B.08.03 Amendment 0001, W912EP20R0004.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, CONSTRUCTION DREDGING, 47-FOOT PROJECT CONTRACT C, CUT-42, BLOUNT ISLAND TURNING BASIN AND

LOCAL SPONSOR BERTHING AREAS, DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA

A.SEE CONTINUATION SHEET FOR AMENDMENT DETAILS.

B.THE PROPOSAL DUE DATE REMAINS UNCHANGED AT AUGUST 17, 2020 @ 2:00 P.M. LOCAL TIME. LOCAL TIME.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 2

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W912EP20R0004

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

17-Jul-2020

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

29-Jul-2020

CODE

USA ENGINEER DISTRICT, JACKSONVILLE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

701 SAN MARCO BLVD

JACKSONVILLE FL 32207-8175

W912EP 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

SF 30 CONTINUATION SHEET

JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, CONSTRUCTION DREDGING, 47-FOOT PROJECT CONTRACT C,

CUT-42, BLOUNT ISLAND TURNING BASIN AND LOCAL SPONSOR BERTHING AREAS,

DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA

W912EP20R0004 2 Amendment 0001

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

1. CONSTRUCTION SOLICITATION AND SPECIFICATIONS:

A. Text changes have been updated with additions noted by GREEN BOLD TEXT and deletions noted by

RED BOLD STRIKETHROUGH, and pertain only to changes made by this amendment. The entire section is replaced if there are any changes.

1. SPECIFICATIONS:

Volume 1:

Delete SECTION 00100A, Additional Proposal Preparation/Submission Instructions Solicitation Provisions and Replace with attached Revised SECTION 00100A, Additional Proposal Preparation/Submission Instructions Solicitation Provisions.

Volume 2:

None

2. DRAWINGS

None

3. OTHER

Drawings BIMT PH1 and BIMT PH2, which are included as separate files, are being provided for Informational Purposes Only.

PLEASE NOTE: AN ADDITIONAL PREPROPOSAL CONFERENCE HAS BEEN SCHEDULED:

PLEASE SEE CALL-IN INFORMATION BELOW:

A PRE-PROPOSAL TELECONFERENCE HAS BEEN SCHEDULED FOR 31 July 2020 FROM

10:00AM - 11:00AM. PLEASE CALL: 877-402-9753, ACCESS CODE: 6546236

SECURITY CODE: 0004

(End of Summary of Changes)

W912EP20R0004 00100A-1 Amendment 0001

SECTION 00100A – ADDITIONAL PROPOSAL PREPARATION/SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four evaluation factors: Technical Merit, Past Performance, Small Business Participation and Price. The Contracting Officer will use a trade-off process to determine which offer represents the best value to the Government. This process allows the Contracting Officer to consider making award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than "Acceptable" must be achieved for the Technical Merit Factor and Small Business Participation Factor. Offerors are cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offeror or the highest technically rated offeror.

All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are approximately equal to cost or price.

Limitations on Substitutions for Certain Positions and/or Subcontractors Certain items of work are considered particularly critical to successful completion of the project and may be completed by subcontractors. The Government will consider the qualifications of these subcontractors during its evaluation of the offeror’s proposal*. In accordance with the Limitations On Substitutions For Certain Positions and/or Subcontractors paragraph of this solicitation (Section 00800), if the offeror is awarded a contract, the offeror will not be permitted to make substitutions without the approval of the Contracting Officer or Administrative Contracting Officer. If the offeror does not name a subcontractor for any identified item of work, the Government will assume the offeror intends to perform the work with its own forces and, if the offeror receives the contract, no substitutions will be allowed without prior approval of the Contracting Officer.

*See “Proposal Submission” for specific requirements regarding subcontractors.

B. FACTORS AND ELEMENTS 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 elements described below. Please note the Factors are listed in the order of importance:

Factor 1 – Technical Merit

Element 1 – Technical Approach Plan Element 2 – Construction Schedule

Factor 2 – Past Performance

Factor 3 – Small Business Participation

Element 1 – Proposed Small Business Participation Plan

W912EP20R0004 00100A-2 Amendment 0001

Element 2 – Past Utilization of Small Business Concerns

Factor 4– Price and Price Related Information

C. FACTOR SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION METHODS

Evaluation Approach

All proposals will be evaluated by the Government’s team, on the basis of the factors stated in the solicitation in order to select the responsible offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government. Offerors are required to submit proposals with the content specified herein. Proposals without the specified content may be determined “Unacceptable” and removed from the competition. The Government will not make assumptions concerning intent, capabilities, or experiences. Clear identification of proposal details shall be the sole responsibility of the offeror.

All responsible offerors whose proposals are among the most highly rated may be included in the competitive range in accordance with FAR 15.306(c)(1) &(2). However, the Government reserves the right to limit the number of proposals in the competitive range for purposes of efficiency. By submitting an offer in response to this solicitation, offerors are agreeing to comply with all terms and conditions contained in the solicitation. Unless the solicitation specifically invites the offeror to submit exceptions, the Source Selection Authority/Contracting Officer may reject any offer that contains exceptions and or qualifying language. In this solicitation, the words “offer” and “proposal” are used interchangeably. (See definition of “offer” at FAR 2.101.) Except for any portions of the offeror’s proposal incorporated by reference into the resulting contract, the terms and conditions of the solicitation, will take precedence over the content of the offeror’s proposal.

Proposal Evaluation

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. Further, if the Contracting Officer determines that discussions are necessary and if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

Source Selection Decision

The Source Selection Authority, independently exercising prudent business judgment, will select the proposal that represents the best value to the Government. The Source Selection Authority will not receive a recommendation from any individual or body as to which offeror should receive the award and will not receive a rank order or order of merit list pertaining to the offers being evaluated.

W912EP20R0004 00100A-3 Amendment 0001

FACTOR 1 – Technical Merit

In responding to this factor, the objective should be to instill confidence that the offeror thoroughly understands the requirements of the solicitation and has the expertise and experience required to successfully satisfy or exceed the solicitation requirements within the required period of performance (See Section 00700, Clause 52.211-10).

In accordance with the non-substitution clause in Section 00800, Limitations on Substitutions for Certain Positions and/or Subcontractors, a letter of commitment must be provided for any major subcontractor whose experience is submitted as part of this proposal and is also identified in the clause.

Failure to provide a letter of commitment from a proposed major subcontractor will be noted as a significant weakness.

A letter of commitment is defined as a letter from the proposed major subcontractor(s) on official Company letterhead (1) addressed to the prime contractor, (2) identifying the work they intend to perform, and (3) stating that they are willing to be bound to perform the identified work if the prime receives this contract.

A major subcontractor is defined as any subcontractor whose experience is submitted as part of this proposal and is also identified in the non-substitution clause in Section 00800 of the Solicitation.

Elements are not rated separately. An overall rating will be assigned for Factor 1 – Technical Merit.

See “Technical Merit Ratings” below.

Element 1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH PLAN

Submission Requirements

In a narrative format, the offeror shall describe the proposed Technical Approach Plan regarding how the offeror intends to execute the work from start to completion. The selected Technical Approach Plan, key personnel, construction schedule, and equipment will be incorporated in whole or in part into the contract. The plan should include a description of related activities to include coordination with major subcontractors, types of equipment to be utilized and any other means and methods the offeror feels will give the Government confidence that the offeror will successfully complete the project.

Offerors should also identify potential risks and plans for mitigating those risks.

The Technical Approach Plan must include the following:

a. List and describe all major pieces of equipment your company is proposing to use and is required for rock fracturing and removal, dredging and disposal of material.

b. Present the sequence of activities which represent work through the entire project from mobilization to demobilization.

W912EP20R0004 00100A-4 Amendment 0001

c. Provide a detailed description of the Technical Approach Plan, include techniques and equipment to fracture, dislodge and remove massive in situ rock with bedding greater than 3 feet thickness and up to 10,000 psi strength obtained with the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) testing method.

d. Describe the rock removal methodology in the Technical Approach Plan specific to Specification

01 57 20 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

i. Address the requirements identified in the Environmental Protection plan as described in 01 57 20 Paragraph 1.6. subparts b and f as stated below:

b. Methods for protection of features to be preserved within authorized work areas. The Contractor shall prepare a listing of methods to protect resources needing protection, air and water quality, fish and wildlife, soil, historical, archeological, and cultural resources. Include underwater sound exposure level (SEL) and sound pressure level (SPL) data for non-dredging equipment (i.e. hydraulic hammer, etc.) that will be used to fracture, dislodge, and remove rock.

f. Environmental monitoring plans for the job site, including land, water, air, and noise monitoring. Include underwater sound exposure level (SEL) and sound pressure level (SPL) data for non-dredging equipment (i.e. hydraulic hammer, etc.) that will be used to fracture, dislodge, and remove rock.

ii. Provide a narrative that demonstrates the contractor’s understanding of the proximity of resources and authorized impacts as opposed to unauthorized impacts to adjacent natural resource.

e. Describe how the offeror intends to lessen, mitigate and/or prevent environmental impacts associated with dredging rock without blasting as specified in Section 01 57 20, specifically referring to paragraphs 3.1.5 Protection of Fish and Wildlife Resources. Include underwater sound exposure level (SEL) and sound pressure level (SPL) data for non-dredging equipment (e.g.

hydraulic hammer, etc.) that will be used to fracture, dislodge, and remove rock. (Data should include SEL and SPL estimated at 1 meter from the source. These estimated values for SEL and SPL would be based on taking sound recordings at fixed stations at equal increments from the source, up to one kilometer from the source.)

f. Describe transportation of the material to the Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS) and associated turbidity sampling as specified in Section 01 57 25, specifically referring to paragraph

3.1.2.2 Turbidity.

g. Provide an organizational chart including offeror and all major subcontractors complete with key personnel by name and a detailed explanation of how work will be coordinated between the offeror and major subcontractors. At a minimum the offeror shall identify the major subcontractors outlined in the Non-Substitution clause.

h. Describe the coordination anticipated with local, state and Federal regulatory and enforcement

W912EP20R0004 00100A-5 Amendment 0001

i. Describe measures to deal with marine traffic and other maritime construction activities.

j. Describe the basis for timeframes proposed in Element 2, Construction Schedule, including equipment production rates and all assumed contingencies (i.e. adverse weather, mechanical shut-down, environmental issues, etc.)

Evaluation Method

The Technical Approach Plan evaluation determines the degree to which the offeror’s proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation as well as the feasibility of the proposed approach. The feasibility of the proposed technical approach will measure how well the means and methods proposed provide the Government with confidence of successful project completion in accordance with the solicitation requirements and within the required contract schedule.

All work items listed in the Technical Approach Plan should be included in the Construction Schedule and the timeframes given for work items in the Construction Schedule. This example is given for clarity and is not the only corroboration that will be made between the Technical Approach Plan and Construction Schedule. Any conflicts between Element 1 and Element 2 may be noted as a significant weakness. Failure to provide the basis for timeframes proposed in Element 2 may be noted as a deficiency.

Element 2 – CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE

Provide a schedule of construction within the period of performance provided in Section 00700, clause 52.211-10 in the format of a Gantt, PERT, or similar graphical timeline, showing the start and completion dates, interdependence, and other relative scheduling factors for all the items of work listed in Element 1. The Government reserves the right to incorporate the successful offer’s proposed construction schedule into the contract. Any changes or deviations from the successful offer’s incorporated schedule shall require the written approval of the Contracting Officer.

The schedule must clearly show the interdependence of activities (i.e., schedule logic) and start and completion dates for the following:

1. Mobilization and demobilization for work items in general and for Construction Dredging equipment

2. Excavation Operations (for each dredge and related support equipment)

3. Submittals

4. Environmental windows

5. Contingency time (e.g. float)

6. Work items discussed under Element 1, Technical Approach Plan

a. The work items for all activities should be clearly identified to ensure a delineation of any concurrent work

W912EP20R0004 00100A-6 Amendment 0001

b. Basis for proposed timeframes should be supported in the Technical Approach Plan

The Construction Schedule evaluation determines the degree to which the offeror’s proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation as well as the feasibility of the proposed approach.

All work items listed in the Technical Approach Plan should be included in the Construction Schedule along with their timeframes and constraints. This example is given for clarity and is not the only corroboration that will be made between the Technical Approach Plan and Construction Schedule. Any conflicts between Element 1 and Element 2 may be noted as a weakness.

EVALUATION AND RATING SYSTEM

General: The Government will review the proposals and rate the quality of each evaluation factor.

Each member of the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will individually rate each proposal against the specified evaluation criteria in the Solicitation requirements and in accordance with the requirements of the Plans and Specifications. The SSEB will reach consensus on the final rating assigned to ensure that it reflects the degree to which the proposal meets or does not meet the minimum requirements through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of a proposal. The SSAC will consequently review the evaluation results of the SSEB to ensure the evaluation process follows the evaluation criteria and the ratings are appropriately and consistently applied. The advice and recommendations from the SSAC will be incorporated into a written comparative analysis and recommendation for use by the SSA in making the best-value decision. The Source Selection Authority will determine which offeror represent the best value to the Government.

Rating System: After listing proposal strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies, the SSEB will assign an adjective rating of “Outstanding”, “Good”, “Acceptable”, “Marginal”, or “Unacceptable” for this Factor to reflect the Government's confidence in each offeror's technical ability, as demonstrated in its proposal, to perform the requirements stated in the solicitation. The adjectival ratings shall be assigned, using the following criteria, which incorporate a proposal risk assessment:

TECHNICAL MERIT RATINGS DEFINITIONS

Deficiency - A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Weakness - A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness - A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Strength - Any aspect of a proposal that, when judged against a stated evaluation criterion, enhances the merit of the proposal or increases the probability of successful performance of the contract.

W912EP20R0004 00100A-7 Amendment 0001

Significant Strength -A significant strength appreciably enhances the merit of a proposal or appreciably enhances the probability of successful contract performance.

Deviation - Proposal implies or specifically offers a deviation below the specified criteria. The offeror may or may not have called the deviation to the Government’s attention. A deviation is a deficiency.

The proposal must conform to the solicitation requirements for award.

Combined Technical/Risk Rating. The offeror’s technical solution will consist of a combined rating.

The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. (see Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method below).

Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

Adjectival 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 to 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 requirement. 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 unawardable.

W912EP20R0004 00100A-8 Amendment 0001

Factor 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

a. Using the Company Experience Form (Attachment 1), offerors are required to provide a maximum of three completed projects, which demonstrate that they and/or their major subcontractors (if applicable) have the experiences listed below:

1. Successfully dredged material in mixed face conditions, including expansive clays, as described in the Geotechnical Data Report; Successfully dredged rock without blasting;

2. Protected environmental resources similar in sensitivity as specified in Section 01 57 20, specifically to sub-section 3.1.5. Protection of Fish and Wildlife Resources.

Note: Projects submitted must be completed or 75% physically completed within the last 15 20 years from the date of this solicitation. A completed project is defined as work performed under a “project” that is physically complete and has been accepted by the customer. If a project is presented and has not been accepted by the client, the offeror shall explain which elements of the work are completed and provide supporting documentation from the client to confirm physical completion of those completed elements.

If any firm has multiple functions or divisions, limit the project examples to those performed by the division, unit or team member submitting the offer. If the offeror proposes to use the experience of an affiliate, the proposal must clearly demonstrate that the affiliate will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

If submitting a proposal as a joint venture, the experience of each joint venture partners can be submitted for the joint venture entity. These projects will be evaluated separately; however, the overall evaluation for the demonstrated corporate technical experience will be combined to from one overall evaluation rating for the joint venture. Contractors submitting an offer as a joint venture must provide a written copy of the joint venture agreement with the initial proposal. The joint venture agreement must be signed by both parties and will be subject to review. Also, if the joint venture involves an 8(a) small business, approval by the Small Business Administration is required and must be submitted with the offeror’s proposal. Offerors are reminded that if it is an 8(a) or HUBZone joint venture, it shall ensure that it complies with the applicable requirements of 13 CFR Part 124 and 13 CFR Part 126, respectively. In addition, the joint venture must be registered in the System for Award Management website (SAM.gov) as a joint venture in order for an award to be made.

b. Also, Offerors shall submit one NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 3), completed and signed by an Owner of the Project (Client) point of contact (POC) for each of the projects submitted above. If a project was completed by the offeror’s major subcontractor, the offeror is responsible for coordinating with their major subcontractor and submitting a completed NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire on their major subcontractor’s behalf. All pages of each NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire must be initialed and dated on the bottom right-hand corner by the POC. Failure to provide a completed and signed NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire for each project as described above may be noted as a deficiency. If a

W912EP20R0004 00100A-9 Amendment 0001

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) record or official performance evaluation from a non-federal entity is available for any of the projects submitted in response to the Factor 2 – Past Performance, the CPARS record or official performance evaluation from a non-Federal entity may be submitted in lieu of the completed NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire.

The Client/POC is defined as the entity that took ownership of the project after construction was complete.

If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire from the Owner of the Project (Client), before the proposal due date, the offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the questionnaire (Blocks 1 – 7) that contains contract and client information for the submitted project. It is the offeror’s responsibility to ensure that the client’s point of contact information is current and correct. The client point of contact reflected in Blocks 1 – 7 should also be familiar with the past performance they are being asked to verify and informed that they will be contacted by the Government to verify past performance.

The Government reserves the right to obtain copies of all CCASS/CPARS records contained in the US Army Corps of Engineers CCASS/CPARS database for the offeror or offeror’s major subcontractors.

The past performance evaluation is an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The assessment considers each offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant past performances in supplying services that meet the solicitation requirements. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation.

The first aspect of the past performance evaluates how recent and relevant the offeror’s past performance is to the effort to be acquired. Using the information contained in the Company Experience From (Attachment 1), the technical evaluation team will review the projects submitted in response to Factor 2 – Past Performance for relevancy. Relevancy will be determined based on the timeframe for project completion given under this Factor and the level of similarity between the offeror’s provided projects and the solicitation requirements. Projects that involve essentially the same scope, magnitude of effort and complexities as this solicitation requires will most likely be given a relevancy rating of Very Relevant (see Relevance Rating Definitions below).

The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed the experience submitted. This will be determined by utilizing the completed NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaires, CCASS/CPARS record or official performance evaluation from a non- Federal entity. The POC noted on each NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire will be contacted to verify the past performance ratings provided. If the POC cannot be contacted, the past performance rating will be noted as “Unknown”. It is the offeror’s responsibility to ensure that the POC’s contact information is current (i.e. names, addresses, telephone numbers and email addresses).

The POC should be familiar with the performance they are to verify and be aware that they will be contacted by the Government.

Once the Relevancy Ratings are assigned, and Past Performance Ratings are verified, the Government

W912EP20R0004 00100A-10 Amendment 0001 will conclude with a performance confidence assessment based on the results. This performance confidence is the level of risk associated with the offeror as it relates to the probability that the offeror will successfully complete this project (see Performance Confidence Assessments Definitions below).

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation

Somewhat Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation

Not Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS RATING METHOD

Rating 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

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

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

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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.

W912EP20R0004 00100A-11 Amendment 0001

Factor 3 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION

This Factor consists of two Elements: Element 1 – Proposed Small Business Participation Plan and Element 2 - Past Utilization of Small Business Concerns.

Element 1 - PROPOSED SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

All offerors (both other than small and small) shall complete a Proposed Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP) using the template found at (Attachment 4). No minimum small business participation goal (SB) has been assigned to this project. Contractors shall propose their Best Effort for SB participation and provide documentation to demonstrate and support their proposed SB participation goals (Best Effort). A goal is defined as a number GREATER THAN ZERO that results from the offeror expending good faith effort to use small business subcontractors (as defined in FAR Part 19) to the maximum practicable extent.

Large businesses primes may achieve the small business participation goals through subcontracting to small businesses.

Small business primes may achieve small business participation goals through their own performance/participation as a prime and also through subcontracting to other small businesses.

Note: The awardee’s Small Business Participation goals shall be incorporated into the contract.

Offerors are to demonstrate their level of commitment to utilizing SBs by identifying the extent to which SBs as defined by the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code applicable to this solicitation are to be used. The offeror’s own participation as a SB is to be identified, and will be considered in evaluating the Small Business Participation. All offerors shall provide a Small Business Participation Plan that identifies its anticipated utilization of SB concerns in performance of this solicitation for VOSB, SDVOSB, SDB (includes 8(a)) WOSB, and HUBZone). The offeror’s plan must reflect its effort measured as a percentage of the total contract amount.

Element 2 - PAST UTILIZATION OF SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS

This Element applies to offerors that are small business concerns (including all categories) and to offerors that are other than small business concerns. For each of the three most recently completed Federal contracts submit one of the following: (i) if the contract required a subcontracting plan submit the FINAL Individual Subcontracting Report (ISR). ISR reports for projects that are not marked FINAL but well underway will be accepted IF the offeror explains which elements of the work are not completed and provide the percentage of completion. A well underway project is defined as at least 80% construction progress completed (ii) if the contract did not require a subcontracting plan, complete and submit the Past Performance of Small Business Participation Plan Collection Sheet.

Offerors that are SB, SDB, VOSB, SDVOSB, HUBZone SB, or WOSB may count work performed

W912EP20R0004 00100A-12 Amendment 0001 with in-house resources toward compliance with FAR 52.219-8 in the category (or categories) to which they belong. (For example, a HUBZone could count work in 2 categories: SB and HUBZone).

IF YOU HAVE NOT HAD A CONTRACT THAT INCLUDED THE CLAUSE FAR 52.219-8, YOU

MUST INDICATE IN WRITING IN YOUR PROPOSAL. FAILURE TO DO SO WILL BE

CONSIDERED A WEAKNESS AND/OR A DEFICIENCY FOR THIS ELEMENT.

Offerors are to show the extent to which they have utilized SBs in past contracts. Offerors shall submit a record of the past three (3) consecutive years that demonstrates the utilization of SB in the performance of its contracts, to include percentage of utilization. Past information is limited to the three years preceding the solicitation issue date. An Offeror may demonstrate its past record by including a description and available documentation that shows the methods employed to promote SB utilization and internal methods used to monitor such utilization. Usage of a table or graph to summarize demonstration of small business utilization is preferred, not required.

Note for joint ventures: If the Joint Venture has no subcontracting past performance, then each member of the Joint Venture must provide the most recent subcontracting past performance.

EVALUATION METHOD

The small business participation goal of this acquisition is for small business, small disadvantage small business, veteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business and woman-owned small businesses as identified in FAR Part 19 to have maximum practicable opportunity to participate in contract performance consistent with its efficient performance. In this factor, all offerors (both other than small and small businesses) will be evaluated on the level of small business commitment they are demonstrating for the proposed acquisition, and their prior level of commitment to utilizing small businesses in performance of prior contracts.

Element 1 – PROPOSED SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

Small Business Participation Plans (from other than small and small businesses) will be evaluated on the extent to which the Offeror identifies and commits to SB participation in the performance of this solicitation:

In addition to the information provided on attachment 4, Small Business Participation Plans (from other than small and small businesses) will be evaluated on the basis of:

The extent to which such firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in the proposal

Identification of the complexity and variety of the work small business firms are to perform

The extent (i.e. length of and formalityconsiderations) of demonstrated commitment to use such firms (enforceable commitments) (JV, MP or written teaming agreements) will be considered more favorably than non-enforceable ones; refer to Attachment 4

The extent of participation of Prime offerors (both large and small) and small business subcontractors in terms of the total value of the acquisition vs the large business

W912EP20R0004 00100A-13 Amendment 0001 participation percentage;

The extent to which the offeror provides detailed explanations/documentation supporting their Best Effort.

Element 2 – PAST UTILIZATION OF SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS

All Offerors regardless of size will be evaluated by assessing its records or information in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, and, for all other than small business offerors, FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan. If the offeror has never had a contract that included FAR 52.219-8, Evaluation of Small Business Participation will be based solely on the offeror’s proposed small business participation plan for this contract. Past Utilization of Small Business (Attachment 5) will be evaluated on the basis of:

The extent of commitment to the policy stated in FAR 52.219-8 and FAR 52.219-9 reflected in the offeror’s past performance.

The extent the offeror documented obstacles in meeting goals or shows evidence of good faith effort.

The Government may use information supplied by the offeror and information obtained from other sources to evaluate past utilization of small business concerns.

Small Business Participation Factor Rating Definitions

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Green Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Red

Unacceptable

Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

W912EP20R0004 00100A-14 Amendment 0001

Factor 4 – PRICE AND RELATED INFORMATION

The Price Factor is not rated. It is evaluated for reasonableness. Additionally, a price realismevaluation maybe performed. Offerors are advised that their business decision to submit a low-priced proposal can be considered in assessing their understanding or the risk associated with their proposal. All evaluation factors other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

The offeror shall submit the following price and price related information:

a. Proposal Data Sheet (Attachment 6)

b. Standard Form 1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award) and Section 00010A (Line Items and Pricing

Schedule)

Include the completed Standard Form 1442 for the Request for Proposal (RFP), along with the completed Pricing Schedule. The total cost for the construction will be considered for evaluation, including all options and alternates (if applicable).

c. Section 00101, Representations, Certifications and OtherStatements of Offerors

d. In accordance with FAR Clause 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee, an electronic copy of the bid guarantee shall be submitted with the offer while the original must be received within two calendar days of the proposal submission date.

e. Responsibility Determination (Attachment7)

f. Small Business Subcontracting Plan (For other than Small Business)

Each Large Business offeror shall provide a Small Business Subcontracting Plan that contains all the elements required by FAR 52.219-9, Alt II, in Section 00700. This plan shall be submitted separately from the Small Business Participation Plan information required in Factor 3. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan is not a requirement for evaluation in source selection, but rather a requirement for award to a large business.

The Small Business Subcontracting Plan shall be thorough and complete. The Subcontracting Plan will be incorporated into the contract upon award of the contract, if acceptable and upon final approval of the Contracting Officer.

The Proposal Data Sheet (Attachment 6) is not considered for evaluation but is required as part of the Offeror’s proposal.

W912EP20R0004 00100A-15 Amendment 0001

The Standard Form 1442 and completed Section 00010A will be checked for minor clerical errors and/or mistakes. After resolution of minor or clerical errors and/or mistakes, the Government will perform a price analysis on all proposals received. Price analysis will be performed in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, to determine the adequacy of the offer in fulfilling the requirements of the proposal.

Completeness addresses the extent to which the elements of the price proposal are consistent with the requirements of the Request for Proposal. Reasonableness will be established using historical price information, price competition information, the Independent Government Estimate (IGE) and any other pricing tools necessary.

Section 00101 is not considered for evaluation, but is required as part of the offeror’s proposal. The information requested in this section shall be fully completed.

The Bid Guarantee will be reviewed for acceptability. Any offeror whose bid guarantee is unacceptable, will be eliminated without further consideration unless the Source Selection Authority later determines that discussions are necessary and decides that the offeror’s proposal should be included in the competitive range.

The Determination of Responsibility Form (Attachment 7) is not considered for evaluation, but is required as part of the offeror’s proposal. In addition to other proposal information, the Contracting Officer shall use the information provided in the Determination of Responsibility Form in making an affirmative responsibility determination for award to the Successful offeror, in accordance with FAR Part 9.

PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

The proposal shall be divided into volumes as indicated below and as indicated in Attachment 8.

Each volume shall be sealed separately and marked with the offeror’s name, the solicitation number, the volume number and stamped with “Original” or “Copy”. Each original or copy within each volume shall be placed in a separate 3-ring binder.

All proposals shall contain the evaluation requirements stated herein and every binder volume shall also contain: Table of Contents, List of Tables (if required), List of Figures (if required), List of Appendixes, and Name/Address/Telephone Number/e-mail address of the offeror. Proposal clarity and organization is very important to ensure that there are no hindrances for reviewers. No material (information not part of the proposal) shall be incorporated by reference. The offeror shall submit in the proposal the requested information specified herein.

VOLUME ONE: Factor 1 - Technical Merit Package

DO NOT INCLUDE PRICING INFORMATION IN THE TECHNICAL MERIT

PROPOSAL

VOLUME TWO: Factor 2 - Past Performance Package

VOLUME THREE: Factor 3 – Small Business Participation

W912EP20R0004 00100A-16 Amendment 0001

VOLUME FOUR: Factor 4 - Price and Related Information

Offeror’s are responsible for providing a clear, well organized Proposal Format (Attachment 8). In addition to the Proposal Format cover sheets provided in Attachment 8, every volume shall contain the offeror’s Name/Address/Telephone Number/E-mail address and the following (if applicable): Table of Contents, List of Tables, List of Figures and/or List of Appendixes. No information may be incorporated into the proposal by reference; however, one volume within the proposal may cross-reference another volume within the proposal.

This package will include Proposal Data Sheet (Attachment 6) the Standard Form 1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award), Section 00010A (Line Items and Pricing Schedule), Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors (Section 000101), Subcontracting Plan and Bid Bond Guarantee.

NOTE: An electronic copy of the bid guarantee shall be submitted with the offer while the Original must be received within two calendar days of the proposal submission date.

W912EP20R0004 00100A-17 Amendment 0001

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 – Company Experience Form (The space provided may not be sufficient. If this is the case, offerors are encouraged to provide additional information on supplemental pages attached to the collection sheet)

Addendum to Attachment 1 – Dredging Equipment Documentation

Attachment 2 – Letter of Commitment for Major Subcontractor(s) or Key Personnel

Attachment 3 – NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire

Attachment 4 – Proposed Small Business Participation

Attachment 5 – Past Utilization of Small Business Concerns Collection Sheet

Attachment 6 – Proposal Data Sheet

Attachment 7 – Determination of Responsibility Form

Attachment 8 – Proposal Format

W912EP20R0004 00100A-18 Amendment 0001

ATTACHMENT 1 - COMPANY EXPERIENCE FORM

Provide the following information to show examples of projects your company or subcontractors constructed within the last fifteen (15) twenty (20) years indicating experience with projects of similar type and scope. Use one form per project. NOTE: Use additional pages as necessary to provide the information requested.

1. Type of Project Represented

2. Your Firm’s Name

3. Project Name and Contract Number

4. Location of Project and Conditions

5. Owner/Customer

6. General Scope of Construction Project

7. Did you mechanically dredge rock on this project?

8. If yes on Number 7; what was the strength of the hardest rock dredged on this project?

9. Describe how this project is relevant to the elements of the solicited project. Use additional pages as necessary to provide this information.

10. Your Role (Prime, Joint Venture, or Subcontractor, etc.) and Work Your Company Self- Performed:

11. Construction Cost:

12. Extent and Type of Work You Subcontracted Out

13. Dates Construction: Began Completed

14. Your Performance Evaluation by Owner and Awards and Recognitions (if any)

15. Were You Terminated or Assessed Liquidated Damages? (If either is “Yes”, attach an Explanation)

16. Owner’s Point of Contact for Reference (Name and Company)

17. Current Telephone Number and email of Owner Reference

18. Any unusual conditions requirements

19. Any innovative ideas that were required during construction

20. Any environmental challenges associated with mechanical removal of rock and how these challenges were overcome.

W912EP20R0004 00100A-19 Amendment 0001

ADDENDUM TO ATTACHMENT 1 - DREDGING EQUIPMENT DOCUMENTATION

The Contractor shall provide documentation for major pieces of dredging equipment that have been used on the previous projects discussed and are being proposed for use on this project to verify its capabilities to dredge and transport rock and/or sand to the distances shown in the plans and specifications. This documentation shall consist of past dredging history for each specific dredging plant for a minimum of the last two years but no longer than 15 20 years preceding the date of this solicitation. Additional credit will be given to projects that demonstrate similar geological conditions to this solicitation. The Government will verify in the past performance information submitted under Factor 2 to confirm that the equipment presented under this Element was used and how well it performed. The contractor is requested to provide:

• Identification of the dredge

• Coast Guard certification, if applicable

• ABS certification

• Estimated daily production rate for this contract

• Associated booster/pipeline equipment and/or scow barges (including size)

• Age and Condition (Including information on last major maintenance and scheduled future maintenance)

• Present Location

• Draft and freeboard

• Positioning equipment (vessel and dredge- head/arm apparatus) Size of Suction and Discharge

Lines and/or Bucket

• Primary Pump and/or Crane Horsepower

• Photographs of dredge(s)

• The information below is applicable specifically to Hydraulic Pipeline dredges:

• Dredge Size

• Photographs of cutter head

• Horsepower of dredge pump

• Ladder Pump Horsepower

• Total horsepower of dredge excluding the dredge pump

• Horsepower of cutterhead

• RPM (revolutions per minute) of cutterhead

• Cutterhead tooth replacement per cubic yard dredged, or total number of cutter teeth replaced for each dredge.

• Typical production rates achieved in rock and non-rock materials

• Typical bank heights used in rock, non-rock materials

W912EP20R0004 00100A-20 Amendment 0001

• Typical pipeline lengths used

• The information below is applicable…