A.2.11.3_Final_Solicitation_-_Naha_Port.pdf

FY18 PN 87597, DREDGE WHARVES B0001 - B0005, NAHA PORT, JAPAN

SECTION 00 10 00, Soliciation, Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Schedule SECTION 00 21 00, Instructions SECTION 00 22 00, Proposal Submission and Evaluation Criteria SECTION 00 45 00, Representations and Certif ications SECTION 00 70 00, Conditions of the Contract SECTION 00 73 00, Supplementary Conditions DIVISION 01, General Requirements

DRAWINGS

TEDRA N THOMPSON 046-252-0994

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

21-Nov-2017

(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 _______15 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________730 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________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 __________4 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________ (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 _______120 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

CONTRACTING DIVISION

USACE-JAPAN DISTRICT

RM 147, BLDG. 250

CAMP ZAMA

ZAMA-CITY, KANAGAWA 252-8511

JAPAN

W912HV

PAGE OF PAGES

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

(hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

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

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

FAX:TEL: 046-252-0994 TEL: FAX:

W912HV18R0001 1 OF 2

02:00pm

26 Jan 2018

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

FY17 NAHA PORT MILITARY DREDGING

NAHA PORT, JAPAN

00 10 00

SECTION 00 10 00

SOLICITATION, CONTRACT LINE ITEM NUMBER (CLIN) SCHEDULE

ITEM

NO.

DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT

PRICE

AMOUNT

BASE ITEMS

0001 PERMITS,

MOBILIZATION, AND

DEMOBILIZATION

1 JB

LS

0002 DREDGING WHARVES

1-3

98,100 CM

SUBTOTAL BASE ITEMS

OPTION ITEMS

0003 DREDGING AREA

WHARVES 4-5 TO

-7.9 METERS

13,400 CM

0004 DREDGING AREA

WHARVES 4-5 FROM

-7.9 METERS TO

-9.1 METERS

27,900 CM

0005 DREDGING AREA

WHARVES 4-5 FROM

-9.1 TO -10.4

METERS

42,700 CM

SUBTOTAL OPTIONAL ITEMS

TOTAL (BASE + OPTION ITEMS)

NOTES:

1. Failure of the offeror to propose prices for all items in the

Proposal Schedule may be cause for rejection of the proposal as unacceptable.

2. See Section 01 22 00.00 10, Subparagraph 1.2 for additional line item description.

3. Any reference to “bid”, bidder, or “bidding schedule” shall be construed to mean “offeror” and “proposal schedule”

4. LEGEND: LS = Lump Sum CM = Cubic Meter JB = Job

5. The Government reserves the right to exercise any of option items

0003, 0004 and 0005 at Contract award at the quantity and price stated in this CLIN schedule.

FY17 NAHA PORT MILITARY DREDGING

NAHA PORT, JAPAN

00 10 00

6. CLINs 0002, 0003, 0004, and 0005 are subject to adjustment in accordance with FAR clause 52.211-18, Variation in Estimated Quantity.

Section 00 21 00 – Page 1

1. DELIVERY OF BIDS/OFFERS (MAR 2014).

a. Each bidder/offeror is solely responsible for ensuring that their bid/offer is received by the Government as specified in the solicitation. Please read the following statements to ensure timely submittal of your bid/offer:

(1) Closely coordinate the delivery of your bid/offer in sufficient time before the bid opening date/proposal due date.

(2) Bids/offers will not be accepted at the main gate of Government facilities.

(3) Valid picture identification is required for entry into Government facilities.

b. For Japanese visitors, Residential Registration Card, Passport, or Japanese Driver's License are considered valid picture Identification. Those individuals using a newly issued Japanese driver’s license with an Identity Code (IC) chip as a form of identification will be required to enter an 8 digit Personal Identification Number (PIN) into an IC Chip Reader. Individuals are granted 3 attempts to input their PIN and will be denied access if they are unable to input the correct PIN. To obtain or reset the PIN code, individuals should go to their local Japanese police driver’s licensing center for assistance.

c. For non-Japanese visitors, Passport or Alien Registration Card are considered valid picture identification.

d. The Government will not escort or provide any base access to any door-to-door service company.

e. For bids/offers addressed to Camp Zama.

(1) The Japan Post has access to Camp Zama.

(2) If you decide to hand-carry your bid/offer to Camp Zama, please allow sufficient time to have a Government personnel meet your representative(s) at the Camp Zama main gate, sign your representative(s) in, and be escorted to our office. We suggest arriving at the gate to Camp Zama at least 30 minutes before the closing time for bid/offer acceptance.

2. SOLICITATIONS FOR LOCAL SOURCES ONLY. This contract will be performed in its entirety in the country of Japan and is intended only for local sources. (See Federal Acquisition Regulation 5.202(a)(12) and Paragraph titled, ”Offeror Eligibility”.) (JED APR 2006)

3. SUBMISSIONS OF OFFERS IN JAPANESE YEN. Offers submitted in response to this solicitation shall be in terms of Japanese Yen, including any required bid guarantee. Offers received in other than Japanese Yen shall be rejected.

4. MAGNITUDE OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT. The estimated price range of this work is between ¥2,500,000,000 and ¥10,000,000,000 [DFARS 236.204].

5. REQUEST FOR EXPLANATION OR INTEPRETATION. Request for explanation or interpretation of the solicitation, drawings, specifications, etc., must be submitted to the Government point of contact, Ms. Tedra N.

Thompson via email at Tedra.N.Thompson.civ@usace.army.mil by December 19, 2017 at 2:00pm, Japan Standard Time (JST).

6. BONDING THRESHOLDS (MAR 2015).

a. Under the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994, Public Law 103-355 (FASA), the Miller Act (40 U.S.C.

270a-270f) no longer applies to contracts that do not exceed the amount of $150,000. Therefore, the Government will not require the successful bidder to furnish a performance bond if it appears that award of a contract to the bidder will be in an amount of ¥17,250,000 or less.

mailto:Tedra.N.Thompson.civ@usace.army.mil

Section 00 21 00 – Page 2

b. The government requires a bid guarantee to accompany a bid when a performance bond will be required under the resulting contract. Therefore, under this solicitation, any bid that is in excess of ¥17,250,000 shall be accompanied by a bid guarantee, in the form and amount that is required by provision "52.228-1, BID GUARANTEE," and other pertinent provisions and clauses in this solicitation. Failure to submit a bid guarantee in such case may render the bid non-responsive to the solicitation.

c. A bid under this solicitation that does not exceed ¥17,250,000 shall not require a bid guarantee to be submitted with the bid. Absence of a bid guarantee in such case will not, in and of itself, render the bid non-responsive to the solicitation.

7. SAFETY STANDARDS. The successful offeror will be required to comply with the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) standards as well as the Corps of Engineers Manual 385-1-1, Safety and Health Requirements Manual.

8. PERFORMANCE OF WORK BY THE CONTRACTOR – DEFINED. For the purpose of Clause entitled, "PERFORMANCE OF WORK BY THE CONTRACTOR", of Special Contract Requirements, work on the site with the Contractor's own organization means physical activities at the site other than work performed by subcontractors, procurement of materials for installation by subcontractors, or providing equipment to be used solely by subcontractors.

9. PRORATED COSTS. All costs pertaining to the performance of work under the contract over and above the direct costs for the work shall be prorated to and included in the price quoted for each item in the Bidding Schedule.

10. SPECIAL TREATMENT OF PACKAGING OF EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL. Bidders are cautioned that equipment and material requiring ocean transportation may be subjected to inordinate dangers and special treatment or packaging may be necessary to assure arrival in a condition conforming to contract requirements.

11. SIGNATURE ON OFFERS. Offers must be signed by an officer of the company or an individual who is authorized to sign offers for and on behalf of the company. An individual, other than an officer of the company, who signs an offer must submit evidence of his authority to sign such offer. This evidence must accompany the offer.

Failure to comply with this requirement may be cause for rejection of the offer.

12. JOINT VENTURE. In the event the offeror is a joint venture, the offer must be signed by an authorized representative of each participant in the joint venture. Failure to comply with this requirement may be cause for rejection of the offer.

13. OFFEROR ELIGIBILITY. Only local sources will be considered under this solicitation. Local sources are sources (e.g. corporations, partnerships, or Joint Ventures [For a Joint Venture, the Joint Venture as an independent entity must satisfy the local source requirements or, in the alternative, each member of the Joint Venture must individually satisfy the local source requirements]) that are physically located in Japan and authorized (i.e. licensed and registered) to perform in Japan, the type of construction work specific in this solicitation. Specifically, a prospective offeror must be duly authorized to operate and conduct business in Japan and must fully comply with all laws, decrees, labor standards, and regulations of Japan during the performance of the resulting contracts. In addition, prior to award of the contracts, offerors must be registered with the Government of Japan to do construction work in Japan and possess necessary construction licenses and permits to perform work required under this solicitation. The U.S. Government will not offer “United States Official Contractor” status under Article XIV of the US-Japan Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) to U.S. contractors normally resident in the United States; nor will the U.S. Government certify employees of such contractors as “Members of the Civilian Component” under Article I(b) of the SOFA.

14. JAPANESE CONSUMPTION TAX (APR 2014). Effective April 1, 2014, the Government of Japan increased the rate of Japanese Consumption Tax from 5% to 8%. By virtue of Article XII of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), materials, supplies, equipment and services procured for official purposes in Japan by the United States armed forces, or its authorized procurement agencies are EXEMPT from various Japanese Taxes, including Consumption Tax.

The exemption from the Japanese Consumption Tax applies not only to Japanese prime contractors, but also to Japanese subcontractors or suppliers at every level regardless of the nationality of the prime contractor whether a Japanese or a Foreign firm. The instruments listed hereinafter have been agreed to by both governments of Japan and the U.S. as "Proof of Purchase by U.S. Forces in Japan.”

Section 00 21 00 – Page 3

Standard Form 1034 Public Voucher for Purchases and Services other than Personal

DD Form 1155 Order for Supplies or Services

Standard Form 44 Purchase Order-Invoice-Voucher

ENG Form 93 Payment Estimate

Therefore, Japanese Consumption Tax shall NOT be included in your bid, proposal or quote.

15. DEFINITION OF THE WORDS ITEM/ITEMS.

a. This solicitation contains a single schedule for award to a single bidder.

b. For the purpose of this solicitation, the words "ITEM" and "ITEMS" as used in provision(s) of this section shall be construed to mean "SCHEDULE" and "SCHEDULES", respectively.

16. BID GUARANTEES AND PERFORMANCE BONDS (NOV 2016).

a. ACCEPTABLE SURETIES. Notwithstanding the statement contained in paragraph (d) of the clause, FAR 52.228- 15, "Performance and Payment Bonds - Construction", concerning the acceptable corporate sureties appearing on the Treasury Department Circular 570, a corporate surety that has received official approval to execute bid bonds (Standard Form 24) and performance bonds (Standard Form 25) on United States Forces Japan construction projects from the Government of Japan will be considered an acceptable surety. Banks are not acceptable sureties; bid bonds and performance bonds executed by banks will be rejected.

b. Notwithstanding the statement contained in paragraph (b) of clause FAR 52.228-1, “Bid Guarantee”, the bid guarantee must be supported by good and sufficient surety or sureties acceptable to the Government.

c. Notwithstanding the statement contained in paragraph (d) of clause FAR 52.228-15, "Performance and Payment Bonds – Construction”, the performance bond must be supported by good and sufficient surety or sureties acceptable to the Government.

17. FUNDING. Funds are not presently available for this acquisition. No contract award will be made until appropriated funds are made available from which payment for contract purposes can be made.

18. METHOD OF PROCUREMENT. The US Army Corps of Engineers, Japan District, intends to solicit this requirement using the source selection procedures in accordance with the provisions set forth in this Request for Proposal (RFP). A Firm-Fixed Price construction contract will be awarded to the offeror whose proposal is deemed to represent the Best Value to the Government through the utilization of Trade-off source selection procedures. (See Section 00 22 00).

19. PRE-AWARD SURVEYS. The Government reserves the right to conduct a pre-award survey of any firm under consideration to confirm any part of the information furnished by the offeror, or to require other evidence of managerial, financial, technical, and other capabilities, the positive establishment of which is determined by the Government to be necessary for the successful performance of the contract.

20. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE.

a. Offerors are strongly urged and expected to attend and participate in the pre-proposal conference. The purpose of this conference is to promote uniform interpretation of the solicitation documents and work requirements and can include discussions of any problems with interpretations of the solicitation documents and work execution identified by potential offerors through written questions. In no event will a failure to attend the pre-proposal conference constitute grounds for a claim after award of the contract.

Section 00 21 00 – Page 4

b. Offerors are encouraged to ask questions at the conference. Any questions made at the conference may or may not be addressed at the conference, but will be addressed in the minutes of the conference.

c. This Pre-proposal Conference will be conducted on 12 December 2017 at Naha Military Port, immediately following the site visit (11:30am – 12:30pm JST).

NOTE: Due to security and access requirements at Naha Military Port, prospective offerors are required to send access information to Mr. Frank Cook via email at Frank.H.Cook.civ@usace.army.mil no later than 06 December 2017.

Information needed shall include: company name, name(s) of attendee(s), telephone number and vehicle license plate number. Attendees will be required to show valid photo identification to gain access to the installation. Please be advised, all vehicles are subject to vehicle search. Attendees are requested to arrive at Building T0110 (Seamen's Club) between 0930 and 1015 hours on the day of the pre-proposal conference to allow sufficient time for access processing.

mailto:Frank.H.Cook.civ@usace.army.mil

W912HV18R0001

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.204-7 System for Award Management OCT 2016 52.211-2 Availability of Specifications, Standards, and Data Item

Descriptions Listed in the Acquisition Streamlining and Standardization Information System (ASSIST)

APR 2014

52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition JAN 2017 52.217-4 Evaluation Of Options Exercised At The Time Of Contract

Award

JUN 1988

52.236-28 Preparation of Proposals--Construction OCT 1997 252.204-7004 Alt A System for Award Management Alternate A FEB 2014 252.204-7008 Compliance With Safeguarding Covered Defense Information

Controls

OCT 2016

252.215-7008 Only One Offer OCT 2013

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

The Government contemplates award of a Firm-Fixed Price (FFP), Construction contract resulting from this solicitation.

(End of provision)

52.228-1 BID GUARANTEE (SEP 1996)

(a) Failure to furnish a bid guarantee in the proper form and amount, by the time set for opening of bids, may be cause for rejection of the bid.

(b) The bidder shall furnish a bid guarantee in the form of a firm commitment, e.g., bid bond supported by good and sufficient surety or sureties acceptable to the Government, postal money order, certified check, cashier's check, irrevocable letter of credit, or, under Treasury Department regulations, certain bonds or notes of the United States.

The Contracting Officer will return bid guarantees, other than bid bonds, (1) to unsuccessful bidders as soon as practicable after the opening of bids, and (2) to the successful bidder upon execution of contractual documents and bonds (including any necessary coinsurance or reinsurance agreements), as required by the bid as accepted.-

(c) The amount of the bid guarantee shall be 20 percent of the bid price or ¥345,000,000, whichever is less.-

(d) If the successful bidder, upon acceptance of its bid by the Government within the period specified for acceptance, fails to execute all contractual documents or furnish executed bond(s) within 10 days after receipt of the forms by the bidder, the Contracting Officer may terminate the contract for default.-

(e) In the event the contract is terminated for default, the bidder is liable for any cost of acquiring the work that exceeds the amount of its bid, and the bid guarantee is available to offset the difference.

(End of provision)

52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST (SEP 2006)

(a) Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from Contracting Officer Contracting Division U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Japan District Camp Zama - Bldg 250, Room 147 Zama-shi, Kanagawa-ken 252-8511 Japan

(b) The copy of any protest shall be received in the office designated above within one day of filing a protest with the GAO.

(End of provision)

52.236-27 SITE VISIT (CONSTRUCTION) (FEB 1995) – ALTERNATE I (FEB 1995)

(a) The clauses at 52.236-2, Differing Site Conditions, and 52.236-3, Site Investigations and Conditions Affecting the Work, will be included in any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation. Accordingly, offerors or quoters are urged and expected to inspect the site where the work will be performed.

(b) An organized site visit has been scheduled for-- Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 10:30am, Japan Standard Time (JST).

Paricipants should contact Mr. Frank Cook via phone at 080-2160-7244 or via email at Frank.H.Cook.civ@usace.army.mil not later than (NLT) 12:00pm, JST on Wednesday, December 6, 2017.

(c) Participants will meet at-- Building T0110 at Naha Port See Naha Port Map included with this solicitation

(End of provision)

52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es):

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/

52.252-3 ALTERATIONS IN SOLICITATION (APR 1984)

Portions of this solicitation are altered as follows:

Subparagraph (c)(5) of FAR Clause 52.215-1 -- Instructions to Offerors -- Competitive Acquisition, is revised to read as follows, “Offerors shall submit proposals in response to this soliciation in English, unless otherwise permitted by the solicitation , and in Japanese Yen”.

Section 00 22 00 – Page 1

SECTION 00 22 00

SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

SUBMISSION AND EVALUATION CRITERIA

1.0 BASIS FOR AWARD

1.1 Contract award will be made on the best overall (i.e. best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the three evaluation factors: Experience, Past Performance and Price. The Contracting Officer will use a trade-off process to determine which offer represents the best value to the Government. This process allows the Contracting Officer to consider making award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for the Experience factor. Non-Priced Factors when combined, are approximately equal to the price factor. Within Non-Price Factors, Experience is significantly more important than Past Performance. Please keep in mind that award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offeror or the highest technically rated offeror.

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

This acquisition is being conducted using a design-bid-build procurement process.

2.1 Offerors shall strictly adhere to the requirements in this Section when preparing the proposal to be submitted in response to this Request for Proposal (RFP). All proposals shall be in English. The Government will not reimburse any offeror any cost incurred in response to this RFP. Proposals that fail to comply with the proposal submittal requirements addressed in this section of the solicitation may be deemed unacceptable. To assure 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 identified as evaluation factors. The Offeror shall submit in their proposal all requested information specified in this section of the Request for Proposal (RFP) solicitation at or before the exact time specified.

There will be no public opening of the proposals received as a result of this RFP. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Copies of the RFP are available by INTERNET ACCESS ONLY. All RFP documents will be posted to and made available for viewing in Federal Business Opportunities (http://www.fbo.gov). All amendments will be posted to and made available for viewing in FedBizOpps. It shall be the Offeror’s responsibility to check the website for any amendments. If this solicitation is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged. Offerors shall acknowledge http://www.fbo.gov/

Section 00 22 00 – Page 2 receipt of any amendment to this solicitation by the date and time specified in the Amendment(s).

2.2 The Government seeks award of one contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to all evaluation factors.

2.2.1 The Government will determine which offeror demonstrates the required competence for performing the work described herein and provides the offer deemed most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described in the solicitation. Offerors are advised the Government intends to make an award on the basis of initial proposals without conducting discussions with the offerors. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer determines it necessary.

2.2.2 The Government reserves the right to discuss aspects of proposals with Offerors in the competitive range, if one is determined to be necessary, upon completion of the evaluation.

Offerors are advised that the Government may make award without discussions, clarifications, or any contact concerning the proposals received. Therefore, proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable terms from a price and technical standpoint. Offerors shall not assume that they will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to clarify, discuss or revise their proposals.

2.3 Proposals received by the Government after the date and time set for receipt of proposals will be handled in accordance with the requirements of Provision “52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition”.

2.4 Offerors are required to provide information addressing all stated factors in a clear and understandable format. If an offeror does not have information relating to a specific factor, the offeror shall clearly state so in the proposal. Proposals that do not clearly address all factors may be considered unacceptable and may not receive further consideration.

3.0 PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBMISSION FORMAT

3.1 General Requirements: All proposals shall contain the evaluation requirements stated herein and every binder shall also meet all submission format requirements detailed herein. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet the requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities or experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror’s proposal.

Section 00 22 00 – Page 3

3.1.1 Proposals shall be submitted in two (2) separate envelopes as follows:

3.1.1.1 Volume I shall contain the Technical Proposal and shall be clearly marked Volume I – Technical Proposal. In addition, follow instructions in Paragraph (c)(1) of Section 00 21 00, 52.215-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION.

3.1.1.2 Volume II shall contain the Price Proposal and shall be clearly marked Volume II – Price Proposal. In addition, follow instructions in Paragraph (c)(1) of Section 00 21 00, 52.215-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMPETITIVE ACQUISITION.

3.1.2 Each volume shall be separate and complete in itself so that evaluation of one may be accomplished independently from evaluation of the other. It is recommended that the pages be standard letter size (8-1/2” x 11” or A4). If drawings or other graphics are submitted, Offerors should reduce them only to the extent that legibility is not lost. Font size 12 or larger is preferred.

Each page should be numbered. Any pages over the prescribed limit will not be considered for evaluation.

3.1.3 Revised Proposal. Revised proposals will not be accepted unless specifically requested by the Contracting Officer. If the Contracting Officer decides to conduct discussions and requests revised proposals from the offerors; offerors shall ensure that all replacement pages are clearly marked “REVISED”, shall show the date of revision, shall be submitted in the appropriate number of copies (e.g., if two copies of the original page was required, then two copies of the revised page will also be required). All proposal revisions shall be submitted as page replacements with revised text readily identifiable, e.g. bold face print or underlining.

4.0 SUBMISSION AND EVALUATION CRITERIA

VOLUME I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (1 Original and 4 Copies)

FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE

a. Submission Requirements: Using Attachment A - Project Information Sheet, provide a detailed narrative that explains how each project included in Factor 1 – Experience, is similar to the work described in the solicitation

1. The Technical Proposal shall be bound, tabbed and in the order as shown in the table below. The Technical Proposal shall not contain any reference to cost for this project. The total pages submitted for the Technical Proposal shall not exceed seventy (70) pages. Each page should be numbered. Any pages over the prescribed limit will not be considered for evaluation. Do not include the front and back cover of the technical proposal in the seventy (70)

Section 00 22 00 – Page 4 page count. Provide the original and four (4) hard copies of the Technical Proposal.

2. Provide the complete Volume I – Technical Proposal submittal, inclusive of text, renderings, drawings, photographs, etc. as PDF files and on CD (one copy). The CD should be marked with the offeror’s name, the solicitation number, and should be identified as the electronic copy of the Volume I - Technical Proposal. If the electronic files are of a size at which they must be compressed (zipped), they shall be compressed into one file using WinZip version 6.2 or later. Self extracting exe files will not be accepted. Electronic files shall be in their native format (i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc.), or if in pdf format, shall be in searchable text.

3. In the event of any conflicts or differences between the original sealed offer and any paper copy or electronic (PDF) copy of the proposal, the sealed original offer shall control. The offeror is responsible for ensuring that all copies of the proposal, whether a paper copy or an electronic copy, is consistent with the original sealed offer.

The submittals should be formatted as follows:

Volume I – Technical

Tab Documents to be Included

Cover Sheet. Follow instructions in Paragraph (c)(2) in Section 00 21 00, 52.215- 1, Instruction to Offerors—Competitive Acquisition

2 Attachment A - Project Information Sheet. Submit one information sheet per project. Submit at least one but not more than three projects.

3 Attachment B – USACE Past Performance Questionnaire. Submit one sheet for each project submitted under Factor 1 – Experience.

4. Additional Submittal Instructions

(a) Project Information Sheet (Attachment A) is included in this solicitation and provided for the offeror to submit for each project included for Factor 1, Experience. Submit one information sheet per project. Submit at least one (1) but not more than three (3) projects.

Factor 1, Experience, sets forth project relevancy requirements

Section 00 22 00 – Page 5

(b) USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment B) included in this solicitation is provided for the offeror to submit information for Factor 2, Past Performance. See Factor 2 for more information.

b. Evaluation Criteria: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s experience on recent and relevant projects.

This Factor evaluates the offeror’s dredging experience. The Government will evaluate the dredging experience an offeror displays, as the prime contractor, on relevant dredging projects. For purposes of evaluation of this Factor, relevant projects are projects that were:

(a) Dredging projects that were:

i. Completed by using one (1) or more dredging vessel(s) for the excavation of underwater sediment and/or activities associated with clearing, widening, or deepening a waterway;

ii. Required at least 10,000 cubic meters of material to be dredged;

iii. Completed, or at least 30% progress completed, within ten (10) years from the date of the advertisement of this project;

iv. A dredging project performed within regulated ports or regulated waterways in Japan;

v. Required treatment and disposal of dredged material;

vi. Projects with a contract value of at least ¥200,000,000.

Note: Projects not meeting all the relevancy criteria listed above will be considered not relevant for this factor evaluation.

Note: If a Joint Venture is identified in Block 14 of the SF 1442, then a signed joint venture agreement must be submitted with the proposal and the joint venture shall be registered as such in the System for Award Management (SAM) before the due date for proposals to this solicitation.

(a) The offeror may demonstrate prime contractor experience through one or more principal members to the joint venture.

Section 00 22 00 – Page 6

(b) Projects performed by contractors other than the offeror (such as teaming partners) will not be evaluated as dredging experience by a prime contractor unless those other contractors are part of a joint venture for this solicitation as demonstrated by a signed joint venture agreement.

(c) Prior experience of a joint venture, other than the same joint venture entity that is identified as the offeror in Block 14 of the SF1442 for this solicitation, is not considered relevant when evaluating the experience of the offeror as a prime contractor.

(d) The Government will also consider prime contractor experience of the offeror's parent/subsidiary/affiliate firm as experience attributable to the offeror for evaluation purposes if the offeror can establish that the parent/subsidiary/affiliate firm will have a significant involvement in performance of this contract and describe the resources of the parent/subsidiary/affiliate firm that will be utilized on project that is the subject of this procurement.

If submitting a parent/subsidiary/affiliate firm’s project for experience, it is the offeror's responsibility to effectively demonstrate and describe how the parent/subsidiary/affiliate firm's resources (such as workforce, management, facilities, or other resources) will significantly contribute to the execution of the project which is the subject of this procurement; failure to effectively demonstrate and describe the planned contribution of the parent/subsidiary/affiliate firm’s involvement in the subject project of this procurement will cause the past experience of the parent/subsidiary/affiliate firms to be considered not relevant for evaluation purposes in this procurement. Further, any project in which the parent/subsidiary/affiliate firm performed the role of a subcontractor will not be considered relevant when evaluating the experience of the offeror.

The Government will evaluate the dredging experience an offeror displays, as the prime contractor, on relevant projects, to include:

(a) Dredging experience on projects with similar scope to this solicitation (i.e.

cubic meters dredged, safety considerations, environmental considerations, and local coordination);

Offerors demonstrating dredging experience for more than one (1) relevant dredging project may be considered more advantageous.

(b) Experience in Okinawa; dredging projects completed, or at least 30% completed, in Okinawa may be considered more advantageous than projects completed elsewhere in Japan.

Section 00 22 00 – Page 7

(c) Experience with performing projects for the Government of Japan (GoJ) and/or U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) may be considered more advantageous than projects completed commercially elsewhere in Japan.

(d) Experience with treatment and disposal of dredged materials similar to the requirements in this solicitation may be considered more advantageous.

(e) Experience with ports or waterways that are heavily used and require coordination with passing vessels and associated maritime safety procedures may be considered more advantageous.

(f) Experience with projects with a contract magnitude between ¥2,500,000,000 and ¥10,000,000,000 may be considered more advantageous.

The following evaluation ratings and definitions will be used to evaluate the non-price factors other than past performance. Past performance will be evaluated according to Factor 2 – Past Performance.

The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in the below chart.

FACTOR 1. EXPERIENCE – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Adjectival Rating Definition

Blue

Outstanding

Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Purple

Good

Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Section 00 22 00 – Page 8

Green

Acceptable

Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow

Marginal

Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red

Unacceptable

Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and thus, contains one or more deficiencies and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

EVALUATION DEFINITIONS

1. Best Value. The expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement. See FAR 2.101.

2. Clarifications. Limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. See FAR 15.306(a)(1).

3. Communications. Exchanges between the Government and offerors, after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of competitive range. See FAR 15.306(b).

4. Deficiency. A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

5. Discussions. Exchanges (i.e. negotiations) in a competitive environment that are undertaken with the intent of allowing the offeror to revise its proposal. Discussion take place after

Section 00 22 00 – Page 9 establishment of the competitive range. See FAR 15.306(d).

6. Relevancy. As it pertains to past performance information, it is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance.

7. Risk. As it pertains to source selection, the potential for unsuccessful contract performance.

The consideration of risk assess the degree to which an offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor may involve risk or disruption of schedule or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

8. Strength. An aspect of an offerors’ proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract

9. Significant Strength. A strength that appreciably enhances the merit of a proposal or appreciably increases the probability of successful contract performance.

10. Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

11. Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciable increases the risk of an unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

12. Uncertainty. Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission or mistake).

13. Communications. Communications are exchanges between the Government and offerors after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range. FAR 15.306(b).

14. Discussions are negotiations conducted in a competitive acquisition that are undertaken with the intent of allowing the offeror to revise its proposal.

15. Tradeoff is a process used in competitive negotiated contracting when it may be in the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror. This process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and

Section 00 22 00 – Page 10 non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal. See

FAR 15.101-1.

FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

a. Submission Requirements: Each offeror’s past performance will be reviewed to determine relevancy and confidence assessment.

1. The Government will evaluate the relative merits of each Offeror’s past performance on the same relevant projects submitted and evaluated under Factor 1 – Experience. Please keep in mind that “Past Experience” measures “what you have done” while “Past Performance” measures “how well you have done it.” A completed Past Performance Questionnaire 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 (Attachment B), 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 contacts listed below via email prior to proposal closing date and time.

Tedra N. Thompson, E-mail: Tedra.N.Thompson.civ@usace.army.mil Sean P. Sackett, E-mail: Sean.P.Sackett2@usace.army.mil and Sean.P.Sackett@usace.army.mil

2. 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.

3. The offeror may include performance recognition documents received for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1, such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

b. Evaluation Criteria: The past performance evaluation is an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation determines how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. The evaluation also assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an offeror’s ability to supply products and services that meet the user’s needs, based on a demonstrated record of performance. See FAR 15.305.

1. Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth.

mailto:Tedra.N.Thompson.civ@usace.army.mil mailto:Sean.P.Sackett2@usace.army.mil mailto:Sean.P.Sackett@usace.army.mil

Section 00 22 00 – Page 11

2. The Government will focus its inquiries on the offeror’s record of performance as it relates to all solicitation requirements, including cost, schedule, performance.

A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of the work can become an important consideration in the evaluation process.

Therefore, offerors will be reminded to include the most recent and relevant efforts in their proposal. Absent any recent and relevant past performance history or when the performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will be assigned an “unknown (neutral) confidence rating.” Offerors who are able to demonstrate a “substantial confidence” or “satisfactory confidence” rating may be perceived as offering a greater value to the government than an offeror with an “unknown (neutral) confidence rating in a best-value tradeoff, as a measure of the likelihood that their past performance is an indicator of future performance. The Government may use data provided by the offeror in its proposal and data obtained from other sources, including data in Government files or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor and their current and past performance under Federal, State, or local Government or commercial contracts for same or similar services as compared to this project.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition

Very Relevant

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

Relevant involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant involved some of the scope and

Not Relevant involved little or none of the scope and

Section 00 22 00 – Page 12

RELEVANCY: The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to assess the offerors past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort (within 10 years of the date of advertisement of this solicitation) accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. Relevancy is not separately rated; however, the following criteria will be used to establish what is relevant which shall include similarity of scope, complexity, dollar value, and contract type.

QUALITY ASSESSMENT: The offeror’s performance on prior projects for recent and relevant projects will be assessed for quality. Documented results from Past Performance Questionnaires, interviews, CPARS, and other sources form the support and basis for this assessment.

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT: The final step is for the team to arrive at a single consensus performance confidence assessment for the offeror, selecting the most appropriate rating from the chart below. This rating considers the assessed quality of the relevant efforts gathered.

Performance Confidence Assessments

Rating Definition

Substantial Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence

No recent/relevant performance…