B.08.03 W912EP22R0002 BFWC Amendment 0002.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

BIG FISHWEIR CREEK, AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM (CAP) SECTION 206, DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA

1. See SF30 Continuation Sheet for Amendment Details.

2. The Proposal Due Date of May 4, 2022 at 2:00 pm, Local Time, remains unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 169

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 W912EP22R0002

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

04-Apr-2022

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.

A0002

5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3.EFFECTIVE DATE

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:

22-Apr-2022

SF 30 CONTINUATION SHEET

BIG FISHWEIR CREEK, AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM (CAP)

SECTION 206, DUVAL COUNTY, FLORIDA

W912EP22R0002 2 Amendment 0002

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

1. SPECIFICATIONS:

Text changes are in underline green lettering only and deleted text is simply removed to maintain neatness in the Line Items and Pricing Schedule. For other sections, text changes have been updated with additions noted by underlined text (green in PDF) and deletions noted by line/cross-outs (red in PDF). These text changes pertain only to changes made by this amendment.

Volume 1:

DELETE Section 00100A ADDITIONAL PROPOSAL PREPARATION/SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS and REPLACE with the attached Section 00100A ADDITIONAL PROPOSAL PREPARATION/SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS.

DELETE Section 00700 CONTRACT CLAUSES and REPLACE with the attached Section 00700

CONTRACT CLAUSES.

2. DRAWINGS:

NONE.

(End of Summary of Changes)

Section 00100A – ADDITIONAL PROPOSAL PREPARATION/SUBMISSION 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 Price 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 an acceptable non-priced proposal (Technical and Past Performance). The Government will evaluate the proposals for technical acceptability, but not ranked using two non-price factors, Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience and Past Performance.

These non-priced factors will be evaluated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis. In order to be considered awardable, there must be an "acceptable" rating in every non-price factor. The lowest price technically acceptable proposal will then be evaluated to determine price fairness and reasonableness in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(a).

The Source Selection Authority (SSA)/Contracting Officer shall select the source whose proposal offers the lowest evaluated price and for which all non-price factors are rated as Acceptable in accordance with established criteria in the solicitation.

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. EVALUATION APPROACH

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 Request for Proposal (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.

All amendments to the solicitation will be distributed via the SAM.gov website (www.sam.gov). It is the offeror’s

W912EP22R0002 00100A-1 Amendment 0002 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.

All proposals will be evaluated on the basis of the factors stated in the solicitation to award a contract. There will be no trade-offs performed. Award will be made to the responsive and responsible offeror who submits the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal that conforms to the requirements of the solicitation. To be considered technically acceptable, an offeror’s proposal must be rated “Acceptable” under all non-price factors.

Source Selection Decision: The Source Selection Authority (SSA), independently exercising prudent business judgment, will make the source selection decision based on the proposals that meet the requirements of the Government. The SSA will not receive a recommendation from any individual or entity as to which offeror should receive the award and additionally will not receive a rank order or order of merit list pertaining to the offers being evaluated.

1. 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. 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.

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.

C. TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA

A. FACTOR 1 – PRICE

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

The Offeror’s volume for this factor shall be fully completed and will include the following 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. 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.

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 (2) calendar days of the proposal submission date.

W912EP22R0002 00100A-2 Amendment 0002

e. Proposal Data Sheet (Attachment 4).

f. Determination of Responsibility (Attachment 5).

g. Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable)

h. The Offeror’s proposal must be received by the Government no later than the date/time specified in the solicitation and cited above. Offerors shall submit their proposal using the following link:

https://piee.eb.mil/

Please submit proposals utilizing the link above to Contracting Officer Tedra N. Thompson at Tedra.N.Thompson@usace.army.mil and carbon copy (CC) Contract Specialist, Anelis Nazario-Castillo at Anelis.I.Nazario-Castillo@usace.army.mil. (See Section 00800, Electronic Proposals paragraph).

EVALUATION METHOD:

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.

W912EP22R0002 00100A-3 Amendment 0002

B. FACTOR 2 - DEMONSTRATED CORPORATE TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

The offeror’s volume for this non-priced factor will not include price or price related information. The offeror will include the Proposal Format Sheet - Attachment 6 with the Factor 2 submission requirements.

Attachment 1, Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience must be utilized to provide project information for each project. The offeror shall ensure that all information required by the Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience Sheet(s) are provided and all descriptions and explanations are in sufficient 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.

All experiences required for this factor listed as elements (a through d), may be submitted under one project or any combination of projects. All four elements need not have been performed on the same project(s); however, the entire portfolio of projects must satisfy all four elements. Provide three (3) examples of recent and relevant experience on same or similar completed civil construction projects or close to completed projects, only the first three (3) projects submitted in the offeror’s proposal will be reviewed and any additional projects will not be evaluated. The offeror must have been the prime contractor on at least one (1) of the projects submitted under Factor 2.

NOTE 1: No additional consideration or evaluation will be given for the submission of more than three (3) projects and only three (3) projects will be evaluated.

Recent and relevant experience is defined as same or similar scope as a civil construction project having the features of work listed in Factor 2.

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.

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.

The project/projects submitted under Factor 2, Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience must have a corresponding submission under Factor 3, Past Performance. In addition, project/projects submitted under Factor 2 must be a completed project or a close to completed project.

A complete 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 close to complete project is defined as work performed under a “project” that is over 75% physically complete.

Failure to demonstrate the minimally acceptability standards under Factor 2 will result in an “UNACCEPTABLE” rating and possible elimination from further consideration for contract award.

A joint venture entity shall submit the designated number of projects for Factor 2 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.

W912EP22R0002 00100A-4 Amendment 0002

Any demonstrated corporate technical experience (to include subcontractors) provided for consideration for Factor 2 shall also have a corresponding submission in the Past Performance Factor. If Past Performance information is not provided for a demonstrated corporate technical experience that demonstrated corporate technical experience will not be evaluated.

The Offeror’s Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience Proposal must also include the following:

Project/Projects that demonstrate the following experiences.

a. Experience successfully dredging tidally influenced narrow shallow draft channels (less than 6 feet in depth) in urban residential areas bounded by waterfront structures such as bulkheads and docks.

b. Experience successfully dredging in highly populated areas with limited access and limited areas for staging and storage adjacent to or near the work area.

c. Experience successfully disposing of dredge material in an upland disposal area that required rehandling of the dredge material at least once.

d. Experience successfully dredging in a channel containing debris or obstructions such as those found in urban forested rivers/streams.

NOTE 1: Successfully is defined as receiving at least an "acceptable" rating in every non-price factor.

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 the 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,” in order to receive a rating of Technically Acceptable for Factor 2.

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

Factor 2 Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

C. FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Offerors shall submit one NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), (see Attachment 3), completed and signed by an Owner of the Project (Client) point of contact or “POC” for each of the projects submitted under Factor 2. 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 should 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

W912EP22R0002 00100A-5 Amendment 0002

(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.

EVALUATION METHOD

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 (within the last ten years) 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 recent, and relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. If a demonstrated corporate technical experience submitted in Factor 2, is determined to be Acceptable, it will also be determined to be recent and relevant in Factor 3.

The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed a demonstrated corporate technical experience submitted in Factor 2. 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 or 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

NOTE: In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past

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 or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note below)

Unacceptable 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.

W912EP22R0002 00100A-6 Amendment 0002 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.”

D. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted electronically, as described below. The use of hyperlinks in the proposal is prohibited. The offeror’s proposal is due no later than 2:00 PM, local time on 4 May 2022.

The Offeror’s proposal must be received by the Government no later than the date/time specified in the solicitation and cited above. Offerors shall submit their proposal using the following link:

https://piee.eb.mil/

Please submit proposals utilizing the link above to Contracting Officer Tedra N. Thompson at Tedra.N.Thompson@usace.army.mil. and carbon copy (CC) Contract Specialist, Anelis Nazario-Castillo at Anelis.I.Nazario-Castillo@usace.army.mil.

Instructions for submitting electronic proposals:

In an effort to reduce paperwork and cost, all proposals shall be submitted electronically through the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) website. Electronic copies of each volume shall be submitted through the Solicitation Module of PIEE at https://piee.eb.mil. If there is a system outage, see below. All proposals received after the exact time specified for receipt shall be treated as late submissions.

For instructions on how to post an offer, please refer to the Posting Offer demo:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to obtain written confirmation of receipt of all electronic files of the full proposal by the Contracting office. The submission date for all Volumes shall be no later than the date and time specified in Block 13 of the SF 1442 of the RFP. In the unlikely event the PIEE system is not operational, experiences technical difficulties, or a Contractor is temporarily unable to access or use the system, the Contractor shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer. This Notification must occur at least 24 hours prior to the proposal submission deadline. Contractor notification shall be in writing and may be in conjunction with verbal notification, but verbal notification alone shall not be sufficient. The alternate method for proposal submission is via expedited delivery or hand-carried. The Offeror must obtain prior approval from the Contracting Officer to use the alternate submission method. The Contractor shall have 24 hours to provide their proposal upon contracting officer approval. In the event that the Contractor alleges technical difficulties and does not notify the contracting officer until after the closing date and time, the contracting officer will follow the procedures identified in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and then make a determination if the Contractor’s late proposal submission is accepted. Screen shots of the submission should be taken to validate a submission was accepted in the PIEE system.

You are limited to five (5) maximum files per upload (total size cannot exceed 2GB 1.9GB). If you have a large number of files, it is recommended that you combine or ZIP your files before uploading to the PIEE site. Offerors may use compression utility software such as WinZip or PKZip to reduce file size and facilitate transmission.

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 file name 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) “W912EP22R0002 RESPONSE Firm name Volume I.pdf”

(2) “W912EP22R0002 RESPONSE Firm name Volume II.pdf”

(3) “W912EP22R0002 RESPONSE Firm name Volume III.pdf”

W912EP22R0002 00100A-7 Amendment 0002

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--larger page sizes (such as 11x17 foldouts, etc.) will be counted as two pages. 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 so as 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 & Deadline:

Interested parties shall submit responses no later than the date cited above. 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 Contract Specialist Anelis I. Nazario-Castillo at (Anelis.I.Nazario-Castillo@usace.army.mil) still be uploaded to the PIEE Solicitation Module 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.

Receipt of Submission:

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 PIEE website. For multiple submissions, the Government will consider the date and time the last submission is completely uploaded into the PIEE 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 offers are submitted so as to reach the designated recipient. Offerors are responsible for allowing sufficient time for the offer to be received in accordance with the instructions provided.

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

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. 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 each 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, 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.

W912EP22R0002 00100A-8 Amendment 0002

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 three volumes as indicated below. Each volume shall be marked with the Offeror´s name, the solicitation number, and the volume number. See Attachment 6 – Proposal Format.

• VOLUME ONE (Factor 1) – Price

• VOLUME TWO (Factor 2) – Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience:

Do not include pricing information in Volume Two

NOTE: Page Limitations Not to Exceed 150 Pages.

• VOLUME THREE – (Factor 3) Past Performance.

Do not include pricing information in Volume Three.

E. OTHER GENERAL REVIEW

1. System for Award Management (SAM):

Failure to have an active and completed registration in SAM: http://www.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. Offer 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.

W912EP22R0002 00100A-9 Amendment 0002

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 – Demonstrated Corporate Technical Experience

Attachment 2 – Letter of Commitment from major Subcontractors

Attachment 3 – NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire

Attachment 4 - Proposal Data Sheet

Attachment 5 - Determination of Responsibility

Attachment 6 – Proposal Format

W912EP22R0002 00100A-10 Amendment 0002

ATTACHMENT 1

DEMONSTRATED CORPORATE TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE

Solicitation W912EP22R0002

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

4. Location of Project and Conditions

5. Owner

6. General Scope of Construction Project

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

Performed:

8. Construction Cost

9. Extent and Type of Work You Subcontracted Out

10. Dates Construction began and if completed, completion date

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

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

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

14. Current Telephone Number and email address of Owner Reference

15. Any unusual conditions requirements

16. Any innovative ideas that were required during construction.

W912EP22R0002 00100A-11 Amendment 0002

ATTACHMENT 2

LETTER OF COMMITMENT OF MAJOR SUBCONTRACTOR

(USE SUBCONTRACTOR’S COMPANY LETTERHEAD)

Solicitation W912EP22R0002

TO: PRIME OFFEROR NAME AND ADDRESS

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 Proposer/Prime Offeror), that (insert name of subcontractor firm, not …. individual) will fulfill the duties of (state role on the project/specific work to be performed)

Sincerely, (Authorized Subcontractor Official)

Date:

W912EP22R0002 00100A-12 Amendment 0002

ATTACHMENT 3

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE FOR CIVIL CONSTRUCTION

PROJECT

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

CONTRACT INFORMATION

1. Contractor Information Firm Name:

Address:

Phone Number:

Email

CAGE Code:

DUNs Number:

Unique Entity

ID (UEI):

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:

W912EP22R0002 00100A-13 Amendment 0002

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)

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, businesslike and communication)

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/ LABOR

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

W912EP22R0002 00100A-14 Amendment 0002

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)

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.

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

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.

E VG S M U N

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

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

E VG S M U N

END OF QUESTIONNAIRE

W912EP22R0002 00100A-15 Amendment 0002

ATTACHMENT 4

PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

1. Name of Firm:

Address:

Phone:

Fax:

E-mail:

2. DUNS # Unique Entity ID (UEI) (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 Unique Entity ID (UEI) 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# Unique Entity ID (UEI) for each.

Provide DUNS Unique Entity ID (UEI) for any firm identified as a major subcontractor for which demonstrated corporate technical experience has been submitted under Factor 3. Also, list the firm and briefly describe the nature of the association for each firm listed.

Firm1:

Firm2:

Firm3:

Nature of Association:

3. AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATORS. FAR 52.215-11

The Offeror represents that the following persons are authorized to negotiate on its behalf with the Government in connection with this Request for Proposals (RFP).

[List names, titles, and telephone number of the authorized negotiator.]

Name of Person Authorized to Negotiate: Negotiator's Address:

Negotiator's Telephone: Negotiator’s E-mail:

W912EP22R0002 00100A-16 Amendment 0002

ATTACHMENT 5

DETERMINATION OF RESPONSIBILITY

Project Title: Big Fishweir Creek, Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Continuing Authorities Program (CAP) Section 206, Duval County, FL

The following information is provided to assist the Contracting Officer in determining whether or not the propose contractor meets the general standards of responsibility enumerated at FAR 9.104-1 and DFARS 209.104-1.

PROVIDE A COPY OF YOUR LATEST FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Balance Sheets and Income Statements). If Financial Statements are older than one year, furnish a statement as to the current financial status of the company.

Banking References

Provide letters from the banking references to confirm this information.

*1st bank's name:

Telephone #:

Address:

Person:

Title:

Length of time with bank:

Credit Rating:

Number/type of accounts:

Amount in each account (# of figures):

Credit Line: Secured/Unsecured

Outstanding Loans: Secured/Unsecured Comments:

*2nd bank's name:

Telephone #:

Address:

Person:

Title:

Length of time with bank:

Credit Rating:

Number/type of accounts:

Amount in each account (# of figures):

Credit line:

W912EP22R0002 00100A-17 Amendment 0002

Secured/Unsecured Outstanding Loans Secured/Unsecured Comments:

*** Provide letters from the banking references to confirm this information.

Trade References

*1st Company:

Telephone #: Address: Name:

Title:

Length of time with company:

Credit line:

Average monthly business:

High credit:

Payment History:

Takes Discounts:

Comments:

*2nd Company:

Telephone #: Address: Name:

Title:

Length of time with company:

Credit line:

Average monthly business:

High credit:

Payment history:

Takes Discounts:

Comments:

*Workman's Compensation Experience Modification Rate (EMR):

If EMR is greater than 1, an explanation as to why the EMR exceeds the currently established satisfactory threshold of 1.0 must be provided. Additionally, provide an explanation as to what your firm has been doing or are currently doing, in the realms of safety programs, training and policy enforcement to reduce your risk to acceptable levels.

2019: 2020: 2021:

W912EP22R0002 00100A-18 Amendment 0002

ATTACHMENT 6

PROPOSAL FORMAT

PROPOSAL IN RESPONSE TO SOLICITATION W912EP22R0002

OFFEROR’S NAME: [Offeror enter]

OFFEROR’S ADDRESS: [Offeror enter]

OFFEROR’S POINT OF CONTACT (POC): [Offeror enter]

POC’s TELEPHONE: [Offeror enter]

POC’s FAX: [Offeror enter]

POC’s EMAIL: [Offeror enter]

THIS OFFER IS SUBMITTED IN SEPARATE VOLUMES AS FOLLOWS: [Offeror check applicable items]

Volume…