Amendment 0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

See Summary of Changes

PAGE OF PAGES1. CONTRACT ID CODE

J 1 105

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

16C. DATE SIGNED16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BY

15C. 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

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

24-Jul-2020

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

W912EP20R0022

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 X is extended, 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 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.

A00001

5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3.EFFECTIVE

DATE

20-Aug-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:

X 1

W912EP20R0022 1 Amendment 0001

SF 30 CONTINUATION SHEET

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Picayune Strand Restoration Project Southwest Protection Feature Levee, Collier County, Florida

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The text changes have been updated with additions noted by underlined text and deletions noted by line/cross-outs, and pertain only to changes made by this revision. The entire section is replaced if there is any change. The Project Table of Contents and Submittal Register are replaced without underlines and cross-outs if there are changes to these documents. New and revised information represented in GREEN text and deleted text identified by RED text.

SF1442 Volume 1: REVISE SF1442 to extend the proposal due date from 24 Aug 2020 to 4 Sep 2020 DELETE Section 00100A and REPLACE with the attached Section 00100A DELETE Section 00800A and REPLACE with the attached Section 00800A

Volume 2: DELETE Section 01 52 10 and REPLACE with the attached revised Section 01 52 10.

DELETE Section 01 57 20 and REPLACE with the attached revised Section 01 57 20.

ADDED Section 25 31 20.

DELETE Section 31 00 00 and REPLACE with the attached revised Section 31 00 00.

DELETE Section 32 92 19 and REPLACE with the attached revised Section 32 92 19.

Drawings:

DELETE Drawing C-01 and REPLACE with the attached revised Drawing C-01.

DELETE Drawing C-03 and REPLACE with the attached revised Drawing C-03.

DELETE Drawing C-14 and REPLACE with the attached revised Drawing C-14.

DELETE Drawing C-15 and REPLACE with the attached revised Drawing C-15.

DELETE Drawing C-16 and REPLACE with the attached revised Drawing C-16.

ADDED Drawings S-11 through S-26 ADDED Drawings T-01 through T-14

(End of Summary of Changes)

Section 00100A – Proposal Submission & Evaluation Instructions

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

Subject to the provisions contained herein, award will be made to one (1) offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR; who conforms to the solicitation requirements; provides the lowest evaluated price and whose proposal, judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria and other considerations specified in this solicitation, meets the technically acceptable standard for the non-price factors. Prices will be evaluated to determine fair and reasonableness in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(a).

The Lowest Priced, Technically Acceptable (LPTA) process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition because the best value is expected to result from selection of the lowest evaluated price proposal with acceptable non-priced proposal (Technical and Past Performance). The Government will evaluate the proposals for technically acceptability by evaluating two non-price factors, Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience, Past Performance, and Small Business Participation. These non-price factors will be evaluated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis. The lowest price technically acceptable proposal will then be evaluated to determine fairness and reasonableness in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(a). That offeror will be selected for award.

The Government reserves the right 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.

B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

Award will be made to the offeror who submits the lowest price proposal that is determined to be technically acceptable. To be considered technically acceptable, an offeror’s proposal must be rated “Acceptable” under all non-price factors. The following evaluation factors and factors will be used to evaluate each proposal:

Factor 1 – DEMONSTRATED CORPORATE TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE: The Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience Factor must include the following:

(a) Two projects that demonstrate work on levee construction/major earthwork, culvert construction installation, and dewatering. Both projects must be similar in scope (Value greater than $10,000,000.00). One project the contractor must have been the prime contractor.

(b) One project that demonstrates installation of gated culverts in wet conditions.

Volume 1 Changes

Factor 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

Factor 3 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION

Factor 4 – PRICE

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

1. Overview

By submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation, offerors agree to comply with all terms and conditions contained in the solicitation. Unless the solicitation specifically invites the offeror to submit exceptions, the 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 into the resulting contract by reference, the terms and conditions included in the solicitation, including any amendments, shall take precedence over the offeror’s proposal.

To ensure the timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those criteria identified as evaluation factors. Proposals should be prepared simply and economically, and they should be straightforward and concise. The proposal should be practical, legible, clear, and coherent. Offerors are discouraged from providing information not required by the RFP. Offerors shall submit all requested information requested in the RFP. Failure to submit requested information or to meet an RFP requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award.

This RFP does not commit the Government to reimburse any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of a proposal or for any other costs incurred by any firm submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation.

Any information given to an offeror which impacts the solicitation and/or offer will be given in the form of a written amendment to the solicitation. Any and all amendments to the solicitation will be distributed via the Beta.SAM.gov website. It is the offeror’s responsibility to acknowledge any and all amendments in its proposal submission.

Offerors should not modify the terms and conditions of the solicitation in either the price or non- price proposal or add conditions, exceptions, or qualifications to their offers. Should an Offeror include terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation, that offer may be determined to be ineligible for award. Any questions related to specific terms and conditions contained within the solicitation should be submitted via Bidders Inquiry in ProjNet by not later than (NLT) the date specified in Section 00010A, Attachment A, Instructions For Technical Inquires and Questions, prior to submission of an offer.

2. Proposal Evaluation Process

A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of representatives of the Corps of Engineers will evaluate all proposals. The technical evaluation will be conducted in strict confidence. Non-price proposals will be initially reviewed and evaluated without knowledge of the corresponding price proposal. The number and identities of offerors will not be revealed to anyone who is not involved in the evaluation and award process, nor will this information be released to other offerors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is the LPTA process.

D. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

The Offeror’s proposal must be submitted electronically by email to the Contracting Officer, James T. Tracy (James.T.Tracy@usace.army.mil), with the Contract Specialist, Joseph Sherwood (J oseph.D.Sherwood@usace.army.mil) copied. In accordance with Paragraph Electronic Proposals in Section 00100 instructions below submit one email that contains proposals containing all volumes (Price, Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience, Past Performance, and Small Business Participation) using the SAFE app instructions. The email shall clearly identify the RFP# for identification purposes. The solicitation will provide the Government address and receipt date for proposal submittal.

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 w ill not make assumptions concerning intent, capabilities, or experiences.

Clear identification of proposal details shall be the sole responsibility of the Offeror. The Government reserves the right to reject incomplete proposals after initial evaluation without further consideration.

All proposals shall contain the evaluation requirements stated herein and every file 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, organization, and cross-referencing are mandatory. No material (information not part of proposal) shall be incorporated by reference. The offeror shall submit in the proposal the requested information specified herein.

Offerors shall verify that the information for all forms submitted are current, correct, and complete, including names of points of contact, email addresses, and telephone numbers.

The Government will not evaluate any material that exceeds the page limits specified within each evaluation factor. Elaborately prepared proposals are not required, and any material in excess of what is requested, such as corporate marketing information, will not be considered.

Failing to submit or completely fill out attachments properly may result in rejection of the offer without further evaluation. Therefore, Offerors are urged to follow instructions and raise questions through inquiries if instructions are not understood. Do not include references to material or information not found within its respective volumes. Information submitted in the wrong volumes could lead to an Offeror’s proposal being determined “unacceptable” if materially incomplete in any aspect.

The proposal shall be divided into four volumes as indicated below. Each set of volumes shall be submitted in separate files. Each volume shall be marked with the Offeror’s name, the solicitation number, the volume number.” See Attachment 6 – Proposal Format.

1. VOLUME ONE (Tab A) – Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience:

This Factor m ust include the following:

(a) Two projects that demonstrate work on levee construction/major earthwork, culvert construction installation, and dewatering. Both projects must be similar in scope (Value greater than $10,000,000.00). One project the contractor must have been the prime contractor.

Do not include pricing information in Volume One, Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience – Tab (A). NOTE: Page Limitations Not to Exceed 150 Pages.

2. VOLUME TWO (Tab B) – Past Performance. Do not include pricing information in Volume Two.

3. VOLUME THREE (Tab C) – Small Business Participation

VOLUME FOUR (Tab D) – Price

E. EVALUATION FACTORS

1. FACTOR 1 – DEMONSTRATED CORPORATE TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

The Offeror’s volume for this non-priced factor shall include the Proposal Format Sheet, Attachment 6 with the Factor 1 submission requirements. Volume 1 will not include price or price related information.

Provide at least two (2) examples for (a) and one (1) example for (b) of recent and relevant experience on same or similar completed civil construction projects or close to completed projects for each items in Factor 1. NOTE: Two project submitted for (a) and one project for

(b) m ust meet the criteria.

NOTE: Recent and relevant experience is defined as same or similar scope as a civil construction project having the features of work listed in Factor 1.

The projects submitted under Factor 1 each (a) and (b) must be a completed project or a close to completion.

NOTE: A c omplete project is defined as work performed under a “project” that was physically completed within the last ten (10) years preceding the date of this solicitation and has been accepted by the customer. A c lose to complete project is defined as work performed under a “project” that is over 7 5% physically complete.

(a) Two projects that demonstrate work on levee construction/major earthwork, culvert construction installation, and dewatering. Both projects must be similar in scope (Value greater than $10,000,000.00). One project the contractor must have been the prime contractor.

The project submitted must demonstrate a completed or close to complete project for work on levee construction/major earthwork, culvert construction installation, and dewatering which meets the conditions of the specifications of this requirement.

The project submitted must demonstrate a completed or close to complete project for work on installation of gated culverts in wet conditions which meets the conditions of the specifications of this requirement.

Failure to demonstrate the minimally acceptability standards under Factor 1 will result in an “UNACCEPTABLE” rating and possible elimination from further consideration for contract award.

Attachment 1, Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience must be utilized to provide project information in response for each project (a) and (b). The offeror shall ensure that all information required by the Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience Sheet is provided and all descriptions and explanations are in great detail to provide the technical evaluation team with a clear understanding of the work completed and how it is similar to this project. If a project is presented and has not been completed, the offeror shall explain which elements of the work are not completed and the percentage.

NOTE 1: Do not submit more than two (2) projects for (a) and one (1) project for (b) as no additional consideration or evaluation will be given for the submission of more than the required projects to be evaluated. A total of three (3) projects for Factor 1.

NOTE 2: The prime must have been the prime contractor on one (1) of the submitted projects submitted under in Factor 1.

NOTE 3: If any portion of the work provided as demonstrated corporate technical experience was subcontracted, clearly identify that work as such and provide the required experience of that subcontractor as it relates to work the subcontractor will be performing for this requirement. Using Attachment 2, provide a letter of commitment from that proposed subcontractor.

A Letter of Commitment is defined as a letter from the subcontractor 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. Failure to provide a letter of commitment from a proposed major subcontractor will cause any non-priced factor to be rated Unacceptable, if applicable.

NOTE 4: In accordance with the non-substitution clause in Section 00800 Limitations on Substitutions for Certain Positions and/or Subcontractors, a major subcontractor is defined as any subcontractor that is critical for successfully completing the project and whose experience is submitted as part of this proposal and is also identified in the clause.

NOTE 5: A joint venture entity shall submit the designated number (two (2)) projects for Factor 1 for the combined Joint Venture). If submitting a proposal as a joint venture, the experience of each of the joint venture partners can be submitted for the joint venture entity.

These projects will be evaluated separately; however, the overall evaluation for demonstrated corporate technical experience will be combined to form one overall evaluation rating for the joint venture.

EVALUATION METHOD

The technical evaluation team will evaluate each of the projects submitted to determine if they are similar to this project and whether or not these projects demonstrate that the offeror has the knowledge and experience required to meet or exceed the terms and conditions of the specifications, and the ability to successfully accomplish and complete the project within the required timeframe, as defined in specification Section 01 11 00, Summary of Work.

Offerors must receive a demonstrated corporate technical experience rating of Acceptable for (a) and (b) in order to receive an overall rating of Technically Acceptable for Factor 1.

Ratings for the Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience factor are shown below:

Factor 1 Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

2. FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

Offerors shall submit two NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), (see Attachment 3), completed and signed by an Owner of the Project (Client) point of contact or “POC”. If a project submitted under Factor 2 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 result in this Factor being rated Unacceptable. If a Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) record is available for any of the projects submitted under Factor 2, the CPARS record may be submitted in lieu of the completed Past Performance Questionnaire or an official Performance Evaluation from a non-Federal agency.

The Owner of the Project (Client) or “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 PPQ from the Owner of the Project (Client), before the proposal receipt date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the Questionnaire (Blocks 1-8) that contains contract and client information for the submitted project. NOTE: 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 1-8) 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.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detail, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with each offeror. Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), CCASS, CPARS, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), or other databases for the Offeror or the Offeror’s major subcontractors.

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

The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to evaluate whether the offeror’s submitted past performance is relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired.

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar 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 determine how well the contractor performed a previous project. This will be determined by utilizing the NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire at Attachment 2, CPARS records or official performance evaluations from a non-federal entity. The offeror must receive a past performance rating of “Satisfactory* or better to be considered acceptable.

*A Satisfactory Rating is defined in the NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire.

Once relevancy has been determined and past performance ratings have been verified, a rating of Acceptable of Unacceptable will be assigned based on the results. Offeror’s must receive a Past Performance rating of Acceptable for ALL submitted demonstrated corporate technical experiences to receive and overall rating of Acceptable for the Past Performance Factor.

Ratings for this Factor are defined below:

Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Rating Description Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort (i.e. the offeror received a rating of Satisfactory or better from an offeror provided POC) or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See notes below)

NOTE 1: Do not submit more than two projects as no additional consideration or evaluation will be given for the submission of more than two (2) projects and only two (2) projects will be evaluated.

NOTE 2: In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, shall be considered “Acceptable.”

3. FACTOR 3 – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION

All offerors (both other than small and small) shall complete a Proposed Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP) using the template found at (Attachment 7). 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.

The offeror shall also provide for the three most recently completed Federal contracts 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 75% construction progress completed. 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

‘Unacceptable’. Offerors without identifiable ISR reports or otherwise has no Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (ESRS) information will be rated as ‘Unknown’ for this factor and this rating will not be considered position nor negative in evaluating the proposal.

Instead when evaluating this factor a contractor with an ‘Unknown’ rating will be considered ‘Acceptable’ for evaluation purposes.

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.

The offeror shall provide at a minimum a complete SBPP (Attachment 7). At a minimum all

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort (i.e. the offeror DID NOT receive a rating of Satisfactory or better from an offeror provided POC).

Unacceptable information shall be filled in and % goals greater than 0 shall be assigned to every single socioeconomic category. Additionally, a minimum three of the provided ISRs shall have a rating no less than ‘Acceptable’. Failure to provide a completed Attachment 7 or otherwise receiving a rating less than ‘Acceptable’ for any ISR provided shall result in this factor being evaluated as ‘Unacceptable’.

FACTOR 4 – PRICE

The Offeror’s volume for this factor shall be fully completed. Offeror completeness addresses the extent to which the elements of the price proposal are consistent with the requirements of the RFP.

This volume will also include price and price related information:

a. Proposal Format (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 RFP, along with the completed Pricing schedule. The total price for the construction will be considered for evaluation, including all options and alternates (if applicable).

c. Section 00101, Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements 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. Attachment 4, Proposal Data Sheet.

f. Attachment 5, Determination of Responsibility.

g. Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable)

The Price factor is not rated. It will be evaluated for reasonableness through the use of a price analysis in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b). The price analysis will also check for the appearance of unbalanced line item prices. Additionally, Offerors’ price proposals may be evaluated for price realism to determine if there are proposals that are unrealistically low in terms of overall price or reflective of an inherent lack of management and/or technical competence or comprehension of the requirements. Therefore, 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.

Prices will be reviewed for minor or clerical errors. If necessary, Offerors will be afforded an opportunity to resolve any such errors. Any exchange with Offerors under this subparagraph shall be for the purpose of clarification (FAR 15.306(a)) and shall not constitute negotiations as defined at FAR 15.306(d). In the event of discrepancy between a unit price and the extended amount, the unit price shall be controlling.

Prices will be reviewed for apparent mistakes. Should this review reveal any prices that seem unreasonably low, the Contracting Officer will contact the offeror and ask the offeror to confirm the questioned price. If the offeror confirms the price, no further action will be taken under this subparagraph. If, however, the offeror alleges a mistake, the offeror may modify the proposal in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(c)(6). Any modification submitted for the purpose of correcting a mistake shall include documentation explaining how the mistake was made. After resolution of minor or clerical errors and/or mistakes, prices will be reviewed for reasonableness, realism, unbalanced pricing or any other price related issue that could pose an unacceptable risk to the Government or indicate the offeror does not clearly understand the requirement at hand.

After resolution of minor or clerical errors and/or mistakes, the Contracting Officer will perform a price analysis on all proposals received. Price analysis will be performed in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b), to determine fairness and reasonableness and the adequacy of the offer in fulfilling the requirements of the proposal. The price analysis will also check for the appearance of unbalanced line item prices. Additionally, offerors’ price proposals may be evaluated for price realism to determine if there are proposals that are unrealistically low in terms of overall price or reflective of an inherent lack of management and/or technical competence or comprehension of the requirements.

Completeness addresses the extent to which the elements of the price proposal are consistent with the requirements of the RFP. Fairness and Reasonableness will be established using historical price information, price competition information, the Independent Government Estimate (IGE), and any other pricing tools necessary. Additionally, a price realism evaluation may be performed.

Submittal of Section 00101 is not considered for evaluation, but is required as part of the offeror’s proposal of this solicitation. The information requested in this Section needs to be fully completed along with completion of Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) per FAR 52.204-8 Annual Representations and Certifications. The submitted information will be reviewed for completeness by Contracting Personnel.

In addition to other proposal information, the Contracting Officer shall use this information in making an affirmative responsibility determination for award to the Successful Offeror, in accordance with FAR Part 9.

F. OTHER GENERAL REVIEW

1. System for Award Management (SAM):

Failure to have an active and completed registration in SAM: h ttp://sam.gov/ database will determine an Offeror ineligible for award and removed from competition. An Acceptable offer with incomplete or expired registrations at the time of award may not be eligible for a contract. In such instances, the Government will award to the next Acceptable offer who is eligible for award.

Information contained within an Offeror’s registration must be current and valid. The responsibility of maintaining current information contained in an Offeror’s registration rests solely on the Offeror.

2. Debarred List:

Offerors will be checked against the List of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement and Non-procurement Programs. Any offeror who is listed will be eliminated without further consideration.

3. Bid Bonds:

Bid bonds will be reviewed for acceptability. Any offeror whose bid bond is unacceptable, will be eliminated without further consideration unless the Contracting Officer later determines that discussions are necessary and decides that the offerors proposal should be included in the competitive range

4. 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 by District Office of Counsel. The offeror 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 System for Award Management (SAM) as a joint venture in order for an award to be made. Also, the SF 1442 as well as all future documents (modifications, bonds and etc.) must be signed by both parties.

PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

NOTE: The only authorized transmission method for proposal in response to this solicitation is electronically via SAFE online submission. NO OTHER TRANSMISSION METHODS (EMAIL, FACSIMILE, REGULAR MAIL, HAND CARRIED, ETC.) WILL BE ACCEPTED.

The Offeror’s proposal must be received by the Government by the date/time specified in the solicitation. Offerors shall submit their proposal using the following link: https://safe.apps.mil/ Please send proposal using the link above to Contract Specialist Joseph Sherwood at Joseph.D.Sherwood@usace.army.mil AND to Contracting Officer James Tracy at James.T.Tracy@usace.army.mil.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMITTING ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL:

In an effort to reduce paperwork and cost, all proposals shall be submitted electronically through the SAFE site. You are limited to five (5) maximum files per upload (total size cannot exceed 2GB). If you have a large number of files, recommend that you combine or ZIP your files before uploading to the SAFE site. Offerors may use compression utility software such as WinZip or PKZip to reduce file size and facilitate transmission.

REQUEST FOR UPLOAD CODE: Offerors must email Contract Specialist, Joseph Sherwood at Joseph.D.Sherwood@usace.army.mil and to Contracting Officer, James Tracy at James.T.Tracy@usace.army.mil no later than five (5) working days prior to the proposal due date to receive a request code which will allow for file uploads via the SAFE site. Offerors that fail to email for request a code five (5) working days before proposal submission date may not be able to receive a request code in time to upload their submission.

FILE DESCRIPTION: To ensure your submission is received and processed appropriately, it is important that interested parties CAREFULLY ensure their electronic files adhere to the following naming convention: Each filename shall begin with the solicitation number, followed by the word “RESPONSE”, followed by your firm’s name, and finally a brief file description.

EXAMPLES:

(1) “W912EP20R0022 RESPONSE Firm name Volume I.pdf”

(2) “W912EP20R0022 RESPONSE Firm name Volume II.pdf”

File Organization, Formatting, and other instructions. Although hard copies are not accepted, each file shall be clearly indexed, and logically assembled. Font size shall be 10 or larger. Pages shall be letter sized. Offerors shall prepare proposals in the English language.

Proposals shall be in a narrative format, organized and titled so that each section of the proposal follows the order and format of the factors. Information presented should be organized to pertain to only the evaluation factor in the section that the information is presented. Information pertaining to more than one evaluation factor should be repeated in each section for each factor.

Include a “File Description” for each file(s) you upload. The “File Description” will be included in the email notice to each of the recipients you choose to have access your file(s). NOTE: Do NOT enter Privacy Act Data (Personal Identification Information (PII)) in the File Description.)

Upload Completion and Deadline. Interested parties shall submit responses no later than the date on this announcement page. The time and date of proposal receipt will be the upload completion / delivery time and date recorded within Safe. Offerors should time their upload effort with prudence by not waiting until the last few minutes—this will allow for unexpected delays in the transmittal process. Submissions after the deadline may be emailed to Joseph Sherwood, Contract Specialist (Joseph.D.Sherwood@usace.army.mil), but be advised they will be considered late and as such will be processed in accordance with FAR 15.208.

Submission shall be in Adobe PDF format.

INSTRUCTIONS TO FOLLOW ON THE SAFE WEBSITE:

1. Once at the SAFE website, select the “Drop-off” icon. This allows users without a CAC or users whose computer is not configured to read a CAC the option to access the SAFE site as a guest.

2. After selecting the “Click Here” link you will be prompted to add your personal information, file information, recipient (Government representative) information and email settings.

3. When completing your file information for transmittal via the SAFE website, you will be required to enter the email address for all recipients for this solicitation, the recipients are the Contract Specialist and the Contracting Officer. The Contract Specialist for this solicitation is Joseph.D.Sherwood@usace.army.mil, and the Contracting Officer is James.T.Tracy@usace.amry.mil. The E-Mail address of the Government Employee who initiated the request code will be automatically entered. The offeror must enter the E-Mail address for both the Contracting Officer and Specialist. The offeror can enter an additional E- Mail address if desired. After entering the email address, click the ADD button to add the person(s) email to the “Recipients List” of your response. When your proposal is submitted, a notification will be sent to the recipients you added.

NOTE: Do NOT send the SAFE site packages to group email accounts.

Even if you successfully upload your proposal to the SAFE site, notification will not be sent to the government recipients until you verify your email address. Entering an incorrect email may result in the rejection of your submission for lateness. An Offeror can confirm proper submission by the ‘Drop-Off Completed” screen which generates based on proper file submission.

NOTE: It has been reported that documents may more quickly upload into the SAFE website when using the Firefox web browser. The Government cannot verify that this is true and offers no guarantee that Offerors will have more success utilizing any particular browser.

RECEIPT OF SUBMISSIONS:

For the purposes of establishing whether a proposal submission is considered timely, the government considers the date and time the submission is completely uploaded into the SAFE website. For proposals larger than the 2GB capacity of the SAFE website and require multiple submissions, the Government will consider the date and time the last submission is completely uploaded into the SAFE website. Do not assume that electronic communication is instantaneous. It can take several minutes or even hours in some cases.

The Government will not be responsible for submissions delivered to any location or to anyone other than those designated to receive proposals. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that proposals are submitted to reach the designated recipient. Offerors are responsible for allowing sufficient time for the proposal to be received in accordance with the instructions provided.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 – Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience Attachment 2 – Letter of Commitment from Key Subcontractors Attachment 3 – NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment 4 – Proposal Data Sheet Attachment 5 – Determination of Responsibility Attachment 6 – Proposal Format Attachment 7 – Proposed Small Business Participation Plan

ATTACHMENT 1

DEMONSTRATED CORPORATE TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE

Solicitation W912EP20R0022

Provide the following information to show examples of projects your company constructed within the last ten (10) 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 Number

5. Location of Project and Conditions

6. Owner

7. General Scope of Construction Project

8. Describe how this project is similar to the elements of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) Picayune Strand Restoration Project Southwest Protection Feature Levee, Collier County, Florida.

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

10. Construction Cost

11. Extent and Type of Work You Subcontracted Out

12. Dates Construction began and if completed, completion date

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

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

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

16. Current Telephone Number and email address of Owner Reference

17. Any unusual conditions requirements

18. Any innovative ideas that were required during construction.

Source Selection Information – See FAR 3.104 For Official Use Only

ATTACHMENT 2

LETTER OF COMMITMENT OF KEY SUBCONTRACTOR

(USE SUBCONTRACTOR’S COMPANY LETTERHEAD)

Solicitation

W912EP20R0022

TO: Name of Offeror

SUBJECT: Letter of Commitment for Proposed Contract for

Dear Sir or Madam:

I hereby make the unequivocal commitment that, in the event of an award of a contract to (Fill in name of Offeror), that (insert name of subcontractor firm, not …. individual) will fulfill the duties of (state specific items of work to be performed on this project)

Sincerely, (Authorized Subcontractor Official)

Date:

ATTACHMENT 3

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR CIVIL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT

– Solicitation W912EP20R0022

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

CONTRACT INFORMATION

d. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email

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.)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

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

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

8. Client’s Signature:

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts E VG S M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E VG S M U N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project? E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes; responsiveness to administrative reports, E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/ LAB OR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort

E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines

E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution

E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)

E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved

E VG S M U N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back- up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E

VG

S

M

U

N

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remark s section.

Yes No

e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

Yes

No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.

Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues? (Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues)

E VG S M U N

c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below)

Yes No

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor.

E VG S M U N

END OF QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Name of Firm:

Address:

Phone:

Fax:

E-mail:

ATTACHMENT 4

PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

Solicitation

W912EP20R0022

2. DUNS # (used for accessing the Contractor Performance Appraisal Retrieval System (CPARS).

Also provide any other assigned number that identifies the member firm(s) CPARS databases. If a separate DUNS has been created for a joint venture (J-V) it must also be submitted. If the firm is a joint venture, list the individual firms and briefly describe the nature of the association and provide the DUNS# for each.

Provide DUNS for any firm identified as a major subcontractor for which demonstrated corporate technical experience has been submitted under…