W912Pl-16-R-_0020__Am_2.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICAITON NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicble)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICIATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.

Offers 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 your 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 APPROPIRATION DATA (If required)

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

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

CHECK ONE 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.

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.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

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

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

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

0002 2Aug16

USACE, Los Angeles District ATTN: Contracting Division East Region Branch 915 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 930 Los Angeles, CA 90017

W912PL-16-R-0020

21Jul16

Replace Hydrant Fuels System, Nellis AFB, NV

The purpose of this amendment is to revise the following:

1. Add Section 00 73 46 Wage Rates

2. Remove and Replace Sections 00 22 00 and 00 22 16 entirely.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

Replace Hydrant Fuel System Nellis Air Force Base, NV

W912PL-16-R-0020

SECTION 00 22 00 - 1

AMENDMENT 0002

SECTION 00 22 00

SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

I. GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENT

II. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

III. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PRICE PROPOSAL

IV. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

V. PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

ATTACHMENTS:

1. PERFORMANCE ASSESSEMENT REPORT (PAR)

2. SAMPLE COVER LETTER

3. NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ-0)

4. EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS – CONTSRUCTION KEY PERSONNEL (Résumé)

5. EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS – DESIGN TEAM KEY PERSONNEL (Résumé)

SECTION 00 22 00 - 2

SECTION 00 22 00

SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS

1.1 GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

1.1.1 In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all offers, the Contracting Officer must receive sufficiently detailed information that clearly responds to the technical evaluation factors listed in Section 00 22 16.

1.1.2 Offerors shall submit their proposal packages in accordance with the instructions outlined in Section 00 21 16 Instruction to Proposers.

1.1.3 Each Offeror must submit their responses to the technical evaluation factors in a Technical Proposal (Original Plus 3 hard copies and one searchable PDF electronic copy) and Price Proposal (Original only). The Technical Proposal and Price Proposal must be submitted as separate distinct volumes. Both the Technical Proposal (Volume II) and a Price Proposal (Volume I) must be received by the closing date and time set for receipt of proposals.

1.1.4 All information intended by the Offeror to be evaluated must be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal. No dollar amounts or pricing information from the Price Proposal are to be included in the responses to the technical evaluation factors.

1.2 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS:

1.2.1 All written portions: Use only 8 ½ by 11 inch paper, unless another size is specifically authorized elsewhere in this section for a particular submission. Do not use 11” X 14” or 11” X 17” size sheets (e.g. fold-outs) unless specifically authorized in this section for a particular submission. Do not use a font size smaller than 10, an unusual font style such as script, or condensed print.

1.2.2 Three-ring binders are preferred. Do not use spring clamps or exceed the recommended capacity of the fastener or binder. Do not use plastic multi-hole/spiral binding systems, heat binding systems, or other systems which do not facilitate the ready insertion of additional pages.

1.2.3 “Confidential” projects cannot be submitted to demonstrate capability unless all of the information required for evaluation as specified herein can nonetheless be provided to the Government as part of the Offeror’s Technical Proposal. Offerors that include in their proposals information that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, must be clearly marked in accordance with the instructions at FAR 52.215-1, “Instructions to Offeror—Competitive Acquisition”, paragraph (3), “Restriction on disclosure and use of data”.

1.2.4 The Corps of Engineers recognizes that submittals by the Offeror may contain confidential or proprietary information; however, the Government reserves the right to make inquiries into the information disclosed. The submission of false or misleading information may be grounds for disqualification of the proposal.

1.2.5 Offeror(s) shall submit their proposal packages to the Los Angeles District Corps of Engineers (COE) in accordance with Section 00 21 16.

1.3 SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PRICE PROPOSAL (VOLUME I):

1.3.1 Number of Sets of the Price Proposal: Submit One (1) original only.

SECTION 00 22 00 - 3

1.3.2 Format and Contents of the Price Proposal/List of Tabs:

1.3.2.1 The Price Proposal shall be appropriately labeled as such and shall be organized as indicated in the following chart.

TAB CONTENTS OF THE PRICE PROPOSAL

TAB #1 SF 1442, “Solicitation, Offer and Award”

TAB #2 The Completed Pricing Schedule Section 00 10 00

TAB #3 Reps & Certs See Section 00 45 00

TAB #4 A Bid Guarantee (e.g., Standard Form 24, “Bid Bond”)

1.4 SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL (VOLUME II):

1.4.1 Number of Sets and Pages of the Technical Proposal: Submit original and three (3) additional sets of the written Technical Proposal, with each set separately packaged. In addition, submit one complete copy of the technical proposal on Compact Disk (CD) using a searchable “.pdf” file format. The Technical Proposals shall be in 8-1/2" x 11" format, bound as a single document, with single-sided or double-sided pages being acceptable. Condensed print is not permitted. The Proposals shall be separated with section tabs, and the tabs shall clearly identify the contents of each section. The Maximum number of pages for the Technical Proposal is thirty (30) pages single sided or fifteen (15) pages double sided. Any drawings submitted, resumes up to 4 pages single sided and the Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) will not be included in the above page count. Tables of contents, cover sheets, and section tab sheets will also not count against the page count. Each page shall be sequentially numbered for that section.

1.4.2 Format and Contents of the Technical Proposal/List of Tabs: The original and all copies of the technical proposal will be appropriately labeled as such. Each set shall be organized using the tabs specified in the chart below. The tabs directly correlate to the evaluation factors identified in Section 00 22 16.

TAB CONTENTS OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

TAB #1 EXPERIENCE ON SIMILAR CONTRACTS

TAB #2 PAST PERFORMANCE

TAB #3

OFFEROR’S SUBCONTRACTOR’S QUALIFICATIONS AND

CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE

TAB #4

KEY PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION

EXPERIENCE

TAB #5 SCHEDULE

1.4.3 Detailed Submission Requirements for the Technical Proposal: Submit detailed responses to the evaluation factors under each of the tabs as follows:

SECTION 00 22 00 - 4

1.4.4 TAB 1 FACTOR #1 EXPERIENCE ON SIMILAR CONTRACTS

1.4.4.1 This factor will evaluate the offeror for its experience in successful completion of design/bid/build projects of similar scope, magnitude and complexity completed in the USA within the past eight years. Projects completed over eight years ago may be submitted to demonstrate ability, but they will carry little weight in the evaluation and will not be used to meet the standard for acceptability.

1.4.4.2 Evaluation Factor: For this factor, the offeror should submit three (3) examples of construction projects which best illustrate the experience of the construction contractor on projects of similar function, scope, complexity, and dollar value as the requirements for this solicitation. Each project summary should consist of a maximum two page narrative of the example project, discussing the project and providing specifics as noted herein. No more than three (3) projects may be submitted. If more than three (3) projects are submitted, only the first three (3) listed in the proposal will be evaluated. Each project cited must have a construction dollar value greater than $20 million and have been completed in the USA within eight (8) years from the date that the proposal for this solicitation is due. Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts, where numerous Task Orders are summed to meet the minimum construction dollar value identified herein, are not acceptable. Only those projects for which the offeror was the prime contractor or was a Subcontractor with a large percentage (50% or more) of the fuel related work shall be submitted. All projects submitted must have been completed by the office that will be performing the work. The summaries should include project types that are similar to the REPLACE Hydrant Fuel System at Nellis AFB, Nevada. Similar project types are:

1.4.4.3 Type III hydrant fuel systems with associated airfield pavement construction on a completed airfield runway and successful start-up of a military or civilian Hydrant Fueling System with features such as pump houses, hydrant control pits, and aboveground fuel storage tanks with fixed roof and floating pans.

1.4.4.4 The government requires that project examples submitted be of completed projects (i.e.

construction complete). Projects still under construction will not be evaluated.

1.4.4.5 Each project summary must include the following for each project: a description/scope;

picture/photo; firms on the proposed team that performed this project, construction contract award amount; final construction cost; location; date when the project was started; original contract finish date and actual finish date. Narratives of each project must include a brief overview of each project and its relevance to this solicitation. All summaries should contain the name, address, telephone, FAX number and e-mail address of a representative of the owner (as well as one alternate individual not affiliated with your firm) familiar with your firm’s experience on the project that can verify the experience cited.

1.4.4.6 Standard for Acceptability: Evaluation will be based on the project summaries provided in the offeror’s proposal. To be rated acceptable, at least two of the project examples submitted must be similar in function, scope, complexity, and dollar value to this solicitation and clearly demonstrate the offeror’s abilities to execute the projects successfully while maintaining cost and schedule. Characteristics such as size, complexity, dollar value, the number and types of trades employed may be indicative of similarity. Projects that do not meet the similarity criterion identified above will be rated unacceptable for this factor.

1.4.4.7 Projects that appear to have been performed by a Contractor’s office other than the regional office that will be performing the work will not be rated. Projects that are less than 75% complete will be not be rated. Projects cited which indicate the offeror was not the prime contractor or a subcontractor with more than 50% or more of the fuel related work will not count as one of the two required projects. Omission of requested information may result in an

SECTION 00 22 00 - 5

unacceptable rating.

1.4.5 FACTOR #2 PAST PERFORMANCE

1.4.5.1 This factor will evaluate each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in completion of those projects identified in Tab #1. The past performance is an indicator of the likelihood of the successful completion of the project by the offeror.

1.4.5.2 Project examples (Past Performance). Submit information on the recent and relevant contracts identified in Factor #1, demonstrating your capability to perform the proposed effort in accordance with the RFP. Past performance information shall be submitted for both the construction contractor and the design firm. The information submitted shall be in accordance with the following instructions:

a. Identify all contracts, including DoD, Federal, State, local government and private/commercial for efforts similar to the Government requirement in scope, function and complexity which were completed in the USA within the past eight years. Past performance on DoD contracts will be evaluated more favorably than on State, local, and private/ commercial contracts. Offeror(s) are encouraged to provide information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to this solicitation. Important Note: See paragraph 5 below regarding required consent for release of subcontractor past performance information. For each project, submit the information in the formats provided at the end of this Section:

1. Furnish a Performance Assessment Report for each referenced contract as an attachment to the past performance information submitted for each referenced project. If an official written performance evaluation/assessment was not received, so indicate. A past performance questionnaire must be sent to the reference if a written performance evaluation/rating is not included in the proposal as an attachment to the performance assessment report. The Offeror(s) is also encouraged to submit any letters of appreciation or similar correspondence that the Contractor received from the Owner/Customer at the time of contract performance/completion. However, the Offeror(s) is neither required nor requested to have the Owner/Customer write such a letter for the purpose of this solicitation. The format for the Performance Assessment Report has been provided at the end of Section 00 22 00 titled: Performance Assessment Report.

2. The Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Complete Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contact 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 point of contract, Ms. Christina Chavez via email at christina.chavez@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. Also include performance recognition documents received within the last ten (10) years such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

The Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) will not be included in the page mailto:christina.chavez@usace.army.mil

SECTION 00 22 00 - 6

count. Formats for the Sample Cover Letter and Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) has been provided at the end of Section 00 01 10 titled: Sample Cover Letter and NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ).

3. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may be include, but are not limited to, CCASS, ACASS, past performance information retrieved through the Past performance Information retrieval System (PPIRS), included Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting Systems (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS number of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owners representatives(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

4. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

5. “Confidential” projects cannot be submitted unless all of the information required for evaluation purposes as specified herein can nonetheless be provided to the Government as part of the Offeror(s) technical proposal. Offeror(s) that include in their proposals information that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, must be clearly marked in accordance with the instructions at FAR 52.215-1, “Instructions to Offeror(s)—Competitive Acquisition”, paragraph (e), “Restriction on disclosure and use of data”.

6. Release of Subcontractor Past Performance information. Past performance information pertaining to a proposed subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the Offeror(s) by the Government without the proposed subcontractor’s consent.

Therefore, if subcontractor past performance information is being utilized by the Offeror(s), the Offeror(s) must also submit as part of its technical proposal the subcontractor’s consent to release of its past performance information by the Government to the Offeror(s). If there is a problem with the proposed subcontractor’s past performance, the prospective prime contractor can be notified, but no details can be discussed without the proposed subcontractor’s permission.

7. In the case of an Offeror without a documented record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Offeror’s submitted information will be given a “neutral” rating, and will not be evaluated.

1.4.5.3 Standard for Acceptability: This standard is met when the offeror can demonstrate an overall satisfactory performance rating for each recent, relevant project within the last 8 years.

The offeror shall not have received any overall “Unsatisfactory” CCASS performance ratings in hydrant fuel projects over the last 8 years.

1.4.6 TAB 3 FACTOR #3 OFFEROR’S SUBCONTRACTOR’S QUALIFICATIONS AND

CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE

1.4.6.1 In this portion of the tab, provide the name of the proposed subcontractors, if any, for the categories listed below, along with a brief two page maximum resume for each company. Also, identify subcontractors’ current key personnel (including their roles) involvement with the projects by name, or identify if the work is to be self-performed (and list projects referenced, in Factor 1 that were previously self-performed).

SECTION 00 22 00 - 7

1.4.6.2 Evaluation Factor: The proposal should only contain the name and resume for one subcontractor for each trade subcontractor listed below. If more than one subcontractor will be used for the trade subcontractor listed below, a second subcontractor for the trade subcontractor listed below may be added if a statement explaining why the second sub-contractor is included.

Resumes should consist of a brief narrative of the company, presentation of relevant experience by the sub-contractor on similar projects (relevant experience is defined in Paragraph 8.1.1 above), and any other information pertinent to this project. In addition, indicate the CCASS or DUNS number of the subcontractor on the resume. CCASS Ratings will be pulled (by the government), if available, for the subcontractors and evaluated.

1.4.6.3 For project experiences sited with each subcontractor, indicate whether the identified subcontractor performed their designated duties or roles for the entire project contract or if they were replaced during the course of the project contract and the owner or Contracting Officer was notified about the replacement. If they were replaced, indicate whether they were replaced with subcontractors acceptable to the owner or Contracting Officer.

a. Mechanical [Hydrant Fuels/Pump House]. The Contractor will be required to show that they have successful experience in construction of fuel hydrant piping (including pits) and piping associated with multiple pumps in a fuel pump house.

b. Electrical [Class I, Division I Fuels Experience]. The contractor will be required to show that they have experience in completing Class I, Division I wiring around fueling systems.

c. Steel Fabricator/Erector (Fuel Tank). Steel Fabricator/Erector (Fuel Tank) will be required to show that they have successful experience in construction of 5,000 barrel or larger fuel storage tanks (as a minimum) with fixed roof and floating pan.

d. Airfield Pavement:

The Contractor will be required to show that they have experience in airfield pavement (preferably military airfield pavement) construction of 13-inch or thicker Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) paving of 3,000 square yards (as a minimum).

e. System Supplier:

The proposed system supplier/installer shall have been regularly engaged in Hydrant Fueling Systems installation work for at least 5 years. The Offeror shall provide a listing indicating that the system supplier has installed at least five similar Programmable Logical Controllers (PLC) based pump control systems for automatic cycling of pumps based upon varying dispensing demands utilizing multiple pumps for dispensing jet fuel into aircraft in the last 5-year period (including start-up dates). The Offeror shall provide locations and dates for all of the listed systems and list of materials supplied on each of the listed systems that have successfully operated over the last three years and are still currently in service.

If, after award the subcontractors identified in the proposal are not able to fulfill this obligation, replacement subcontractors with equal or better skills and experience shall be presented for acceptance and approval by the Contracting Officer. Replacement subcontractors for this solicitation shall be required to have qualifications and experience meeting or exceeding those identified in the proposal. The Contractor shall obtain the Contracting Officer’s written consent before making any substitutions for these designated subcontractors.

Standard for Acceptability: This standard is met when the offeror provides information for subcontractors which demonstrates the required successful experience on project examples which are similar in function, scope, complexity, and size to this solicitation and clearly

SECTION 00 22 00 - 8

demonstrates the abilities to execute the project successfully.

1.4.7 TAB 4 FACTOR #4 KEY PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS AND CONSTRUCTION

1.4.7.1 Evaluation Factor: The offeror should submit the names and resumes for key construction personnel that will be assigned to this project, and an organization chart demonstrating the chain of command of the organization. In addition, provide a summary of the duties and responsibilities of these individuals, which clearly indicate separate duties and responsibilities for each individual.

1.4.7.2 This tab should include data on the following personnel:

Project Manager Project Superintendent Onsite Quality Control (CQC) Manager Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO)

1.4.7.3 The proposal should clearly present the credentials of each person and show that each meets the requirements listed below. Each resume should include the following information:

Name, assignment for this solicitation, and company employing the person

Education and degree or professional registration (if applicable)

Past project experience (including what role or capacity the individual served on each project), as well as the dates (month and year) employed on each project in that capacity, the monetary size of each project cited as experience, and a point of contact familiar with each project. Resumes should be listed in reverse chronological order, with the latest experience listed first, and all time gaps on each resume fully explained. In addition, the educational qualifications of the proposed personnel should be submitted.

1.4.7.4 Prior experience on military construction projects, design/bid/build projects, and projects of this type and size is preferred and will be evaluated more favorably. The proposal should clearly present the credentials of each person, and shall show that each possesses the following qualifications and no individual may be designated more than one position:

Project Manager: The proposed Construction Project Manager shall possess a Bachelor’s Degree in Engineering or Sciences, with a minimum of 5 years experience (within the last 10 years) in Construction Project Management. A minimum of 2 of those 5 years as experience as a Construction Project Manager shall be in construction and installation of Hydrant Fueling Systems.

Project Superintendent: The proposed On-Site Project Superintendent shall have a minimum of 5 years construction related experience (within the last 10 years) as a superintendent on industrial construction projects with a minimum of 2 of those 5 years as experience, as a Construction Superintendent, with the construction of the installation of Hydrant Fueling Systems.

Onsite Quality Control (CQC) Manager: The CQC System Manager must either:

1.4.7.5 Possess a Bachelor’s Degree in Engineering or Sciences with a minimum of 4 years experience (within the last 10 years), as a Construction CQC, in construction of or the installation of Hydrant Fueling Systems.

or

SECTION 00 22 00 - 9

Have a minimum of 8 years construction experience (within the last 10 years) as a Construction CQC or Superintendent, with a minimum of 4 of those 8 years of experience as a Construction CQC, in construction of or the installation of Hydrant Fueling Systems.

Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO): The proposed On-Site Site SSHO shall have a minimum of 5 years safety work experience on similar projects (within the last 10 years), shall have completed the OSHA 30-hour construction safety class or equivalent training within the last five years, shall have completed an average of 24 hours of formal safety training each year for the past five years and shall have competent person training as needed.

1.4.7.6 If, after award, the key personnel identified in the proposal are not able to be utilized on this solicitation, replacement personnel with similar skills and experience shall be presented for acceptance and approval by the Contracting Officer. Replacement individuals for this solicitation shall be required to have qualifications and experience meeting or exceeding those identified in the proposal. The Contractor shall obtain the Contracting Officer’s written consent before making any substitutions for these designated personnel.

Standard for Acceptability: This standard is met when the resumes provided show that the staff is qualified and meets the RFP requirements. Prior experience on military construction projects is preferred.

1.4.8 TAB 5 FACTOR #5 SCHEDULE

1.4.8.1 The Offeror shall provide a narrative that realistically shows the major milestones and features of work for the project, including, as a minimum, discussion of proposed sequence of work for piping, pump station, airfield pavements, etc., mandatory phasing, testing and balancing, interim and final acceptance. Offers shall include a bar chart reflecting the major milestones and features of work with the completion period from the applicable contract Notice to Proceed (NTP).

The proposal schedule shall be graphically presented, and may be on a maximum paper size of 11" x 17". The schedule shall reflect the major design/construction milestones, and the sequence of work required for this project. The schedule shall indicate start/finish dates of events, and durations. A detailed network analysis is not required as a proposal submittal item. As a minimum, the Offeror's schedule shall include the Items of Work, shown in Section 00 73 00, SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS, Clause 52.211-10, “COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION AND COMPLETION OF WORK” (APR 1984).

1.4.8.2 Offerors are cautioned that if they do not meet the schedule completion times shown in Section 00 73 00, Clause 52.211-10, of this Request for Proposals their Technical Proposals may be rated Unacceptable for this factor.

1.4.8.3 Offerors are cautioned that schedules showing shortened government review times for submittals may cause the Schedule evaluation factor to be rated unacceptable.

Standard for Acceptability: This standard is met when the Offeror provides a schedule narrative that shows completion within the RFP required time frame and discusses the major milestones for the project, and provides a bar chart schedule that is clear and logical.

1.5 PROPOSAL COVER SHEET:

1.5.1 Format for the Proposal Cover Sheet: The proposal cover sheet is required by FAR 52.215-1(c)(i)-(v). This provision, titled “Instructions to Offerors— Competitive Acquisition,” has been provided in full text in Section 00100. The format is as follows:

SECTION 00 22 00 - 10

END OF SECTION 00 22 00

PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

1. Solicitation Number: W912PL-16-R-0020

2. The name, address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of the Offeror and electronic address (if available):

3. A statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item.

4. Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation:

5. Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

SECTION 00 22 00 - 11

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT

(To be completed by Offeror)

1. Contractor (Firm being evaluated):

Name: Address:

2. Contract Number: Task Order (TO) Number if Applicable:

3. Solicitation Type: Negotiated or Sealed Bid

4. Contract/TO Type: Fixed-Price Cost, Reimbursement, Hybrid (explain)

5. Routine Difficult Complexity of Work 1 2 3 4 5

6. Contract/TO Dollar Value:

7. Contract/TO Status: Active Complete Completion Date (w/ extensions):

8. Description, location & relevancy of work:

9. Problems encountered and how resolved:

10. Name, Address, Telephone Number and E-mail of the Procuring Contracting Officer and/or the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) (and other references, e.g., Administrative Contracting Officer, if applicable):

11. Check one of the following blocks:

A written performance evaluation was received for this project and is attached.

A written performance evaluation was not received for this project. A Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) has been sent to the reference(s) listed in Block 10, with a letter requesting that the completed questionnaire be returned directly to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers by the closing date for this solicitation.

SECTION 00 22 00 - 12

SAMPLE COVER LETTER

Date

SUBJECT: NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire

Name and Address of Reference

Ladies and Gentlemen:

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District, is conducting a review of our past performance history as part of an upcoming source selection acquisition.

Please complete the attached NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire to aid the Government in its evaluation of our past performance and FAX it directly to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ATTN: Christina Chavez at (213) 452-43246. If you prefer, you may provide the requested information by email to

Christina.chavez@usace.army.mil..

The Government is requesting receipt of this information by 2:00 p.m. on 21 August 2016.

You are advised that it is Government policy that the identity of sources providing past performance information will not be released outside the Government.

We appreciate your efforts to help the Government fairly evaluate our record of past performance. Should you have any questions related to this matter, please contact Ms. Chavez at telephone (213) 452-3246.

Sincerely, Contractor

Attachment mailto:Christina.chavez@usace.army.mil

SECTION 00 22 00 - 13

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0)

CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact:

Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor

Joint Venture Other (Explain)

Percent of project work performed:

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

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other

(Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

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

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

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

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

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

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

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: NAVFAC/USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR. THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS. CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO USACE. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR FOR USACE POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY

AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

SECTION 00 22 00 - 14

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E)

Exceptional

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating.

Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

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

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner.

There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S)

Satisfactory

Performance meets minimum contractual requirements.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

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

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

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

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

SECTION 00 22 00 - 15

(U)

Unsatisfactory

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

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

(N) Not Applicable

No information or did not apply to your contract

Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

SECTION 00 22 00 - 16

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST REFLECTS

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts

E VG S

M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance

E VG S

M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E VG S

M U N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)

E VG S

M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

E VG S

M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

E VG S

M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project?

E VG S

M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes;

responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

E VG S

M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction

E VG S

M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

E VG S

M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort

E VG S

M U N

c) Government Property Control

E VG S

M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel

E VG S

M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns

E VG S

M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines

E VG S

M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes

SECTION 00 22 00 - 17

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)

E M

VG

U

S N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

E

M

VG

U

S

N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client

E M

VG

U

S N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section.

Yes

No

e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.

Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues? (Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.

E M

VG

U

S N

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions

(explain if specific issues)

E

M

VG

U

S

N

c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below)

Yes

No

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor.

E M

VG

U

Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks. Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, SECTION 00 22 16 - 18 deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary):

SECTION 00 22 16 - 1

SECTION 00 22 16

PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND CONTRACT AWARD

I. ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD

II. SOURCE SELECTION USING LOWEST PRICE TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE

(LPTA)

III. LIST OF EVALUATION FACTORS (VOLUME II) AND SPECIFIC TECHNICAL

EVALUATION

CRITERIA

IV. EVALUATION OF TECHNICAL ROPOSAL

V. EVALUATION OF PRICE ROPOSAL

VI. INTENT TO AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

VII. PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL

VIII. PROPOSAL EXPENSE AND PREAWARD COSTS

SECTION 00 22 16 - 2

SECTION 00 22 16

PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND CONTRACT AWARD

I. ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD

In accordance with the FAR, no contract shall be entered into unless the contracting officer ensures that all requirements of law, executive orders, regulations, and all other applicable procedures, including clearances and approvals, have been met. This includes the FAR requirement that no award shall be made unless the contracting officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must meet the general standards in Part FAR 9 and any special standards set forth in the solicitation.

II. SOURCE SELECTION USING LOWEST PRICE TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE (LPTA)

The Government will make award to the offeror submitting the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. The Government will first review non-cost technical proposals to determine which are acceptable to the Government.

Responses that the offeror understands, or will comply with the specifications, statements paraphrasing the specifications, and general or overly broad responses such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used”, will be rated unacceptable.

The objective of the Government is to award a contract to an offeror who submits a proposal that when evaluated is determined to meet the acceptability levels established in the solicitation for each non-cost evaluation factor. Each non-cost evaluation factor will receive a rating of Acceptable or Unacceptable. The award will be made to the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated proposed price.

III. LIST OF EVALUATION FACTORS (VOLUME II) AND SPECIFIC TECHNICAL EVALUATION

CRITERIA

In order to be considered technically acceptable, proposals must meet the following minimum acceptable requirements:

FACTOR #1 EXPERIENCE ON SIMILAR CONTRACTS

This factor will evaluate the offeror for its experience in successful completion of design/bid/build projects of similar scope, magnitude and complexity completed in the USA within the past eight years. Projects completed over eight years ago may be submitted to demonstrate ability, but they will carry little weight in the evaluation and will not be used to meet the standard for acceptability.

Evaluation Factor: For this factor, the offeror should submit three (3) examples of construction projects which best illustrate the experience of the construction contractor on projects of similar function, scope, complexity, and dollar value as the requirements for this solicitation. Each project summary should consist of a maximum two page narrative of the example project, discussing the project and providing specifics as noted herein. No more than three (3) projects may be submitted. If more than three (3) projects are submitted, only the first three (3) listed in the proposal will be evaluated. Each project cited must have a construction dollar value greater than $20 million and have been completed in the USA within eight (8) years from the date that the proposal for this solicitation is due. Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ)

SECTION 00 22 16 - 3

Contracts, where numerous Task Orders are summed to meet the minimum construction dollar value identified herein, are not acceptable. Only those projects for which the offeror was the prime contractor or was a Subcontractor with a large percentage (50% or more) of the fuel related work shall be submitted. All projects submitted must have been completed by the office that will be performing the work. The summaries should include project types that are similar to the Type

III Hydrant Fuel System at Nellis AFB, Nevada. Similar project types are:

Type III hydrant fuel systems with associated airfield pavement construction on a completed airfield runway and successful start-up of a military or civilian Hydrant Fueling System with features such as pump houses, hydrant control pits, and aboveground fuel storage tanks with fixed roof and floating pans.

The government requires that project examples submitted be of completed projects (i.e.

construction complete). Projects still under construction will not be evaluated.

Each project summary must include the following for each project: a description/scope;

picture/photo; firms on the proposed team that performed this project, construction contract award amount; final construction cost; location; date when the project was started; original contract finish date and actual finish date. Narratives of each project must include a brief overview of each project and its relevance to this solicitation. All summaries should contain the name, address, telephone, FAX number and e-mail address of a representative of the owner (as well as one alternate individual not affiliated with your firm) familiar with your firm’s experience on the project that can verify the experience cited.

Standard for Acceptability: Evaluation will be based on the project summaries provided in the offeror’s proposal. To be rated acceptable, at least two of the project examples submitted must be similar in function, scope, complexity, and dollar value to this solicitation and clearly demonstrate the offeror’s abilities to execute the projects successfully while maintaining cost and schedule. Characteristics such as size, complexity, dollar value, the number and types of trades employed may be indicative of similarity.