A.07.24_AMD_0002_8R2002_Semmes.pdf

FT JACKSON RESIDENT OFFICE

2567 ESSAYONS WAY, BUILDING 2567

FORT JACKSON SC 29207

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

Solicitation W912HP18R2002, Semmes Lake Dam Rebuild, is hereby amended to revise Specs and Draw ings. In addition, proposal due date has been extended until Thursday, 1 February 2018 at 2:00pm EST. See Continuation Page on the next page for further information.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 16

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 22-Jan-2018

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 W912HP18R2002

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

20-Dec-2017

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 X is extended, is not extended.

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

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

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

22-Jan-2018

CODE

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, CHARLESTON

69-A HAGOOD AVENUE

CHARLESTON SC 29403

W912HP 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE W912HP

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912HP18R2002

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE (SF 30)

The following have been added by full text:

AMD 0002

A . TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CHANGES:

(1) Section 00 21 00 – Instructions, Paragraph 2.4.3

The subject paragraph has been revised. Review changes further below annotated in tracked changes.

(2) The revised Sections listed below (revised and added by Amendment No. 0002) are hereby added to and made a part of the solicitation. Revised or added information is underlined and deleted information is struck out. Revisions can be located in by searching for an asterisk and amendment number (i.e., *2).

Revised Sections

01 11 00 35 01 70.38

B. CONTRACT DRAWINGS:

The following is a list of amended drawings:

CE105, CE106, CE206, CG105, CG106, CG207, CP103, CP502, CS104, CS105, CS106, CS301, CS302, CS303, CS305, CS310, CS311, CS312, CS313, CS501, CS502, CS503, CS504, S104, S111, S112, S301

The following have been deleted:

AMD 0001

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 25-Jan-2018 10:00 AM to 01-Feb-2018 02:00 PM.

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION CRITERIA

A. INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICE TO OFFERORS

1.0 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS OVERVIEW

1.1. 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.

1.2. 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. Each of the factors 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.

1.3. 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: The requirement will be advertised as Small Business Set-Aside; any legally organized Small Business firm eligible to receive an award under applicable laws and regulations may submit a proposal.

2.2. Notwithstanding the specific requirements of any other area of the RFP, information submitted about any company other than the Offeror, whether a predecessor company, affiliated company, subsidiary (including wholly owned subsidiaries), or subcontractors WILL NOT be evaluated for any factor.

2.3 Contractor Team Arrangements.

2.3.1 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. For reference and evaluation purposes the Offeror shall identify who will perform the major or critical aspects of the project.

2.3.2 Joint Venture Team Agreement. The team agreement will be submitted with the proposal and it 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.

2.3.3 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. Reference UAI 5152.236-9001 Personnel, Subcontractors and Outside Associates or Consultants.

2.4 Proposal Submission Requirements.

2.4.1 Submission Deadline: Proposals must be received by the Charleston District no later than the time and date specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442.

2.4.2 Submission Instructions: The offeror shall submit electronic files as delineated below. Facsimile, hand carried and USPS/UPS/Fedex delivery is not authorized.

File Electronic File Name

Electronic Submission Requirements Format

Cover Letter 00CovLtr Limit 1 page (Reference FAR 52.215- 1(c)(2), Information to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition.)

pdf

Factor 1: Specialized Corporate Experience

01CorpExp Information shall be submitted on the Descriptive Summary Sheet (Blocks 1-5) at Attachment 2. Limit 2 pages per project (One Summary Sheet page and one optional continuation page).

pdf

Factor 2: Past Performance

02PastPerf Performance Evaluations

- USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Submit both Attachment 2 & 3 as provided to the client) -Terminated Projects List (See Attachment 4) -Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters received, if any -(no page limit) pdf

Teaming Agreement 03TeamAgree Joint Venture and/or Teaming Agreement, if applicable. (no page limit). See paragraph 2.3.

Proposal Data Sheet 04DataSht See format in Section Attachment 1. A DUNS number shall be provided for each company identified in any proposed teaming arrangement. If JV, a DUNS shall be provided for the JV.

pdf

Additional Submissions

05SF1442 Completed and signed by an official(s) with the authority to contractually bind the company IAW FAR 4.102. Acknowledge all Amendments in Block 19.

pdf

06Price See Section 00 10 00. Prices must be inserted on all CLINs pdf

07BidBond See FAR Clause 52.228-1. Shall be fully executed by the surety and original must be mailed (See Para 2.4.8)

08RepsCerts See paragraph 2.4.9 pdf 09Financials Statements must include three years’ worth of Balance Sheets and Income Statements.

See paragraph 2.4.10 pdf

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).

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.

2.4.3 Format: Proposals shall be in a narrative format. The submission shall be typed, neatly organized, clearly indexed, logically assembled, and written in the English language. All pages shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and RFP number in the header and/or footer. A Table of Contents should be provided. Printing should be single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are required. A standard, 11-point minimum font size applies. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscape. Headers and footers may use a reduced font size no less than 10-point. MS Word (doc) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

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

Clearly identify the “original” cost/price proposal and the “original” technical proposal on the cover. Any information that is changed (as a result of negotiations or proposal revisions) shall be indicated as follows: cover shall be marked “Revision Dated: MM/DD/YYYYIn the event revised proposals are requested, changes shall be annotated as follows:,” pages shall be of a different color, all text additions/deletions shall be clearly indicated using tracked changes., and sections changed shall be marked by a vertical line in the right margin of the page. The revised pages documents shall be marked renamed by adding “Revision Dated: MM/DD/YYYY.” at the end of the electronic file name. You may only submit the documents that changed.

NOTE: 11X17 formatted pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations ONLY.

2.4.4 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).

2.4.5 Electronic Files. Electronic files shall be provided in a pdf format and 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.

2.4.6 All documents must be received by the closing date and time set for receipt of proposals. No dollar amounts from the Price file are to be included in the other files or documents.

2.4.7 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.

2.4.8 BID BONDS: See Clause 52.228-1. The Offeror is required to submit a bid bond.

Photocopied or electronically scanned bid bonds are not acceptable and may lead to the rejection of the proposal as non-responsive. The Bid Bonds must be fully executed and a hard copy original mailed to Ms. Amy Rivers (CESAC-CT), USACE, Charleston District, 69A Hagood Avenue, Charleston SC 29403.

2.4.9 REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS - FAR Clause 52.204-8, “ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS (DEC 2014)”: 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. NOTE: As an alternative to above, each offeror may submit a copy of their current online Representations and Certifications, also referred to as an Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) to comply with the requirements of this TAB.

2.4.10 FINANCIAL INFORMATION: In accordance with FAR Part 9.1, responsibility will be determined, prior to award, by the Contracting Officer through the performance of a pre-award survey. To facilitate this survey, each Offeror shall submit the most recent three consecutive years’ worth of financial statements. The statements must include a Balance Sheet and Income Statement. Include the names of banks and other financial institutions with which business is conducted (mailing addresses, Point of Contact and phone number). Please ensure the Bank is prepared to provide necessary information regarding average balances in your operating accounts, lines of credit and credit history. If the financial statements are more than 60 days old, attach a certificate stating that the financial condition is substantially the same, or if not the same, describe the changes which have taken place since the financial statements were prepared. Provide evidence of adequate financing arrangements, such as commitments from lending institutions, etc., to perform this contract. This information will be treated confidentially but may be verified. For a newly formed JV, each JV member must submit financial statements and information. (Proposals including proprietary or trade secret information shall be marked consistent with FAR 52.215-1(e).

B. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION CRITER

3.0 Non-Price Factors

3.1 FACTOR ONE: SPECIALIZED CORPORATE EXPERIENCE

3.1.1 Submission Requirements:

3.1.1.1 Using the Descriptive Summary Sheet (Blocks 1-5) (Attachment 2), the Offeror shall demonstrate experience on projects meeting the requirements described in paragraphs below. If the Offeror is a joint venture, the projects do not have to have been performed by the joint venture submitting the offer. These projects could have been performed by the joint venture or by either company in the joint venture. Offerors are advised to submit projects wherein the Offeror, or proposed joint venture members, played a significant role and to clearly define those roles. Ensure that the Descriptive Summary Sheet (Blocks 1-5) and continuation sheet, if used, submitted for this Factor clearly describe the relevant characteristics of the project.

3.1.1.2 The Project Description shall clearly describe the projects and its features. The Government will not assume any project characteristics that are not specifically identified and described. The Offeror may attach a continuation sheet to the Descriptive Summary Sheet if needed consisting of one (1) page to describe how the project contains the elements described below and meets the requirements of this factor. The submission must contain sufficient information for the government to determine whether the project meets the requirements in paragraph 3.1.1.5 below and its subparagraphs.

3.1.1.3 The Offeror must provide a Point of Contact for the Client. If the Government is unable to verify the information provided on the Descriptive Summary Sheet with the client Point of Contact, or by other sources available (e.g. CPARS), the Government reserves the right to disregard that project when evaluating the Offeror’s experience.

3.1.1.4 The projects submitted for consideration in Factor 1 shall be the same projects submitted for evaluation in Factor 2.

3.1.1.5 Offerors shall submit two (2) examples on which it was either the prime or a major subcontractor for each criteria listed in subparagraphs below. It is not necessary that all criteria be performed under the same project. The contractor shall submit a minimum of two (2), but not more than eight (8) projects that have been completed within the last ten (10) years preceding the date that proposals are due for this solicitation

3.1.1.5.1 New construction of concrete hydraulic control structures (i.e. water control structure such as pump station, spillway, outlet works, or culvert with water control gates) with a minimum 10 foot hydraulic head differential maintained across the structure to include reinforced concrete, hydraulic steel structures (gates) with a minimum opening of 49 10 square feet and controls.

3.1.1.5.2 New construction of permanent earthen dam or new (non-modified) permanent levee embankments (water retaining structure) at least 15 feet in height, as measured from the toe of the constructed embankment to the embankment crest.

3.1.1.5.3 Installation of an earthen dike, driven pile, or combination of both cofferdam system, with a minimum 10 foot head differential, maintained across the structure, from the head water to the tail water (or dewatered water level), immediately adjacent to or within a labeled body of water.

3.1.1.5.4 Installation, operation and maintenance of a dewatering system, with the minimum head differential of 10 feet maintained during dewatering operations, immediately adjacent to or within a labeled body of water. The dewatering systems must include pre-drainage, defined as dewatering prior to excavation (Examples deep wells, well point systems and/or ejectors

3.1.1.6 The Government will only evaluate the Offeror’s first eight (8) projects. Any additional projects over eight (8) will not be evaluated. Offerors are cautioned that the Descriptive Summary Sheet must contain sufficient information for the government to determine whether the project contains the elements of work similar in scope to this requirement.

3.1.1.7 In order to be given an acceptable rating, the offer must meet all the minimum requirements specified in paragraph 3.1.1.5.

3.1.1.8 An IDIQ (Umbrella / D) contract will not be considered. The Government must be able to evaluate an actual project.

3.1.1.9 For recognized contractor team arrangements, at least one of the team members must meet the minimum criteria referenced 3.1.1.5 and the other team member must demonstrate at least one of the criteria in subparagraphs 3.1.1.5.1 through 3.1.1.5.4.

3.1.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

3.1.2.1 The Government will review each of the projects provided by the Offeror to assess whether they meet the specified minimum criteria for this factor. Offerors providing at least the minimum criteria will be rated ACCEPTABLE for this factor. Offerors failing to provide at least the minimum criteria will be rated UNACCEPTABLE for this factor. In order to help the Government determine whether the offeror meets the minimum requirements, the burden is on the offeror to clearly explain dollar values and experiences related to placement and instrumentation of mass structural concrete, fabrication of hydraulic steel structures (steel water control gates), operating head differential (headwater minus tailwater), the types of cofferdams systems and head differentials used, types of dewatering systems used and the geology in how it was installed. Offerors should not assume that there will be any additional opportunity to substantiate that their projects meet the criteria for Specialized Corporate Experience.

3.2 FACTOR TWO – PAST PERFORMANCE

3.2.1 Submission Requirements:

3.2.1.1 The Offeror shall demonstrate a record of performance on each project submitted for Factor 1. The information submitted through the Descriptive Summary Sheet (Attachment 2) and the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment 3) as a whole will be evaluated for this factor. Attachments 2 and 3 are provided for the Offeror to submit to the client (Point of Contact) for each project the Offeror included in Factor 1. Alternatively, the Offeror can submit completed PPQs previously filled out and signed by the Client as long as the Government is able to determine the project(s) are the same that were submitted in Factor 1. If the Government is unable to determine that the project(s) are the same as in Factor 1, then the

PPQ will not be considered. Offeror must ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client Point of Contact. If the Government is unable to verify the information provided on the PPQs with the client Point of Contact, or by other sources available (e.g. CPARS), the Government reserves the right to disregard that project when evaluating the Offeror’s past performance and experience. Similarly, it is important for the PPQs to be signed by the client Point of Contact. If PPQs are not signed by the client, the Government reserves the right to disregard the past performance ratings for that particular project. The Government will accept general/prime contractors as clients in the event the offeror was a major subcontractor. Completed PPQs must be submitted with your proposal by the specified closing date and time. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a point of contact for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror shall complete blocks 1–5 of the Descriptive Cover Sheet (Attachment 2) which will contain contract and client information and submit it with the proposal for this Factor. At the client’s request, the Government may allow the client to directly submit the completed PPQ via email to the Contracting Specialist and/or Contracting Officer. PPQ’s received after the due date will not be considered. The Government may call and confirm information provided by the Offeror on the PPQs with the points of contact, to the extent necessary to verify the information in the PPQ or to obtain additional information. The Government reserves the right to interview other individuals if the point of contact is not available.

3.2.1.2 Project Information submitted in a format other than or in lieu of the PPQ at Attachment 2 & 3) (to include CCASS or CPARS) will not be considered. 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. However, Offerors can submit CCASS or CPARS in addition to the PPQ form on the relevant projects submitted by the Offeror under this factor. In addition, the Government may consider available past performance information on projects not submitted by Offerors’ in response to this solicitation.

3.2.1.3 An IDIQ (Umbrella / D) contract will not be considered. The Government must be able to evaluate an actual project. The Government will not consider multiple projects, such as individual task orders, combined to meet the minimum contract value. Do not submit a group of related jobs as one project unless all of the work was done under the same contract or subcontract.

3.2.1.4 Terminated Projects. Using the form located in Attachment 4, list any projects within the last five years that have been terminated. Provide an explanation. If none, so indicate. Attach to the form any Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters received, if any.

3.2.1.5 If the offeror is employing a recognized team arrangement, then Past Performance Information must be completed for each team member submitting one or more projects (performed individually or as part of the same team).

3.2.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

3.2.2.1 The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the probability that the Offeror will perform the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each Offeror’s demonstrated record of performance on recent and relevant projects that involve a similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as this solicitation requires. The projects submitted for Factor 1 will be evaluated to assess the Government’s confidence in the ability of the Offeror to perform the solicitation requirements. Past Performance will be rated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis. See FAR 15.305. Past Performance evaluation will not take into account the past performance information r egarding predecessor companies.

3.2.2.2 The Government will review the Past Performance Questionnaire provided by each Offeror. The Government may contact the references indicated on each PPQ to validate the information provided by the Offeror and to obtain any other additional information as may be necessary to conduct a meaningful evaluation of an Offeror’s past performance record. If the Government is not provided past performance questionnaires and/or is unable to contact an indicated client, such shall be fully documented in the board’s report of findings under “Other Comments.” Client interviews, if conducted, will be recorded and provided as part of the contract files.

3.2.2.3 The Government may contact sources other than those provided by the Offeror for information. These other sources may include, but are not restricted to, PPIRS (Past Performance Information Retrieval System, CPARS (Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System) and Government personnel with personal knowledge of the Offeror’s performance capability. Additional interviews with Government personnel will be documented.

3.2.2.4 Offerors will be provided an opportunity to address any negative past performance information about which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond to if such information has any bearing or impact on the assessment of the Offeror’s proposal. Interviews will be recorded in writing on a worksheet. At the conclusion of the interview, the interviewer should read a summary of the information collected to the person interviewed. A summary of the interview should also be transmitted to the person interviewed to assure the summary is accurate.

3.2.2.5 If there are any negative ratings (i.e. marginal, unacceptable, unsatisfactory, or would NOT recommend) in any elements provided for projects submitted under Factor One – Specialized Corporate Experience the proposal shall be rated Unacceptable. The Government reserves the right to determine an Offeror’s past performance to be Unacceptable if negative past performance information or terminations for default on relevant projects performed by the Offeror but not submitted in response to this solicitation is discovered.

3.2.2.6 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. Less than satisfactory performance by a member of a contractor team shall result in an Unacceptable rating for this factor.

3.2.2.7 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.”

3.2.2.8 Past Performance – Past performance is evaluated to determine how well the contractor performed on recent and relevant contracts. The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection gathers information from customers on how well the Offeror performed those contracts. The SST will review the past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to the past performance evaluation rating. In conducting each Offeror’s past performance assessment, each Offeror shall be assigned one of the past performance evaluation ratings in paragraph A.5.1, Table A- 2.

4.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION PROCESS

4.1 SSEB members will independently review the technical proposals. Proposal pricing will not be revealed to the SSEB. The SSA will select all, or a minimum of the three (3) lowest-priced, proposals for technical review by the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB).If none of the selected proposals are technically acceptable in all factors, then the SSA will select the next lowest-price proposal or proposals for technical review, and so on. Proposals not selected for technical review because of pricing will not be further reviewed. Any debriefing of offerors whose proposals were not selected for technical review will reflect this approach and will not receive a technical review merely for the purpose of debriefing. 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 determi ne the proposals to be included in the competitive range consistent with FAR 15.306(c).

4.2 Technical 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:

4.3 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.

4.4 Each member of the SSEB will independently evaluate all information provided in a 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.

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

4.6. 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.

5.0 TECHNICAL RATING

5.1 Proposals selected for technical review will be evaluated against the minimum requirements for each non-price evaluation factor based on the ratings and descriptions in the following tables:

Table A-1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Rating Description

ACCEPTABLE Proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

Table A-2. Past Performance Evaluation 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. (See note above)

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.

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

5.3 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.

6.0 PRICE EVALUATION.

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 of the solicitation.

6.2 The Government will perform a price analysis on all 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 proposed price. 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 unaccepta ble 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.

7.0 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.

A responsibility determination will be made in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR) 9.1.

7.2 Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-price factors. In order for a proposal to be considered awardable, there must be an “acceptable” rating in all non-price factors. The Government will make award to the lowest priced Offeror who is deemed responsive and responsible and whose price has been determined fair and reasonable.

7.3 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.

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

7.5 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.

SOW

Semmes Lake Dam Rebuild

The full Scope of Work is outlined in the Specifications entitled, “A.01.38 Dam Reconstruction Semmes Lake Dam SPECS 18 Dec 17.pdf” and “A.01.38 Dam Reconstruction Semmes Lake Dam PLANS 18 Dec 17” which both documents are included as separate attachments and incorporated into the solicitation/contract by reference.

(End of Summary of Changes)