST PERFORMANCE WORKSHEET

PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY ratings assess the relevancy of recent contracts to the scope of work in this RFP.

ADJECTIVE DESCRIPTION

Very Relevant Past performance efforts involved the magnitude of effort and complexities which are essentially what this solicitation requires.

Relevant Past performance efforts involved less magnitude of effort and complexities than this solicitation requires.

Semi-Relevant Past performance contractual efforts involved much less magnitude of effort and complexities than this solicitation requires.

Low-Relevant Past performance contractual efforts involved significantly less magnitude of effort and complexities than this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Did not involve any significant aspects of above.

The SSEB will conduct an evaluation of performance data obtained to determine how closely the work performed under those efforts relates to the proposed effort. The SSEB will, as deemed necessary, confirm past performance data identified by offerors in their proposals. In evaluating past performance, the SSEB will use past performance information gathered from various sources which may include but not be limited to offeror-provided references, questionnaires, and interviews. The Government reserves the right to use data independently obtained from other Governmental and commercial sources. Moreover, while the Government will review the offeror’s most recent and relevant past performance references, the Government may not review every reference provided by the offeror.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s performance record with special emphasis on the areas covered under the Technical Approach factors and subfactors. The Government will consider the relevancy, time frame of the experience, and scope of the past performance, source of the past performance information, context of the data, general trends in offeror’s performance, and the size, quality, and complexity of the past performance relative to this acquisition’s requirements.

When relevant performance record indicates performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised). The government may review more recent contracts or performance evaluations to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and to evaluate their effectiveness.

Offerors may be given an opportunity to address adverse present/past performance information if the offeror has not had a previous opportunity to respond to the information. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Recent contracts will be examined to ensure that corrective measures have been implemented. The confidence assessment will consider issues including, but not limited to, the number and severity of the problems, the appropriateness and/or effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised), and the offeror’s overall work record.

Prompt corrective action in isolated instances may not outweigh overall negative trends.

The SSEB may consider the offeror’s, including subcontractors, joint ventures, and teaming partners, past performance in total, rather than on an effort (contract) by effort basis.

Pursuant to DFARS 215.305(a)(2), the assessment will consider the extent to which the offeror's evaluated past performance demonstrates compliance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns and FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

b. Lack of Past Performance Information Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and, as a result, will receive a "Neutral/Unknown Confidence" for the Past Performance factor rating since no information is available for a determination.

c. Relevancy/Recency More recent and relevant performance will have a greater impact on the performance confidence assessment than less recent or relevant efforts. A strong record of relevant past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than a “Neutral/Unknown Confidence" rating. Likewise, a more relevant past performance record may receive a higher confidence rating and be considered more favorably than a less relevant record of favorable performance.

d. Performance Confidence Assessment As a result of an analysis of those risks and strengths identified, each offeror will receive an integrated Performance Confidence Assessment, which is the rating for the Past Performance factor. Although the past performance evaluation focuses on performance that is relevant to the subfactors, the resulting Performance Confidence Assessment is made at the factor level and represents an overall evaluation of contractor performance. The possible overall rating for the Past Performance factor is a combination of the performance and relevancy ratings and is listed in descending order in the following table:

PAST PERFORMANCE RATING

PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY

Outstanding Very Relevant Outstanding Relevant Outstanding Semi-Relevant Outstanding Low-Relevant

Above Average Very Relevant Above Average Relevant Above Average Semi-Relevant Above Average Low-Relevant

Satisfactory Very Relevant Satisfactory Relevant Satisfactory Semi-Relevant Satisfactory Low-Relevant

Marginal Very Relevant Marginal Relevant Marginal Semi-Relevant Marginal Low-Relevant

Unsatisfactory Very Relevant Unsatisfactory Relevant Unsatisfactory Semi-Relevant Unsatisfactory Low-Relevant

e. Confidentiality of Sources Past performance information, including questionnaires and past performance sources are confidential and are not to be released to anyone outside the source selection process. Offerors are cautioned that contacting or seeking out source(s) of past performance information is strictly prohibited. Any attempts to contact individuals concerning the past performance information, will be perceived negatively and could impact the performance rating. Any questions regarding source selection information should be addressed directly to the source selection authority only and not to any other individuals. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that all their subcontractors and teaming partners are aware of this information and are in compliance.

FACTOR 3: PROPOSAL RISK

Proposal risk will be evaluated at the Technical Approach factor and subfactor level; and at the Past Performance factor level. Each Technical Approach factor and subfactor; and Past Performance factor will receive one of the following proposal risk ratings.

RISK RATINGS

Rating Definition

High Very likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Risk may be unacceptable even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Moderate High

Likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Risk could be unacceptable even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Moderate Some potentially to cause some disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.

Moderate - Low

Minor potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.

Low Very low potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.

The proposal risk assessment focuses on the risks and weaknesses associated with an offeror’s proposed approach and includes an assessment of the potential for disruption of schedule, increased cost, degradation of performance, and the need for increased Government oversight, as well as the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. For each identified risk, the assessment also addresses the offeror’s proposal for mitigating the risk and why that approach is or is not manageable. Under the Past Performance factor, the Performance Confidence Assessment represents the evaluation of an offeror's past work record to assess the Government's confidence in the offeror's probability of successfully performing and producing a quality product. An overall risk rating for the Proposal Risk factor will be determined based on the ratings for Technical Approach and Past Performance.

FACTOR 4: PRICE PROPOSAL

The offeror’s price proposal will be evaluated for award purposes, based upon the total price proposed for basic requirements.

Subfactor 4.1. Price Proposal The Government will evaluate the reasonableness of each offeror’s proposed price. This will include an evaluation of the extent to which proposed price indicates a clear understanding of the solicitation requirements, and reflects a sound approach to satisfying those requirements. The proposals/worksheets will be analyzed individually and collectively and compared to a Government developed cost estimate. The Government developed cost estimate cannot be provided to any Offeror. The price factor will not be point scored, but will be a consideration in the award selection. Price information supporting a price judged to be unrealistic and with the proposal will be quantified by the Government evaluators and included in the evaluation for each offeror. When the Government evaluates an offer as unrealistic compared to the anticipated price of performance and the offeror fails to explain its approach, the Government will consider, under the applicable Proposal Risk element, the offeror’s lack of understanding of the technical requirements of the corresponding Technical Approach element.

Subfactor 4.2. Representations and Certifications The Government will review representations and certifications located in Section 00600 of request for proposal.

Subfactor 4.3. Subcontracting Plan

The offeror shall refer to the contract clauses entitled "Utilization of Small Business Concerns (Oct 2000) (52.219-8) and "Small Business Subcontracting Plan" (Jan 2002) (52.219-9, Alt II), which are included in this request for proposal. If the offeror has certified that the offeror is a large business, and the offer is $1,000,000 or more the offeror is required to submit a subcontracting plan with the proposal. Award will not be made under this solicitation without a subcontracting plan approved by the Contracting Officer.

As described in the synopsis notification, we consider the following goals reasonable and achievable during the performance of the contract resulting from this solicitation. However, final goals will be negotiated prior to contract award. The Subcontracting Plan will then become a material part of the offeror’s contract.

a. 51.2% of planned subcontracting dollars can be placed with all small business concerns.

b. 8.8% of planned subcontracting dollars can be placed with those small business concerns owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals or Historically Black Colleges and Universities or Minority Institutions. NOTE: b. is a subset of a.

c. 7.3% of planned subcontracting dollars for small women-owned businesses. NOTE: c. is a subset of a. Also, the women-owned business may meet the definition of a small disadvantaged business (SBD). If so, c. will also be a subset of b. (Count firm in all applicable areas.)

d. 3.1% of planned subcontracting dollars may be placed with HUBZone small business concerns. NOTE: d. is a subset of a. Note: A HUBZone firm may also SDB, women-owned and/or veteran-owned. Count firm in all applicable areas).

e. 1.5% of planned subcontracting dollars for veteran-owned small business. NOTE: e. is a subset of a. Go to http:///www. va.gov/osdbu/vetctr.htm or http://www.sba.gov/VETS/ for questions concerning the Veterans Business Development program.

f. 1.5% of planned subcontracting dollars may be placed with service-disabled veteran-owned small business. NOTE: f. is a subset of a. and e.

Goals included in any proposed plan submitted by the offeror should be at least equal to the ones being recommended. If lesser goals are proposed, the offeror will have to explain how those goals and the plan represent the offeror’s best efforts to…