W912P822R0006 Am 03.pdf

ED 21-019

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

Subject Solicitation: W912P822R0006 Atchafalaya River Levees, St. Mary Levee District, Charenton Floodgate, Replacement, St. Mary Parish, Louisiana (ED 21-019)

The date of the Phase I Proposal Submission date has changed.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 8

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 19-Mar-2022

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 W912P822R0006

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

14-Jan-2022

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer 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

19-Mar-2022

CODE

USACE, CONTRACTING DIVISION

ATTN: CEMVN-CT, ROOM 172

7400 LEAKE AVE.

NEW ORLEANS LA 70118-3651

W912P8 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912P822R0006

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0003

SECTION 00010 – SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The Volume I Proposal Submission date has changed from 22 March 2022 to 29 March 2022.

SECTION 00130 PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. Page 6, paragraph 1.7.1, the first paragraph on this page. Delete this paragraph in its entirety and substitute the following therefore:

“Offerors will be evaluated on the quality of similar work performed within the last TEN (10) YEARS using the evidence provided by the Offeror and other sources. Offerors shall submit at least FOUR (4) but no more than SIX (6) past projects for this factor. Of the SIX (6) past projects, no more than TWO (2) past projects can be utilized for subcontractor past performance. Offerors are cautioned to take extreme care in selecting projects for review that are both relevant and accurately reflect the Offeror’s past performance capabilities. Please note that if the Offeror chooses to provide more than SIX (6) projects, the Government will evaluate only the first SIX (6) projects submitted under this evaluation factor. Any additional projects submitted beyond the SIX (6) allowed will NOT be evaluated. Offerors submitting more than SIX (6) projects risk the Government selecting the first SIX (6) projects which may or may not be the Offeror’s most relevant past performance projects in response to this evaluation factor. Each project will be rated individually as well as collectively. The success of work performed on similar requirements as a prime or significant subcontractor will be evaluated.”

2. Page 7, paragraph 1.7.1. In the 4th line from the top of this page, change “Rachel.A.Woods@usace.army.mil” to ”Dorothy.J.Pitre@usace.army.mil”.

3. Page 8. Near the bottom of the page, change the heading “NON-COST FACTORS 2, 3, 4 AND 5 SHALL BE RATED AS FOLLOWS:” to “NON-COST FACTORS 2, 3, AND 4 SHALL BE RATED AS FOLLOWS:”

4. Page 11, paragraph 1.7.3, subparagraph 2.j. Delete this subparagraph in its entirety and substitute the following therefore:

“j. A sufficient number of additional qualified personnel to ensure safety and contract compliance

Offerors shall provide resumes that include each individual’s years of experience in proposed position, and experience in project of same/similar scope, complexity, magnitude, and schedule. Resumes shall identify the qualifications and experience of key personnel, project managers, superintendents, safety and quality control managers, contemplated subcontractors, and staff identification for participation projects under this contract. Safety and Health manager, Project Superintendent, and CQC System Manager shall be separate individuals with an alternate. “

BIDDER QUESTIONS AND GOVERNMENT RESPONSES

1. What is the timeline for releasing the amendment for bidders to submit their price after Volume I has been submitted?

Response: Volume II Amendment will be released beginning to mid-April 2022.

2. Can FAR 52.216-4 Economic Price Adjustment – Labor & Material be added to this contract?

Response: This FAR clause will not be included for this project.

3. Is there a pre-bid site visit planned?

Response: Please contact Mr. John Page at (504) 390-5869 to schedule a site visit between 21 – 24 March 2022.

4. Can subcontractors’ (i.e. fabricators or other major specialized subcontractor) experience be used in the Past

Performance and would they count against the 6 projects submitted overall? The sector gate fabrication and delivery will be a major component of this and as such the fabricator should be evaluated closely.

Response: See revision to SECTION 00130 in this Amendment.

5. For the key personnel listed on Page 00130-11, Note 2, can multiple positions be satisfied by a single individual? There are also many more individuals listed as required key personnel on Page 00130-11 than we can find in the Specifications.

6. Specification 01 45 04.00 10, Paragraph 3.4.2 appears to contradict itself with regards to the duties allowed to the CQC System Manager. Can the Government confirm that the CQC System Manager may have duties as project superintendent along with quality control? With the numerous other quality control-focused positions on this contract, we feel this is reasonable and the superintendent would have sufficient time to perform both duties.

a. The Org Chart included in the Sample QC Plan appears to show that this can be one individual.

Response: A CQC Manager can have no other duties, including superintendent duties.

7. OSHA 30-Hour certificates do not expire, and thus are not retaken. Can the requirement for the SSHO to have taken this in the past 3 years per Specification 01100 Paragraph 3(O) be removed?

Response: The safety officer must have 8 hours of formal safety training every year for the OSHA 30-hour training to remain valid.

8. Is an organized site visit scheduled?

Response: See response to Question #3.

9. Is there a timeframe on the 100% bid documents being available?

Response: See response to Question #1.

10. General Note 1(a) states to construct a temporary sand dam to Elev. -4.0 (NAVD88) on top of the Existing

Sector Gate Structure, which per sheet REF-001 appears to have an elevation of -10.80 ft. It would seem that this is for dewatering the protected-side of the structure. This elevation would be overtopped by the water as shown on Sheet B-204 on either hydrograph. Is Elev. -4.0 (NAVD88) the correct, and if so what is the dewatering means on this side?

Response: This was a typo in the elevation, it should be El. +4 (NAVD88). This will be revised in the Volume II Amendment.

11. General Note 1(b) on Sheet S-002 state that the dewatering of the TRS is restricted to when the River Side

Water Elevation is at +2.5 (NAVD88) or Below. Which Hydrograph on Sheet B-204 does this correlate to, the one labeled ‘Charenton Flood Gate Canal Hydrograph(64400)’ or ‘Grand Lake at Charenton Flood Gate Hydrograph(03550)’?

Response: This note will be changed to read “PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF STABILITY BERM, DEWATERING OF THE GULF SIDE OF THE TRS IS RESTRICTED TO WHEN THE RIVERSIDE

WATER ELEVATION IS AT +2.5(NAVD88) OR BELOW” in Volume II Amendment. The riverside elevations are represented by the Grand Lake hydrograph so that should be used.

12. The key positions listed on Page 00130-11, Notes 2 a & d appear to be the same individual. Can you confirm this is the case?

13. For the temporary access bridge to the borrow area shown on Sheet R-105, will piling be allowed to be driven through the levee? What is the load limit on the levee?

Response: The toe of the levee is at the gulf side edge of the existing haul road. Piles must be driven a minimum of 10 feet beyond the levee toe and must be cut off 3-ft below the ground surface upon removal of the bridge. The load limit on the levee is 72,000 lbs.

14. Is there an expected start date or NTP?

Response: NTP is anticipated within 3 weeks of contract award.

15. Will the omitted quantities on the bid form be provided at a later date for the pricing Volume II submission?

Response: Quantities will be provided Amendment to incorporate the 100% Plans and Specifications.

16. Is the bid bond required with the Volume I submittal if pricing is not to be submitted?

Response: A bid bond will not be required for Volume I Proposal Submission.

17. If design drawings are not 100% complete how can estimated dollar values of subcontracts for Factor 4 be derived? Subcontractors are unwilling to price drawings that will change when the 100%/IFC design drawings are released.

Response: Volume II will be initiated via Amendment and will incorporate the 100 % Plans and Specifications.

Sufficient time will be provided for Offerors to develop their bid.

18. In Factor 1, the USACE allows past performance dating back to 10 years from the date of the solicitation. Will more recent projects be weighed more favorably than projects that were performed dating back to 10 years ago?

Response: Refer to page 00130-8 “Evaluation and Rating Guidelines” for Factor 1.

19. When does the USACE expect the 100% drawings to be released?

Response: See response to Question #1.

20. Can you please clarify what exactly is getting demolished?

Response: Will be clarified In the Volume II Amendment. The existing granular surfacing and selected pile clusters (dolphins on C-200) will be demolished. At this time the existing structure is to remain as is.

21. To maximize competition, would the Corps please consider extending the performance period to "within the last

TWELVE (12) YEARS" since the majority of floodgate projects completed in Southeastern Louisiana for USACE had a project milestone of June 1, 2011, to meet USACE's Hundred Year Level Attained (HYLA) milestone?

Response: Only the last 10 years will be considered.

22. 00130-7. The RFP requests that PPQs be submitted for each of the projects provided in FACTOR 1. If a CPAR exists, may that be submitted instead of a PPQ?

Response: Yes.

23. 00130-11. The list of resumes in Paragraph 2 includes (1) a Contractor Quality Control Manager, (2) an alternate, and (3) Contractor Quality Control System Manager. Please verify that you would like the offeror to include resumes for all THREE positions.

24. 00130-16. RFP states that, “Drawings requested under Factor 2, Technical Approach” are excluded from the page limitation. What are the requested drawings?

Response: Any drawings the offeror believes are necessary to adequately address their technical approach.

25. What date should be used for past performance compliance with projects dating back to 10 years ago? Should the contractor use the Final CPARS evaluation date from the USACE or work accepted date by the USACE?

Response: The 10 year past performance period for project that are ongoing or completed 10 years prior to the date of the solicitation.

26. Please confirm that stoppages to the critical path due to water levels will result in time added to the contract.

Based on the hydrographs we have found, it appears that these delays are not accounted for in the table titled

“MONTHLY ANTICIPATED ADVERSE WEATHER DELAY WORK DAYS BASED ON (5) DAY WORK

WEEK” on Page 01100-1 of the Specifications.

Response: Refer to SECTION 01100, paragraph entitled “HIGH RIVER WORK RESTRICTIONS”.

27. Can the Government provide the location on a map of where each gage is for the hydrographs included in the plans? We will provide coordinates for gages in Volume I amendment.

Response: Gages can be found on Rivergages.com. Coordinates for the gage will be included in Volume II Amendment.

28. Can the Government provide the hydrograph for the Atchafalaya River at Morgan City?

Response: Gages can be found on Rivergages.com. Coordinates for the gage will be included in Volume II Amendment.

29. Can a correlation of the Morgan City gage to either of the other gages shown in the plans be provided?

Response: Correlation of the gages will not be provided. In the Volume II Amendment notes will be added to the gage drawings describing what each gage is to be used for. The Morgan City gage is provided for use in SECTION 1100 paragraphs entitled “EMERGENCY GAP CLOSURE PLAN” and “HIGH RIVER WORK

RESTRICTIONS”. The other gages are provided for the Contractor’s use in designing their TRS and for general knowledge of conditions at the jobsite.

30. Can electronic signatures be used on bid documents?

Response: Yes

31. What pile driving capacity should be assumed for the bid? We cannot find where this has been provided, and it is critical to understand because this will dictate the size of the pile hammer, which will dictate the crane size, and thus ground improvements required which should be addressed in the technical approach.

Response: It is the responsibility of the contractor to determine drivability based upon pile type and subsurface information provided in the P&S. With this information, the contractor may input a proposed hammer into a software such as GRLWEAP to determine drivability.

32. Is this an open solicitation or small business set aside project?

Response: This requirement is being solicited under a full and open competition.

33. Can the government provide a quantity breakdown at this time, or will this be only available in Phase 2?

Response: Quantities will be provided at Volume II Amendment.

34. Will the contractor be responsible for any permitting for the borrow pits?

Response: The Contractor will not have to obtain any permitting to use the Government furnished borrow site.

35. On Sheet M-300 there are two callouts pointing to MK-103-3. Which is correct, and what is the other part?

Response: This will be clarified in the Volume II Amendment. The callouts have been revised and are now on M-101.

36. Which gage(s) does the note on Sheet B-204 regarding converting the gage elevation to NAVD88 by subtracting 0.72’ apply to?

Response: The note applies to both gages. This will be clarified in the Volume II Amendment. Also, the gage information can be found at Rivergages.com.

37. What is the limiting factor associated with Note 1(b) on Sheet S-002, which restricts dewatering of the TRS to when the river-side water elevation is at +2.5 (NAVD88) or below?

Response: See response to question 11.

38. Will the contractor have the option to reevaluate and/or redesign the TRS for higher elevations?

Response: Yes, Contractor can design/construct the TRS to a higher elevation at their cost.

39. Plans Sheet S-500 for H-piles and Section 31 62 18.01 12 Paragraph 3.1.9 for pipe piles state that pile splices shall only be allowed in the middle 1/3 overall length of piles. There are some H-piles that could exceed 180’ in length, and as such this requirement is not practical. There is also a chance that piles are over-driven and splices need to be added toward the tops of the piles. Can this requirement be waived?

Response: Contractor shall submit a splice plan for approval. However, no splices will be allowed in the bottom 20-feet or the top 30-40 feet of the pile.

40. In lieu of the requirement stated in Specification 05 59 20 Paragraph 2.1.8 for the gate field erection to be performed by an AISC Certified Erector, can the awarded contractor instead be approved to do so by providing a statement of qualifications showing the capabilities to erect the gate?

Response: This paragraph will be revised in the Volume II Amendment and the requirement for the AISC certified erector shall be removed.

41. Can the requirement listed under ‘Installation Drawings’ on Page 7 of Specifications Section 35 20 16.39 12, which states that all equipment shall be barge-mounted, be waived if the contractor analyses the structure(s) used to support the equipment?

Response: This paragraph will be revised in the Volume II Amendment and the requirement that equipment shall be barge mounted shall be removed. The last 2 lines of the paragraph will be replaced with: “All placement of heavy equipment shall require prior approval from the Contracting Officer. Contractor shall submit calculations to justify placement of such equipment as requested by the Contracting Officer.”

42. Under Installation Drawings on page 7 of specification section 35 20 16.39 12 what equipment does the statement “The greatest load imposed by such equipment shall be less than two thousand (2,000) pounds total and the equipment shall have suitable approved grillages to distribute the load.” refer to?

Response: See response to question 11.

43. The drawings of the gate and the amount of field welding indicate that the gates will come in truckable sections and be assembled on-site. Can the requirement to deliver by barge listed under ‘Delivery Drawings’ on Page 6 of Specifications Section 35 20 16.39 12 be removed?

Response: This paragraph will be revised in the Volume II Amendment and the requirement to be delivered by barge will be removed.

a. Specification 35 20 16.39 12 paragraph 3.2 states “Sector gate leaf sub-parts and appurtenant items shall be assembled in the shop, and the entire sector gate shall be fully assembled in the field.” Please confirm that is the intent.

Response: Yes, this is the intent.

44. Will USACE allow a Construction Manager to serve as the Environmental Engineer with the same years of required experience?

Response: See revision to SECTION 00130 in this Amendment.

45. Factor 1 QUESTION: Will the USACE please confirm that the "past projects" for Factor 1 include experience from both the Prime Contractor and Contemplated Subcontractors as long as a Letter of Commitment (Factor 4) is included as well as the corresponding Safety Data required in Factor 1 are also included?

Response: See revision to SECTION 00130 in this Amendment.

46. Has an access channel from the Atchafalaya River to the Charenton Flood Gate been permitted? If so, what is the maximum depth, width and alignment permitted?

Response: No, it has not been permitted.

47. On electrical drawing E-100, notes 1 & 2 state coordinate work with CLECO and pay all fees. At this time

CLECO does not have a cost proposal for this work. Please quantify the dollar amount the contractor needs to put in their proposal for this feature of work.

Response: The electrical fees will be clarified in the Volume II Amendment.

48. Sheet SC-113 shows details of the needle girders. The fenders in two views are called out as composite, and in one view as timber. Which is correct?

Response: The Fenders are to be composite. The drawings will be corrected in the Volume II Amendment.

49. Is the site navigable by water and barge access?

Response: No, access shall be by land. Any references to barge requirements will be removed in the Volume II Amendment.

SECTION 00010 - SOLICITATION CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 22-Mar-2022 11:00 AM to 29-Mar-2022 11:00 AM.

(End of Summary of Changes)