16R0004_Final_RFP-CRRP_Fishlift_PLC_Rplcmt_1-29-15.pdf

Project Title: Cooper River Rediversion Project (CRRP) Fish Lif t Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) Replacement, St. Stephen, SC.

Scope of Work: Electrical repairs and component replacements as w ell as the replacement of the existing PLC, control console, transducers and transmitter boxes and all f ield w iring betw een the PLC and f ield w iring devices. OFFERORS SHALL COMPLETE THE ENTIRE PROJECT READY FOR USE NOT LATER THAN 1 DECEMBER 2016 . ALSO, ON-SITE WORK CANNOT BEGIN UNTIL THE END OF THE FISHLIFT SEASON, WHICH OCCURS ON/ABOUT 15 MAY 2016. See Section 00 70 00, FAR Clause 52.211-10, "Commencement, Prosecution and Completion of Work". The number of days indicated in Block 11 below anticipates a contract aw ard date of 31 March 2016.

A site visit w ill be held on Monday 8 February 2016 at 10:00 AM Eastern time. See Section 00 72 00 General Conditions, FAR clause 52.236-27 for details.

This solicitation is a 100% Small Business Set Aside. The NAICS Code is 238210, Electrical Contractors and Other Wiring Installation Contractors, Small Business Size Standard $15 Million.

Project Magnitude: $500,000 to $1,000,000.

The f inal negotiated proposal of the successful offeror shall be considered incorporated by reference upon aw ard of the resulting contract.

CLARISSA D CORDON 843-329-8015

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

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

NEGOTIATED

29-Jan-2016

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

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

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

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

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______10 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________235 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________FAR 52.211-10

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

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

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________1 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________22 Feb 2016 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

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

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

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

D. Offers providing less than _______90 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

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

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, CHARLESTON

69-A HAGOOD AVENUE

CHARLESTON SC 29403

W912HP

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

02:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

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

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

843-329-2331FAX:TEL: 843-329-8193 TEL: FAX:

W912HP-16-R-0004 58

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

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

CODE FACILITY CODE

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

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

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

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

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

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

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

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

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

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

See Item 14

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

30B. SIGNATURE

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

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

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

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

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

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

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation, Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Schedule

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 1 Job CRRP Fish Lift PLC Base ItemElectrical Repairs & PLC Replacement as described in the plans and specifications.

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

0002 1 Job OPTION CRRP Fish Lift PLC Optional Item No. 1Work associated with the laptop for the

Power House Control Room, in accordance with the plans and specifications.

THE CONTRACTING OFFICER MAY EXERCISE THE OPTION BY

WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CONTRACTOR WITHIN 120 DAYS AFTER

CONTRACT AWARD.

0003 1 Job OPTION CRRP Fish Lift PLC Optional Item No. 2Work associated with providing T1 line, in accordance with the plans and specifications. THE CONTRACTING OFFICER

MAY EXERCISE THE OPTION BY WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE

CONTRACTOR WITHIN 120 DAYS AFTER CONTRACT AWARD.

0004 1 Job OPTION CRRP Fish Lift PLC Optional Item No. 3Work associated with providing remote internet access for video streaming, in accordance with the plans and specifications. THE CONTRACTING OFFICER MAY EXERCISE THE

OPTION BY WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CONTRACTOR WITHIN 120

DAYS AFTER CONTRACT AWARD.

Section 00 21 16 - Instructions to Proposers

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

A. INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICE TO OFFERORS

1.0 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS OVERVIEW

General. Since the proposal will describe the capability of the offeror to perform any resulting contract, it should be specific and complete in every detail. The proposal should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straight-forward, concise delineation of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the contract. The proposal should be practical, legible, clear, and coherent. It is the offeror's responsibility to submit an adequately written proposal in sufficient detail to permit a complete and accurate evaluation, and the agency will not adapt its evaluation to match an offeror's submission, nor will it go in search of information that an offeror has omitted or failed adequately to present or organize.

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the non-price requirements or the work statement with such things as a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an adequate understanding of a requirement or a capability to perform.

This Request for Proposal (RFP) solicits work to provide critical electrical repairs to the fishlift facility and incidental related work. The work includes, but is not limited to electrical repairs and component replacements as well as the replacement of the existing PLC, control console, transducers and transmitter boxes and all field wiring between the PLC and field wiring devices.

1.1. Proposal Submissions and the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Source Selection Process. This process requires offerors to submit technical and performance capability information for evaluation by the Government against the uniform baseline of minimum requirements identified in evaluation factors and subfactors. Each of the factors and subfactors will be evaluated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis in accordance with the evaluation criteria set out in this section. Price information will not be rated “acceptable” or “unacceptable” but will be evaluated in accordance with FAR Part 15.

1.2. The Government intends to award a firm fixed price contract and make an award without holding discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, offerors should include their best terms and conditions (both price and technical) in the initial offer. Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to participate in discussions or be asked to submit a revised offer.

The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Source Selection Authority (SSA) later determines them to be necessary. By submitting an offer in response to this solicitation, offerors are agreeing to comply with all terms and conditions contained in the solicitation.

2.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

2.1. Who May Submit: Any legally organized Offeror qualified and eligible to receive an award under applicable laws and regulations.

2.1.1 Contractor Team Arrangements.

2.1.1.1. Recognition of Contractor Teams. In accordance with FAR Subpart 9.6, it is Government policy to recognize the integrity and validity of contractor team arrangements. For a teaming arrangement to be recognized for purposes of source selection evaluation and the application of non-price factors and sub-factors, there must be full disclosure of the teaming arrangement and company relationships in the team's proposal. The proposal must include a narrative that explains the major or critical aspects of the work to be performed by each team member.

For joint venture teams, the proposal must also include an agreement that has been or will be executed prior to award between/among all team members. In the case of prime-sub teams, the prime contractor remains fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any team arrangement between the prime contractor and its subcontractors. However, regardless of whether a formal team arrangement is proposed or recognized, consistent with FAR 9.104, the Government may consider the responsibility of subcontractor team members when it may adversely affect the prospective prime contractor’s responsibility or when it is in the Government’s interest to do so.

2.1.1.2. Joint Venture Team Agreement. The team agreement submitted with the proposal will govern the performance of the work by the joint venture. The agreement must address the following items: identification of team members, a delineation of roles and responsibilities of team members, the duration of the agreement, and the percentages of the participants including the controlling party. Agreements should not be subject to substantive revision because the agreement will be part of the evaluation process. The timely submission of the executed teaming agreement prior to award shall be a precondition to a finding of responsibility.

2.1.1.3. Restriction on Substitution. Regardless of any provision to the contrary in a team or subcontract agreement, all members of a recognized team arrangement are bound to perform any resulting contract and options by means of the same team. There can be no substitution of team members except that, in the case of a prime-sub team arrangement, the Government may (in its sole discretion and without any obligation whatsoever), at the request of the prime, permit the substitution of a subcontractor with equivalent or greater capability for a subcontractor on the identified team. The failure of the Offeror to perform with one or more subcontractors on a recognized team may be grounds for termination for default.

2.2. General Proposal Submission Requirements.

2.2.1. Electronic Submission of Proposals. The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted as set forth within this section.

a. Electronic Proposals. In an effort to reduce paperwork and costs, ALL RESPONSES TO THIS ANNOUNCEMENT SHALL BE SUBMITTED ELECTRONICALLY. Hand carried delivery or USPS/UPS/Fedex delivery of hard copies and/or CD-ROMs is not authorized. Facsimile submission is not authorized. Email submission is not authorized. ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL SUBMISSION IS

REQUIRED THROUGH THE FEDBIZOPPS (FBO.GOV) “ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION”

FEATURE. The FBO vendor user guide has information & instructions on how to utilize this feature (https://www.fbo.gov/downloads/FBO_Vendor_Guide.pdf).

b. File Size Limitations. Offerors are advised to follow the FBO instructions for uploading files larger than 10MB (java upload). FBO has not posted official file size limitations for its electronic response module, however it has been observed that uploads to FBO tend to be problematic when the files are sized 100MB or greater. If needed, Offerors are advised to break the files down into smaller sections in order to upload it to the system. In such cases, please divide the sections as logically as possible and be sure to clearly name the files as specified below.

2.2.1.1. File names. The price proposal volume and the non-price volumes shall be submitted separately. They may be delivered together, but they MUST be submitted as separate single files. Offerors shall title the file(s) in the following format, tailoring the highlighted font as appropriate:

Price: “W912HP-16-R-0004_COMPANY NAME_VOLUME I PRICE”.

Non-Price: “W912HP-16-R-0004_COMPANY NAME_VOLUME II NON-PRICE”.

2.2.1.2. Upload Completion & Deadline. Interested parties shall submit responses no later than the date on the announcement page (or as adjusted by official amendment). The time & date of proposal receipt will be the upload completion / delivery time & date recorded within FBO. Do not assume that electronic submission will occur instantaneously. Large files (e.g. 10MB or more) will take some time to upload. 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. Offerors’ uploads MUST BE COMPLETED before the deadline or the submission will not be successful and the proposal will not be considered timely. The FBO system will automatically shut off the “Electronic Submission” feature at the specified deadline—once that occurs, any uploads still underway will be terminated and the feature will disappear from the announcement. Offerors are encouraged to keep a copy of the upload confirmation for their record. Submissions after the deadline may be emailed to MAJ Clarissa Cordon, Contract Specialist (Clarissa.D.Cordon@usace.army.mil), but be advised they will be considered late and as such will be processed in accordance with FAR 15.208.

2.2.1.3. Electronic files shall be in their native format (i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc.), or if in pdf format, shall be in searchable text. If the electronic files are of a size at which they must be compressed (zipped), they shall be compressed into one zipped folder using WinZip version 6.2 or later. Self-extracting .exe files will not be accepted.

2.2.1.4. Offerors shall prepare proposals in the English language. The proposal shall be typed and neatly organized. All pages shall be numbered. Type pitch shall be 10 pitch or larger.

2.2.1.5. 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 the each section for each factor.

2.2.1.6. 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 set forth below in the paragraph, “VOLUME II, NON-PRICE

PROPOSAL.”

2.2.1.7. Any information, presented in a proposal that the Offeror wants safeguarded from disclosure to other parties must be identified and labeled in accordance with the requirements of Provision “FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors�Competitive Acquisition (Jan 2004),” subparagraph (e), which is found in Section 00 21 16 of the RFP. The Government will endeavor to honor the restrictions against release requested by Offerors, to the extent permitted under United States law and regulations.

2.3. Proposal Volume Content.

2.3.1. Organize the proposal as instructed below.

2.3.2. Requirement for separate price and technical proposals.

2.3.2.1. Each Offeror must submit both a Price Proposal and a Technical Proposal (the Technical Proposal will include all non-price factors, including Past Performance). The Price Proposal and the Technical Proposal must be submitted as separate volumes or files. Ensure that each separate volume/file is clearly marked to indicate its contents and the identity of the offeror.

2.3.2.2. Both the Price Proposal and the Technical Proposal must be received by the closing date and time set for receipt of proposals.

2.3.2.3. No dollar amounts from the Price Proposal are to be included in the Technical Proposal.

2.3.2.4. All information intended to be evaluated as part of the Technical Proposal must be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal. Do not cross-reference similar material in the Price Proposal, or vice versa. Also, do not include links to websites in lieu of incorporating information into your proposal.

2.3.2.5. Include a detailed table of contents for the Price Proposal and for the Technical Proposal. Any materials submitted but not required by this solicitation, such as company brochures or other information, will not be considered part of the proposal or used to determine whether the proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

2.5. VOLUME 1 - PRICE PROPOSAL – Contract Requirements & Price Proposal.

2.5.1. Organize the PRICE PROPOSAL as follows:

TAB A – STANDARD FORM 1442, completed and signed by an official(s) with the authority to contractually bind the offeror in accordance with FAR 4.102.

TAB B – PROPOSAL SCHEDULE “Price/Cost” (Section 00 10 00 of Solicitation)

TAB C – REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS - Section 00 45 00 of Solicitation (FAR Clause 52.212-3): Each offeror shall complete (fill-in and signatures) the solicitation sections indicated below using the file (without modification to the file) provided with the solicitation. An authorized official(s) of the firm shall sign all certifications requiring original signature.

TAB D – PROPOSAL DATA SHEET – See the format provided in Section 00 22 16, Tab D. Ensure to include Offeror’s telephone number, FAX number, Cage Code, Tax ID#, e-mail address and DUNS number. If a separate DUNS has been created for a joint venture (JV) it must be submitted. A DUNS number shall also be provided for each company identified in any other proposed teaming arrangement.

TAB E – BID BOND – See FAR Clause 52.228-1. The amount of the bid guarantee shall be 20 percent of the bid price or $3,000,000, whichever is less.

TAB F – FINANCIAL INFORMATION – (e.g. past three years financial statements, annual reports, Dun& Bradstreet Ratings, and or number, banks name, and POC, etc.).

TAB G – JOINT VENTURE/TEAMING AGREEMENT (as applicable).

2.6. VOLUME II – NON-PRICE PROPOSAL. THE NON-PRICE PROPOSAL SHALL NOT INCLUDE

ANY COST INFORMATION. The Non-Price Proposal will be organized as follows:

TAB H – FACTOR ONE: SPECIALIZED CORPORATE EXPERIENCE

Project Information Sheets (See Section 00 22 16, Tab H)

TAB I – FACTOR TWO: PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Optional - See Section 00 22 16, Tab I)

Any Interim and Final performance evaluations and letters of appreciation or awards for the projects submitted under Factor One

2.7 INQUIRIES. Interested parties with technical inquiries shall submit their inquiries in writing via “Bidder Inquiry” in ProjNet at www.projnet.org/projnet. The bidder inquiry key is AMGRM2-C759FH. The government reserves the right to decline addressing certain questions. Further, no questions, unless in the government’s interest, will be answered any later than ten business days prior to the stated deadline for responses to this announcement.

Simple questions and answers will be made via ProjNet. Official amendments to the RFP will be made on FBO (www.fbo.gov). All Offerors are encouraged to register on ProjNet for alerts so as to stay abreast of Q&A’s that are posted in reference to this solicitation. Only self-registered users on ProjNet can submit & review inquiries. To self-register, go to the webpage, click BID tab, select Bidder Inquiry, select agency USACE, enter the key for this solicitation listed above and your email address. After initial login, enter all the required information to create your user ID. Verify the information on the next screen and from there you may submit and view inquiries. Those submitting inquiries will receive a system generated email notification when their inquiry has been processed and answered. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to monitor for inquiries and responses.

B. EVALUATION FACTORS AND PROCESS FOR AWARD

3. NON-PRICE EVALUATION FACTORS

3.1. FACTOR ONE - SPECIALIZED CORPORATE EXPERIENCE.

3.1.1. FACTOR ONE SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

a. Offerors shall submit a minimum of three (3) but no more than five (5) contracts on which it was either the prime or a major subcontractor, that meet the following value, recency and relevancy criteria:

with a prime or subcontract (as applicable) value of at least $500,000.00;

completed (accepted for use by the customer) within the past five (5) years from the date of this solicitation, or substantially (75% of construction) complete by the date that proposals are due;

which involved similar work consisting of experience with electronic controls/program logic controller replacement.

b. The description of each project shall indicate the offeror's role in the execution of that project. Each project description shall include information regarding the methods of performance, timelines for performance, the complexity of the work, and the dollar value of the contract or subcontract. See the format provided in Section 00 22 16, TAB H.

Offerors are encouraged to identify problems or unique issues encountered on these contracts or subcontracts and discuss both the corrective actions taken and the results achieved by the offeror.

c. For recognized contractor team arrangements, each individual member of a team arrangement must submit at least 1 of the minimum number of projects. Projects submitted by the team may include those performed by individual team members, as well as those where all team members have prior experience together as a team.

d. Where performance of a base contract and one or more options is relied upon by an offeror to meet any criterion under this Factor, the same base contract and contract option(s) will be evaluated for purposes of the remaining criteria for Specialized Corporate Experience (and Past Performance).

3.1.2. FACTOR ONE EVALUATION CRITERIA:

The Government will review the example projects provided by the Offeror to evaluate and rate the recent experience of the Offeror in similar projects. Similar means any experience with electronic controls/program logic controller replacement projects similar in size, scope and complexity of this project as described in paragraph 3.1.1 submissions requirements above. Offerors are encouraged to provide descriptive analysis of why their example projects meet the criteria for Specialized Corporate Experience. If the Offeror cannot provide suitable relevant experience and the evaluators consider that the information provided indicates that the Offeror has little to no relevant experience, a determination will be made as to the risk this lack of experience presents to the Government and the proposal may be rated UNACCEPTABLE.

3.2. FACTOR TWO – PAST PERFORMANCE

3.2.1. FACTOR TWO SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

a. Offerors shall provide past performance information for each project submitted for Factor One – Specialized Corporate Experience.

For each submitted project, provide a copy of any interim and the final performance evaluations for the project, and any letters of appreciation or awards.

For any projects that did not/do not meet original schedule or technical performance requirements, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence. The offerors shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary. All Requests for Deviation and Requests for Waiver shall be addressed with respect to causes and corrective actions.

b. Offerors shall provide a copy of any Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters received by the offeror for each submitted project and a description of any corrective action implemented by the offeror. The offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination.

c. The offeror must provide the information requested for past performance evaluation or affirmatively state that it possesses no relevant, directly related, or similar past performance.

d. Past Performance Questionnaire. The Past Performance Questionnaire included in the solicitation (Section 00 22 16, Tab I) is provided for the offeror and/or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor One, Specialized Corporate Experience. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact via email at clarissa.d.cordon@usace.army.mil no later than three (3) days prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

e. Also include performance recognition documents received within the last 3 years such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

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

g. If the offeror is employing a recognized team arrangement, then Past Performance Information must be completed for each team member submitting one of more projects (performed individual or as a part of the same team) for the purposes of meeting the Specialized Corporate Experience criteria. For reference and evaluation purposes, the offeror shall identify who will perform the major or critical aspects of the project.

h. The Government reserves the right to evaluate the past performance of any subcontract to identified in the offeror’s proposal as part of the assessment of the acceptability of that offeror’s proposal

i. Regardless of the rating or evaluation terminology used in any past performance information, the Government will make in independent determination of the acceptability or non-acceptability of an offeror’s past performance based on the totality of information considered.

3.2.2. FACTOR TWO: PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA:

a. The Government will evaluate and review the completed Past Performance data provided by the Offeror and its customers, as well as other available past performance data for each of the submitted projects. The purpose is to determine how well the contractor performed on past contracts. The Past Performance evaluation will not take into account the past performance information regarding predecessor companies.

b. The Government will evaluate past performance in terms of the elements listed below:

Quality of Work. Based on information provided in the questionnaire and other information, the Government will assess the quality of the actual construction undertaken and the standards of workmanship exhibited by the Offeror’s team.

Customer Satisfaction. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the

Offeror’s past customer satisfaction, cooperation with customers, and interaction on past projects.

Telephone interviews may be conducted.

Schedule/Timeliness of Performance. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror completing past projects within the scheduled completion times. Schedule and timeliness are of particular importance in accomplishing this Fishlift PLC Replacement project due to the seasonal nature of fishlift use.

Management/Personnel/Labor. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror’s management of subcontractors on past projects.

Cost/Financial Management. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect to the Offeror’s ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually-agreed price(s).

Safety / Security. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect the Offeror’s ability to maintain an environment of safety and did the Offeror adhere to its approved safety plan.

General. The Government will evaluate all information available with respect the Offeror ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations.

c. If the customer for any of the projects submitted under Factor 1 –Specialized Corporate Experience would rate the Offeror marginal or unsatisfactory overall for any of the projects submitted, or if there are negative ratings (overall marginal or unacceptable/unsatisfactory) for projects meeting the same value, relevancy and recency criteria in another Government database, the proposal will be rated Unacceptable.

d. Other bases for an unacceptable rating for past performance. If there are any terminations for default, the proposal would receive an overall rating of Unacceptable for this factor.

e. Contractor Team Arrangements Evaluation. Past Performance evaluation will be applied to all team members submitting one or more projects for the purpose of meeting the Specialized Corporate Experience criteria.

However, there will be a single past performance rating for each offeror. Poor past performance by a member of a contractor team may mean that the offeror will be rated Unacceptable for this factor.

f. 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 (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “ACCEPTABLE.”

g. The Government may contact sources other than those provided by the offeror for information with respect to past performance. These other sources may include other Government rating systems or databases, as well as telephone interviews or communications with Government personnel with personal knowledge of the Offeror’s performance capability.

4. NON-PRICE EVALUATION PROCESS

4.1. The SSA will provide all non-price proposals for technical review by the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). Proposal pricing will not be revealed to the SSEB. While the intent is to award without discussions, if at any stage in this process it is determined to be necessary to conduct discussions, the SSA will determine the proposals to be included in the competitive range consistent with FAR 15.306(c).

4.2. Non-price proposals will be evaluated consistent with the uniform evaluation procedure set forth in this section of the solicitation. The SSEB will conduct an in-depth review of each proposal against the factors and any subfactors established in the solicitation as follows:

4.2.1. All proposals received will be subjected to an initial screening by the Contracting Officer to determine whether proposals are complete and in accordance with the solicitation. Proposals that fail this initial screening process may be rejected and the offeror will be notified they are no longer eligible for further consideration.

4.2.2. Each member of the SSEB will independently evaluate all information provided in each proposal against the prescribed non-price factors and any subfactors. Once these individual evaluations are completed, the SSEB will assign a consensus rating for each evaluation factor. The SSEB will not consider any documents incorporated by reference, except as expressly allowed by this solicitation.

4.2.3. Past performance, as instructed above, shall be included in the Technical Proposal and evaluated by the

SSEB.

4.2.4. The overall ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE rating along with ratings on individual factors, to include all supporting documentation, will be provided to the Source Selection Authority.

4.3. Offerors are reminded that unsupported promises to comply with contractual requirements will not be sufficient. Proposals must not merely parrot back the contractual requirements, but rather provide substantive, understandable and realistic evidence to support promised performance.

5. NON-PRICE RATING

5.1. Non-price proposals will be evaluated against the minimum requirements for each non-price evaluation factor based on the ratings and descriptions in the following tables:

Factor One, Specialized Corporate Experience Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Rating Description

ACCEPTABLE Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

UNACCEPTABLE Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Factor Two, Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

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.

UNACCEPTABLE Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

5.2. 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 (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “ACCEPTABLE.”

5.3. In order to receive an overall ACCEPTABLE rating, a proposal must receive an ACCEPTABLE rating on all non-price factors and any subfactors. A proposal receiving an UNACCEPTABLE on one or more non-price factors or subfactors will receive an overall UNACCEPTABLE rating and be ineligible for award.

5.4. The final overall rating, along with ratings on individual factors, will be provided to the SSA and used in making the determination of which Offeror(s) is/are eligible for award.

6. PRICE EVALUATION PROCESS

6.1. Price will not be rated but will be evaluated as to its fair and reasonableness. Pricing for the contract shall be completed and submitted on the Pricing Schedule shown at Section 00 10 00 of the solicitation.

6.2. The Government will perform a price analysis on all technically acceptable proposals received for the contract. Price analysis will be performed in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, to determine fairness and reasonableness as well as to assure an understanding of the work and ability to execute the contract at price proposed. The evaluation will determine the extent to which the price proposal is consistent with the requirements of the RFP. Historical price information, competitive price information, the Independent Government Estimate (IGE), or any other pricing tool as necessary will be utilized in making this determination.

Offerors are advised that any offer wherein pricing is deemed unfair or unreasonable will be rendered ineligible for award.

6.3. The Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items or subline items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

7. BASIS FOR AWARD

7.1. Proposals must meet the criteria stated in the RFP in order to be eligible for award, to include responsiveness, responsibility, technical acceptability, and fair and reasonable pricing.

7.2. The Source Selection Authority, independently exercising prudent business judgment, will determine which Offeror, if any, will receive the contract award. Any such award will be made to that Offeror whose proposal is technically acceptable and has the lowest price that is determined fair and reasonable.

7.3. The Government reserves the right to reject any and all offers.

7.4. Offerors are reminded to include their best technical and price terms in their initial offer and not to assume that they will have an opportunity to participate in discussions or be asked to submit a revised offer.

8. DISCUSSIONS

8.1. In accordance with FAR 15.306(d), discussion sessions with each offeror may be held. Should discussions take place, all offerors in the competitive range will be given the opportunity to submit Final Proposal Revisions.

9. PROPOSAL TABS AND FORMS

9.1. The Proposal Tabs and required forms for each Volume of the Proposal are listed in the following table. As indicated, forms are included in the Tabs which immediately follow this section:

Volume I Forms Included?

Tab A – SF 1442 yes

Tab B – PROPOSAL SCHEDULE yes

Tab C – REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS no

Tab D – PROPOSAL DATA SHEET yes

Tab E – BID BOND no

Tab F – FINANCIAL INFORMATION no

TAB G – JOINT VENTURE/TEAMING AGREEMENT (as applicable) no

Volume II Tab H - FACTOR ONE: SPECIALIZED CORPORATE EXPERIENCE

Project Information Sheet yes

Tab I - FACTOR TWO: PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) yes

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.215-2 Audit and Records--Negotiation OCT 2010 52.222-99 Establishing a Minimum Wage for Contractors

(DEVIATION)

JUN 2014

52.223-17 Affirmative Procurement of EPA-Designated Items in Service and Construction Contracts

MAY 2008

252.236-7008 Contract Prices-Bidding Schedules DEC 1991

Section 00 22 16 - Supplementary Instructions to Proposers

TAB D - PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

Tab D – PROPOSAL DATA SHEET

NOTE TO OFFERORS

This OFFEROR PERFORMANCE CAPABILITY PROPOSAL DATA SHEET must be completed and attached as the first page of the body of your proposal. The information required by this data sheet may be completed directly on this form or attached to the form as supplemental data sheets.

1. NAME OFFFEROR.

Name of Offeror(s):

If a joint venture or contractor-subcontractor association of firms, list the individual firms and briefly describe the nature of the association.

Firm 1:

Firm 2:

Nature of Association:

2. DUNS NUMBER FOR OFFEROR

(If more than one DUNS number is to be considered, explain affiliation to Offeror)

3. CCASS INDENTIFICATION FOR OFFEROR

4. AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATORS. FAR 52.215-11

5. CAGE CODE:

6. Tax ID#

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:

TAB H - PROJECT INFO SHEET

Tab H –SPECIALIZED CORPORATE EXPERIENCE

PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET

1. On an attached sheet, provide information for substantially complete or completed projects that meet the specified number, value, recency, and relevancy criteria that have been constructed by the Offeror to be used for reference and evaluation purposes. For each project provide the following information:

Project Title:

Location:

Contract

Number:

Nature of involvement in this project (i.e. General Contractor, subcontractor, designer):

Procuring activity:

Procurement point of contact (name, telephone number, and email address):

Performance period (month/year start to month/year end and # of years complete if underway):

Original completion date:

Actual completion date:

Address of project:

Address and telephone number of owner:

Indicate type of project (private sector, Government, planned unit development, etc.):

General description of project (narrative):

How this project meets the Corporate Specialized Experienced criteria of this solicitation (narrative), including type of facility/electronic controls and PLC rehabilitated/replaced:

Cost/Price Data (must clearly indicate yearly price information):

Initial Award / Year 2 / Year 3/ etc.:

Modifications:

Total cost:

Problems encountered and corrective actions taken:

2. TERMINATED PROJECTS. On an attached sheet, list any projects within the last five years that have been terminated. Provide an explanation.

3. GOVERNMENT PROJECTS. On an attached sheet, list all contracts with the Government within the last five years. Indicate Government contract number and contracting agency (with contact names and telephone numbers).

TAB I - PAST PERFORMANCE

TAB I - Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0) CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

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

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

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

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

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

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

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to the solicitation? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

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

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

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO

THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS.

CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO USACE. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR USACE POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS

FORM.

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

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

(VG) Very Good Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

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

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

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

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal rating is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

(N) Not Applicable No information or did not apply to your contract Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

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 performance 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)

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

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?

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/…