W912EK-17-R-0013.pdf

Solicitation No. W912EK-17-R-0013

MISSISSIPPI RIVER BASIN

LOCK AND DAM 18

GLADSTONE, IL

FLOOR STABILIZATION AND RELIEF

WELLS

Construction Solicitation and Specifications

MAY 2017

US Army Corps of Engineers Rock Island District

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS

1500 CLOCK TOWER AVENUE

ROCK ISLAND, ILLINOIS 61201

REPLY TO

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

PREBID MEETING NOTICE

A prebid meeting will be held at 0900 hours on 07 June 2017, at Lock and Dam No. 18, Gladstone, IL. The meeting is to discuss the Lock and Dam No. 18 Floor Stabilization and Relief Wells Installation project, Solicitation No. W912EK-17-R-0013, and to provide an opportunity for offerors to visit the site. This is the only on-site visit with the Corps of Engineers during the bidding phase. Offerors may visit the site on their own, but must contact the Area Engineer to set up the site visit.

Offerors are highly encouraged to attend this prebid meeting.

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

Mr. Mark Jacobson, P.E.

Area Engineer Central Area Office U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1910 E. Kimberly Road Suite 105 Davenport, Iowa 52807 Telephone No.: 563-386-0572, Ext. 6701 (Collect calls not accepted.)

Mobile No.: 309-756-6891 E-Mail: Mark.E.Jacobson@usace.army.mil

Questions submitted from Offerors and Government responses will be documented via ProjNet Bidder Inquiry. Please refer to Contract Clause MVR.02 - Questions and Answers via ProjNet for further instruction.

Solicitation No. W912EK-17-R-0013

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS

DIVISION 00 - PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS

00 73 05 SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

00 73 46 WAGE RATES

DIVISION 01 - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

01 11 00 SUMMARY OF WORK

01 22 00 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT

01 32 16 CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS SCHEDULES

01 33 00 SUBMITTAL PROCEDURES

01 35 26 GOVERNMENTAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS

01 42 00 SOURCES FOR REFERENCE PUBLICATIONS

01 45 02 QUALITY CONTROL SYSTEM (QCS)

01 45 04 CONTRACTOR QUALITY CONTROL

01 50 02 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FACILITIES

01 57 19 TEMPORARY ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS

01 78 00 CLOSEOUT SUBMITTALS

DIVISION 02 - EXISTING CONDITIONS

02 21 00 SURVEYS

DIVISION 03 - CONCRETE

03 11 14 FORMWORK FOR CONCRETE

03 15 15 GROUT AND ANCHOR BOLTS

03 20 01 CONCRETE REINFORCEMENT

03 31 00 CAST-IN-PLACE STRUCTURAL CONCRETE

03 40 00 PLANT-PRECAST STRUCTURAL CONCRETE RELIEF WELL PROTECTION

BLOCKS

DIVISION 05 - METALS

05 50 13 MISCELLANEOUS METAL FABRICATIONS

DIVISION 31 - EARTHWORK

31 23 19 PROTECTION, DEWATERING, AND DEBRIS REMOVAL

DIVISION 32 - EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS

32 92 10 REPAIR OF DAMAGED TURFED AREAS

DIVISION 33 - UTILITIES

33 26 00 RELIEF WELLS

-- End of Project Table of Contents --

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1

96514770652577

Mississippi River Basin; Lock and Dam 18; Gladstone, IL; LD 18 Floor Stabilization and Relief Wells

See Section 01 11 00 Summary of Work

NAICS Code: 237990 Small Business Size Standard: $33,500.000.

Completion Date: 275 Consecutive days

This procurement is an unrestricted best value. All questions shall be submitted through ProjNet, please see MVR.02 for further information.

BENJAMIN J KIMBELL 309-794-5048

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

31-May-2017

(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 w ithin _______15 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________275 calendar days after receiving aw ard, 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 w ork required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________30 Jun 2017 (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) w ork 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 w ill not be considered and w ill 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

1500 ROCK ISLAND DRIVE

ROCK ISLAND IL 61201

W912EK

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

02:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

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

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

--- --- ---- REF BLOCK 18A)FAX:TEL: 309-794-5613 (INVOICES TEL: FAX:

W912EK-17-R-0013 208

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 PRICE

ITEM NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 Mobilization and Demobilization

1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0002 Relief Well Installation

34 EA $ $

0003 Lock Chamber Cleanout

0003AA First 80 Cubic Yards

80 CY $ $

0003AB Over 80 Cubic Yards

80 CY $ $

0004 Weep Hole Cleaning

1 JOB XXXXXXXX $

0005 Relief Well Testing

0005AA First 4 Tests

4 EA $ $

0005AB Over 4 Tests

10 EA $ $

0006 Pre-cast Concrete Protection Block Installation

26 EA $ $

0007 Cast-in-Place Concrete Protection Block Installation

8 EA $ $

0008 Installation of Relief Well Reference Markers

34 EA $ $

TOTAL OF ESTIMATED AMOUNTS

(ITEM NOS. 0001 THROUGH 0008, INCL.)

CY = CUBIC YARDS EA = EACH JOB = LUMP SUM

ENSURE UNIT PRICE AND AMOUNT LINES FOR ALL ITEMS ARE

COMPLETED.

SOURCE SELECTION PLAN

SECTION II

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The Government will select for award the proposal that is most advantageous and represents the best overall value to the Government, considering the Price, Technical Approach, Past Performance, and Small Business Participation, along with their respective sub-factors (as applicable). As a result, the Government may select for award the offeror whose proposed prices are not the lowest, but whose technical approach, past performance and small business participation proposals are sufficiently more advantageous as to justify the payment of a higher price. Conversely, the Government may select for award the offeror whose proposed prices are lower than other proposals that are not sufficiently more advantageous as to justify the payment of a higher price.

The evaluation factors are listed in descending order of importance: price, technical approach, past performance, and small business participation. The Price factor is approximately equal to Technical Approach which is significantly more important than the Past Performance and Small Business factors combined.

Proposed prices will be evaluated but not scored or otherwise combined with the other aspects of the proposal evaluation. An offeror must be considered “Acceptable” with no greater than a moderate risk in all factors and sub-factors under the technical approach factor; no less than a “Relevant” ranting in the Past Performance factor; and have “Acceptable” small business participation in order to be eligible for contract award.

B. FACTORS AND SUB-FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and sub-factors described below.

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

Factor 1: Price. The resulting award will be a Firm Fixed Price Contract for construction services. Price reasonableness will be utilized in the evaluation of this effort in accordance with FAR Part 15 procedures.

Factor 2: Technical Approach. The Technical Approach factor is further divided into the following sub-factors:

a. Sub-factor 1: Work Plan

b. Sub-factor 2: Corporate Management

c. Sub-factor 3: Safety

Note: Sub-factors 1 and 2 are significantly more important than sub-factor 3.

Factor 3: Past Performance. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements.

Factor 4: Small Business Participation. All offerors will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of small businesses.

Evaluation of the offeror’s proposal shall address each sub-factor as it applies to the plans and specifications. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section. During evaluations of each proposal, the Government will assign each sub-factor an adjectival rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team (SST).

1. The overarching evaluation approach for all factors and sub-factors is as follows:

a. Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s methods and approach have 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.

b. Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

2. The evaluation approach shall include the following factors:

Factor 1: Price

Price will be evaluated for reasonableness in accordance with FAR Part15. Contract Line Item prices will be evaluated to determine whether the estimated proposed prices are reasonable for the work to be performed; reflect a clear understanding of the requirements;

and are consistent with the offeror's technical proposal.

(1) The offeror shall ensure the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and fully supports the dollar values set forth in the SF1442 Schedule of Prices.

(2) Prices offered will be evaluated for reasonableness in comparison to the Government estimate. In accordance with 33 U.S.C. 622 and 624, no civil works construction contract shall be awarded if the contract price exceeds the Government estimate by more than twenty-five (25) percent.

(3) 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 unreasonably 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.

Factor 2: Technical Approach

The Technical Approach Factor is divided into the following sub-factors:

Sub-Factor 1: Work Plan. This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s proposed Work Plan for the entire length of the contract. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed work plan to determine understanding of and compliance with the Government’s requirements. The elements are listed in descending order of importance and the evaluation will focus on the following:

a. Sub-Factor 1, Element 1: Detailed Work Plan, Network Analysis, and Bar Chart

The Government will evaluate the description of the plan and how the offeror and subcontractors intend to accomplish the work. This plan should include detailed 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 of materials; identification of critical long lead time materials; utilization of labor, equipment and plant; staging, fleeting, parking, and mobilization plan; description also includes a list of major subcontractors with required coordination and overall job site management.

The primary engineering design and construction methodology will be evaluated on the basis that it demonstrates a thorough understanding of the projects specification requirements, work sequencing to overcome the site constraints and challenges associated with the work, and demonstrate a logical plan that accomplishes the work in a safe, cost effective manner.

The work plan shall contain descriptions and illustrations which show the contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers methodology to accomplish the work. The plan shall demonstrate the following items:

The staging and flow of work and materials for accomplishment of the contract.

Procedures for installing the relief wells in the wet:

o Offeror shall describe procedures utilized to meet tight clearances from the lock wall when drilling the wells.

o Offeror shall describe how they will drill the bore holes to the tolerances specified in the solicitation/contract documents.

o Offeror shall describe a plan for verifying the relief wells and precast concrete protection blocks are installed without impacting the struts, sump pits, bubbler crossovers, electrical duct banks, filling and emptying valves, or any other feature on the lock floor.

o Offeror shall describe anticipated relief well installation sequence. Favorable consideration should be given for priority sequencing of the upstream and intermediate wall relief wells, while still ensuring the placement of all relief wells within the relief well drilling duration provided in the specifications.

Offeror shall describe the rationale behind the anticipated relief well installation sequence.

o Offeror shall describe anticipated drilling methods. This is to include methods for coring the lock floor, advancing the tooling through the underlying soils, methods for keeping the bore hole from collapsing before well installation.

Also describe placement methods for well including a description of the stainless steel well screen to PVC riser pipe connection strength, filter material, and backfill of boring.

o Offeror shall describe procedures for development of the relief wells.

Work under this contract will be required during periods when extreme temperatures should be expected. No time extensions should be expected based on cold or icy weather conditions. Offeror shall describe how they will complete work in cold and icy conditions. This shall include a contingency plan that describes how the offeror will meet the relief well drilling duration provided in the specifications in the event of extreme cold or icy conditions, equipment failures, or other unforeseen operational delays.

Offeror shall describe procedures for cleaning of weep holes on the lock floor immediately after completion of the lock water level drawdown. This activity typically occurs prior to the placement of access stairs to the lock chamber floor.

Sediment and well cuttings within the lock chamber will be removed from the lock floor after the chamber has been dewatered. Offeror shall describe the method for removing this material without damaging the relief wells.

Procedures for the installation of the precast concrete protection blocks in the lock dewatered condition, which would have up to one (1) foot of water in the lock chamber:

o Lock floor is not level; however, the horizontal check valves need to be level to function correctly. Offeror shall describe method of ensuring the precast concrete protection blocks are installed correctly.

o Offeror shall ensure there is no flowing water coming out of the relief well when placing the concrete block over it. Offeror shall describe proposed method to be used.

o Offeror shall describe method of anchoring the protection blocks.

Procedures for the installation of the cast-in-place concrete protection blocks in the lock dewatered condition, which would have up to one (1) foot of water in the lock chamber.

Appropriate sequencing of work items to ensure all necessary work can be accomplished during the closure period.

The SSEB will consider the following factors when reviewing the work plan, reasonableness of the Offeror’s sequencing, understanding and ability of the offeror to accomplish the project requirements, and understanding and ability of the offeror to overcome obstacles associated with completion of the work. The work plan description should anticipate the possibility of corrective measures during construction.

In regards to the bar chart, the Government will look for details 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 shall be shown for shop drawings, mobilization, well drilling, well casing installation, well installation, well development, weep hole cleaning, chamber cleanout, protection block installation, relief well reference marker installation, relief well testing, and demobilization. The offeror shall also show the Government work periods on the bar chart and shall not have schedule activities that conflict with Government work. Offeror shall ensure that the bar chart demonstrates major activities placed in logical sequence with a minimum number of critical path activities. The durations shall be set so all activities have assigned durations, major activities have reasonable durations and conform to resources, and detail activities have reasonable durations. It is very important that the work is complete by the end of the closure period as outlined in the specifications. This is to ensure that the start of navigation season is not delayed in any way.

The offeror shall assume a contract notice to proceed of 1 September 2017 for proposal evaluation purposes only. September 1st is an arbitrary date for evaluation purposes and the offeror will not in any way be subjected to using this date for future construction schedules or any other purposes.

Sub-Factor 2: Corporate Management. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposed Corporate Management to determine compliance with and capability to meet the Government’s requirements. The following are the Corporate Management areas on which the offeror’s proposal will be evaluated (all elements are of equal importance):

a. Sub-Factor 2, Element 1: Prime Contractor Experience

The Government will evaluate Prime Contractor experience. Experience prior to ten

(10) 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 project will be unfavorably considered.

b. Sub-Factor 2, Element 2: Subcontractor Experience

The Government will evaluate the extent of recent Subcontractor experience.

Experience prior to ten (10) 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 project will be unfavorably considered. 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. Sub-Factor 2, Element 3: Key Personnel Experience

The Government will evaluate the adequacy and strength of key personnel assignments (prime and subcontractors) to cover the necessary design disciplines and construction staffing requirements. Proposals provide a description of previous experience on projects of similar complexity for the key home office and satellite office employees assigned to this contract. Provide project descriptions (include 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). Provide the minimum 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 after contract award.

d. Sub-Factor 2, Element 4: Organization Chart

The Government will evaluate the organization chart. The organization chart shall list key personnel (including subcontractors) and subcontractor interfaces with the Contractor; on-site and management personnel with the lines of authority. The organization chart shall be clear and concise to allow thorough understanding of the contractor’s team for the project. Clearly labeled on the organization chart shall be employee duties and responsibilities. Based on the organization chart the Government will ensure that that the safety officer and quality control officer are different individuals.

Sub-Factor 3: Safety. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposal to determine capability to meet Government requirements in regards to Safety. The following areas, in which the offeror’s proposal will be evaluated (all elements are of equal importance), will focus on:

a. Sub-Factor 3, Element 1: Risk Management Process

The risk reduction safety plan documentation should clearly demonstrate the offeror’s process for managing risk on high hazard activities, including, but not limited to, diving operations, fall protection, crane operations, and floating plant safety will be evaluated. Key safety positions, including safety competent persons and duties shall be outlined, noting compliance with the duty requirements of the contract. In addition, the offeror shall submit the names of key safety personnel including experience, education, and training.

Proposals that clearly demonstrate the offerors ability to reduce risk with a detailed safety plan and available safety trained professionals for this project will receive an acceptable, good, or outstanding risk rating. Conversely, proposals that do not provide clear evidence of a sound risk reduction safety plan and available safety trained professionals to successfully reduce risk will receive a marginal or unacceptable risk rating.

b. Sub-Factor 3, Element 2: Experience Modifier

The Government will evaluate the Experience Modifier. The offeror must provide documentation that demonstrates their safety and health program experience using an "Experience Modification Rate (EMR)” for the past five (5) years. The following is the rating criteria to be used:

Rating Experience Modifier

Superior 0.7 or below Acceptable 0.71 to 1.0

Sub-Standard 1.1 or greater

The Technical Factor Ratings, excerpted below, focus on the strengths, deficiencies, weaknesses, risks, and uncertainties of the offeror's proposal. The adjectival rating depicts how well the offeror’s proposal meets the Technical sub-factor requirements. Sub-factor ratings shall be rolled up into an overall rating for Factor 2: Technical Approach.

TECHNICAL RATINGS

Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more significant deficiencies.

Proposal is un-awardable.

Factor 3: Past Performance

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 Plans and Specifications. Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in Appendix D.

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 cost, schedule, performance and management of subcontractors. Major subcontractors are defined as members of an offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform ten (10) percent or more of the proposed effort. A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of the work can become an important consideration in the evaluation process.

Therefore, offerors will be reminded to include the most recent and relevant efforts (within the past ten (10) years) in their proposal. Absent any recent and relevant past performance history or when the performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will be assigned an “unknown confidence rating” and its proposal will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

The Government may use data provided by the offeror in its proposal and data obtained from other sources, including data in Government files or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the offeror 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. Data used in conducting performance risk assessments shall not extend past ten (10) years prior to the issue date of the RFP, but may include performance data generated during the past ten (10) years without regard to the contract award date.

The past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements. One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each offeror after evaluating the offeror's recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements.

The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to assess the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. The following criteria will be used to establish what is relevant which shall include similarity of service/support, complexity; dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming.

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY

Relevancy Description 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.

The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to assess each offeror’s past performance to determine how confident a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired. The performance confidence assessment will utilize the most appropriate rating from the chart below. This rating considers the assessed confidence of the relevant/recent efforts gathered.

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

Assessment Description

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.

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.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

Factor 4: Small Business Participation

All offerors (both large and small businesses) will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of small businesses in the performance of acquisition (as small business prime offerors or small business subcontractors) relative to the objectives and goals established herein.

The Government will evaluate:

a. The extent to which such firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in proposals;

b. The extent of commitment to use such firms (and enforceable commitments will be weighted more heavily than non-enforceable ones);

c. Identification of the complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform;

d. The extent of participation of small business prime offerors and small business subcontractors in terms of the percentage of ‘planned subcontracting’ dollars.

e. The extent to which the offeror meets or exceeds the following goals:

Goals for this procurement are:

Small Business Category Procurement Goals

Small Business (SB) 48.74% Small Disadvantaged Business 14% Women-Owned Small Business 5.5% HUBZone Small Business 8% Veteran Owned Small Business 5% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business 5%

The following adjectival rating depicts how well the offeror’s proposal meets the small business participation requirements:

SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION

Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is un-awardable.

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

1. Introduction.

a. The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted as digital copies, as set forth below. The RFP shall provide the Government address and receipt date for proposal submittal.

b. The offeror’s proposal shall consist of the following five (5) volumes:

I – Price

II – Technical Approach III – Past Performance IV – Small Business Participation (Subcontracting plan, if large business) V – Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations/ Bonds/JV or LLC info

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

d. Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements or the Project

Scope of Work with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

2. The proposal submission requirements are as follows:

a. Each volume shall be submitted as a separate PDF file. Each volume shall be clearly labeled with its title. Offeror shall sign the first two pages of Form 1442.

b. Typing should be single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one (1) blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscape.

c. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

DIGITAL MAXIMUM

VOLUME TITLE COPIES PAGES

I – Price 1 Schedule of Prices II – Technical Approach 1 100 (Not including corporate safety plan) III – Past Performance 1 25 IV – Small Business Participation 1 25*

(Subcontracting Plan if applicable) V – Solicitation, Offer and Award 1 N/A

Documents and Certifications/ Representations/Bid Bond/

*The small business subcontracting plans are excluded from the page count.

NOTE: Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed or not read and will not be evaluated by the Government.

3. Proposal files shall be as follows:

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

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1” Gutter – 0” From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5” Page Size, Width – 8.5” Page Size, Height – 11”

NOTE: 11x17 pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations; however, each 11x17 page counts as two (2) pages.

The following additional restrictions apply:

b. File Packaging: Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. Each disc shall be externally labeled with the volume number, date, and the offeror’s name.

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

c. Content Requirement: All information shall be confined to the appropriate volume. Each volume of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, along with the detailed information provided below:

i. VOLUME I – Price: The volume shall consist of all information required to support the offered price. Certified cost and pricing data are not currently required; however, the Government reserves the right to request such data prior to award. No pricing information shall be contained in any other volume of this proposal.

Price Schedule, located in section 00100 of request for proposal, must be completed and returned. Failure to provide may result in your proposal not being considered for award.

ii. VOLUME II – Technical Approach: The volume shall consist of all information required to support the technical approach and shall not exceed one hundred (100) pages. No technical approach information shall be contained in any other volume of this proposal. The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

Sub-Factor 1: Work Plan. The work plan portion of the proposal shall address the following as a minimum:

o Element 1: Detailed Work Plan, Network Analysis, and Bar Chart for Entire

Work Period

Sub-Factor 2: Corporate Management. The corporate management portion of the proposal shall address the following as a minimum:

o Element 1: Prime Contractor Experience o Element 2: Subcontractor Experience o Element 3: Key Personnel Experience o Element 4: Organization Chart

Sub-Factor 3: Safety. The safety portion should address the following at a minimum:

o Element 1: Risk Management Process o Element 2: Experience Modifier

iii. VOLUME III – Past Performance: This volume shall contain past performance information regarding similar contracts. This volume shall not exceed twenty-five

(25) pages plus five (5) pages for each major subcontractor, excluding Past Performance Questionnaire Forms.

Offerors shall submit all Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor 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. Data concerning the offeror shall be provided first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor, in alphabetical order. The Offeror shall also submit the written consent of its major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of its subcontractor’s past performance information to the Offeror. No past performance information shall be contained in any other volume of this proposal.

Submit a separate sheet for each reference. It is the offeror’s responsibility to ensure points of contact can be contacted by the Government’s evaluators and that they will cooperate.

Section 1: Past Performance Questionnaire

The offeror shall submit up to five (5) Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) Forms which shall identify if the contract is active or complete, the contract was for the Government (Federal, state, local, etc.) or commercial, if the offeror was the prime contractor, a teaming partner, and/or joint venture. Clearly link the past performance information to the Technical Approach factor/sub-factors/elements stated in the solicitation. Additionally, as applicable, offerors are to include a discussion of efforts to resolve problems encountered as well as efforts to identify and manage project risk.

Where problems existed, clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming these problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. Contracts shall be at least six (6) months old to be considered. Contracts with expiration dates prior to ten (10) years ago shall not be considered. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Ben Kimbell via email at Benjamin.J.Kimbell@usace.army.mil prior to proposal to the closing date.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

Section 2: Organization Structure Change History

If applicable, include information on organization structure change history or a joint venture resulting in a different company name. Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition.

iv. VOLUME IV – Small Business Participation Plan: No small business participation information shall be contained in any other volume of this proposal. Content of Small Business Participation Volume shall include the following:

Small Business Participation Plan – See Appendix (F) Small Business

Participation Plan Example Small Business Subcontracting Plan is required in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 if other than a U.S. Small Business Offeror. See Appendix (G) Subcontracting Plan Example

**Separate from a Small Business Participation Plan, other than U.S. Small Business offerors must also submit a subcontracting plan meeting the requirements of FAR 52.219-9 and DFARS 252.219-7003 (or DFARS 252.219-7004 if the offeror has a comprehensive subcontracting plan).

**Other than U.S. Small Businesses, offeror’s must submit acceptable subcontracting plans to be eligible for award. Subcontracting Plans shall reflect and be consistent with the commitments offered in the Small Business Participation Plan. The Subcontracting Plan is NOT rated.

iv. VOLUME V – Solicitations, Offer And Award Documents And Certifications /

Representations / Bid Bond

Standard Form 1442 Solicitation, Offer and Award and all amendments Representations, Certification and Other Statements of Offerors, Bid Bond

E. DISCUSSIONS

1. General Information.

In accordance with FAR 15.306(d), discussion sessions with each offeror may be held.

Should discussions take place, all offerors in the competitive range will be allowed a minimum of seven (7) calendar days to submit Final Proposal Revisions.

2. Discussion Scheduling.

If discussions are conducted, the Contracting Officer will schedule the discussion sessions, and each offeror will be notified of the time and place at least three (3) business days prior to their discussion session. Appropriate security clearances should be provided by the offerors in sufficient time to process the requests. The Contracting Officer will provide additional instructions with the notification. The discussion sessions will take place by the method of the Government’s choosing and provided to the offeror in writing.

APPENDIX D

APPENDIX D

PAST

PERFORMANCE

APPENDIX D - Enclosure 1

NAVFAC / USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information

Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other(Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information

Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work: High Med Routine

How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information

Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE requests that the client completes this questionnaire and submits directly back to the offeror.

The offeror will submit the completed questionnaire to USACE with their proposal, and may duplicate this questionnaire for future submission on USACE solicitations. Clients are highly encouraged to submit questionnaires directly to the offeror. However, questionnaires may be submitted directly to USACE. Please contact the offeror for USACE POC information. The Government reserves the right to verify any and all information on this form.

NAVFAC / USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT YOUR EVALUATION OF

THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

Form PPQ -0 (9/30/11)

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a…