W912HY26RA005_MOC_PreProposalConference_Slides_18 Sept 2025FINAL.pdf

Mouth of Colorado River (MOCR) Maintenance Dredging & Sargent Beach Beneficial Use Breakwaters, Groin and Beach Placement Solicitation No. W912HY26RA005

Pre-Proposal Conference

18 September 2025

Meet the USACE Team

Seth Jones Operations Project

Manager Galveston District

Garin Elwell Project Engineer

Jeremy S. Babb Chief, A/E & Construction

Contracting Branch Procurement Contracting Officer

Danelle Tate Contracting Specialist

MOCR Overview (1 of 6)

• Magnitude: $25M - $100M

• NAICS Code: 237990

• Small Business Size Standard is

$37M

• PSC Code:Z1KB

• Location: East Matagorda Bay shoreline in Matagorda County, Texas.

MOCR Overview (2 of 6) Scope of Work: Restore the full MOCR navigation channel depth and remove material from the MOCR sediment impoundment basin.

• The requirement is to dredge approximately 870,000 cubic yards

(CY) of sandy material from the MOCR Entrance and Jetty Channels and the Sediment Impoundment Basin.

• Schedule: completion of Schedule 1 work within 490 calendar days from NTP. Completion of Schedule 1 plus all Options within 570 calendar days from Notice To Proceed

MOCR Overview (3 of 6)

• Construct a rock groin and five breakwaters at Sargent Beach, Matagorda County for beneficial use placement of dredged material removed from the MOCR channel and impoundment basin.

The breakwaters will provide containment for the dredged material and to keep the sand at Sargent Beach which will help reduce the high shoreline erosion rates.

• Customers (Partners/Funding): Funding under the Federal Authorization for the MOCR (USACE) & Texas General Land Office (TxGLO)

MOCR Overview (4 of 6)

• Figure 1 (following slide). FY2026 Mouth of Colorado Entrance Jetty Channel and Detention Basin Dredging Project Locations

MOCR Overview (5 of 6)

• Figure 2 (following slide). The Mouth of Colorado River Entrance Jetty Channel and Sediment Impoundment Basin Dredging portion of the Colorado River Channel Tributary

MOCR Overview (6 of 6)

• Figure 3. Sargent Beach, Matagorda County, Texas

MOCR Technical Requirement Details to Address in Proposal Submission (1 of 2)

• Section 00 10 00

• Schedule 1 – construction of a groin, 4 breakwaters and dredging of MOCR and

MOCR impoundment basin.

• Key Options

• Option 1 - beneficial use beach placement at Sargent Beach Breakwaters

• Option 2 - beneficial use beach placement at Sargent Beach Historic Stretch

• Option 3 - One additional breakwater at Sargent Beach

• Costs for Beach Placement Options 1 and 2

• Schedule 1 covers cost of dredging and placement at MOCR West Beach

Placement Area

• Options 1 and 2 costs are for the difference in costs for placement at the Sargent

Beach areas in lieu of Schedule 1 placement at West Beach PA

• Example Option 1 – Schedule 1 CY dredging cost is $1 / CY for placing sections 1-

4 at MOCR West Beach. If total cost for placing material at Sargent Beach Breakwaters is $6 / CY then the difference in cost entered under Option 1 would be $5 / CY.

MOCR Technical Requirement Details to Address in Proposal Submission (2 of 2)

• Units vs quantities

• All price units must align with the CLIN schedule as mentioned in the solicitation Section 00 10 00

• Examples – Job; Actual Tons (not Metric Tons); Square Yards

• READ TECHNICAL FACTORS REQUIREMENTS CAREFULLY

See Attachment 003 (Appendix D PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

REQUIREMENTS, EVALUATION CRITERIA, AND BASIS FOR AWARD)

Proposal Evaluation and Award Details Overview

• Solicitation No: W912HY26RA005

• Proposals Due By: 10:00 AM Central Time on 07 October 2025

• Contract Type: Firm-Fixed Price (FFP)

• Advertisement Method: Request for Proposal (RFP)/Solicitation

• Basis for Award: Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA)

Source Selection Evaluation IAW FAR 15.101 & as stated in the evaluation criteria in Section 00 21 16.

Technical Factors:

• Factor 1 - Technical Approach (TA):

TA Subfactor 1 – Prime Contractor Team TA Subfactor 2 - Plant & Equipment TA Subfactor 3 – Schedule

• Factor 2 – Relevant Experience

• Factor 3 – Past Performance

NOTE:

It is “highly encouraged” to review Attach 003, Section 00 21 16 for details on submittals and how each Technical Factor (and Subfactor) are evaluated.

Technical Factors:

• Technical Factors (including Subfactors) are rated individually as either

“Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” per the referenced evaluation criteria for each Factor outlined in Section 00 21 16.

NOTE:

If any Technical Factor (or Subfactor) is evaluated as “Unacceptable”, then the Proposal will not be eligible for Award even if they are the apparent lowest priced offeror.

Price Factor:

Lowest Price (determined Fair & Reasonable per FAR 15.404-1)

Proposal Evaluation Process Proposal Evaluation Process:

• All proposals submitted in the Procurement Integrated Enterprise

Environment (PIEE) Solicitation Module timely by 10:00 AM Central Time on 07 October 2025 (see Section 00 21 00) will be reviewed for completeness of proposal submission requirements to determine if it is a “valid” proposal for evaluation.

• The Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will review each valid proposal’s Technical Volume rate it against the Technical Evaluation Factors (and Subfactors) (see Attach 003 Section 00 21 16) to determine if the proposal is rated as “Acceptable.”

Proposal Evaluation Process Proposal Evaluation Process (Cont.d):

• After all proposals have been evaluated against the Technical Evaluation Factors, all “Acceptable” rated proposals will have the Price Volumes reviewed. The apparent lowest priced proposal that is considered “Acceptable” for all Technical Evaluation Factors will be reviewed against the Price Factor to determine if the proposed price can be determined “Fair and Reasonable” IAW FAR 15.404-1.

• If the apparent lowest priced proposal is determined “Fair and Reasonable”, then an award will be recommended.

• If the apparent lowest priced proposal is NOT determined “Fair and Reasonable”, than the next lowest priced proposal considered “Acceptable” will be reviewed for “Fair and Reasonableness”, until a proposal has met this Price Factor.

Solicitation Evaluation and Award Details Overview

• Weight of Evaluation Factors: The following documents the relative weight of factors in the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) evaluation of this requirement. For Technical Factors, Factor 1 Technical Approach is weighted the same as Factor 2 Relevant Experience and Factor 3 Past Performance. Within Technical Factor 1, all sub-factors (Prime Contractor Team, Plant & Equipment, and Schedule) are all weighted equally the same as one another. All Technical Factors are weighted less individually and together than Price as a Factor.

This means that although Technical Factors must be rated as “Acceptable” to be considered for award, Price as a Factor still outweighs Technical and the lowest priced proposal that is determined “Acceptable” will be recommended for award.

Key Milestones

Milestone Schedule:

10/07/25 - Proposals Due NLT 10:00 AM Central Time, submit via PIEE Solicitation Module 10/21/25 - SSEB Consensus Complete 11/10/25 - Internal Award Reviews Complete 11/12/25 - Congressional Notification Submitted 11/17/25 - Projected Award

Please Submit Them in ProjNet Bidder Inquiry System.

Thank You for Joining Us Today!

Any Questions?