W912PL-18-R-0004_Amendment0001.pdf

(SEE ITEM 13)

Vandenberg Air Force Base W912PL-18-R-0004 C-1 Feeder-Repair/Replace Overhead Distribution Line

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 1 of 29

Amendment 0001

SECTION 00 22 10

INSTRUCTIONS

SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURES

1.0 OVERVIEW

Offerors will submit certain specified performance capability proposals, demonstrating their capability to successfully execute design build construction work under the contract resulting from this solicitation.

The Government will evaluate the qualifications and intends award to the lowest price technically acceptable offeror who submitted proposals to compete for the C-1 Feeder-Repair/Replace Overhead Distribution Line, XUMU 08-1476B, Project at Vandenberg Air Force Base.

Offerors must submit a complete proposal to be considered for Award. Offerors will submit their Technical Experience, a design build technical solution, key personnel, past performance and price proposals for consideration. The Contracting Officer will award the contract to the offeror whose proposal represents the lowest price technically acceptable to the Government.

Offerors must submit a complete proposal to be considered for award. Failure to submit a complete proposal may result in the entire proposal being rejected.

2.0 GENERAL PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

All offerors shall be required to submit a proposal with the minimum content as specified herein.

Proposals without the minimum content may be rejected. Proposals will be received until the date and time indicated on Standard Form 1442 at the following address:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District 915 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 930 Los Angeles, CA 90017 ATTN: CESPL-CTW, Michael G. Robinson

3.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT AND SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

1. In order to be considered for award of a contract for the requirements of this solicitation, the offeror must submit a proposal with its offer. Failure to submit a complete proposal may result in the entire offer being rejected. The proposals shall be submitted in Volumes as follows:

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 2 of 29

Amendment 0001

Submit proposals in a tabbed, three-ring binder identified by the Solicitation Number (W912PL-18-R-0004), project title (C-1 Feeder-Repair/Replace Overhead Distribution Line, XUMU 08-1476B), name, address, and telephone number of the Offeror. Arrange tabs as follows:

Volume I, Administrative Requirements & Price Proposal:

All the information required in Volume I shall be presented in a separate, tabbed 3-ring binder clearly marked VOLUME I, ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS. Submit the information in 8.5”x11” paper. For Volume I, submit the original (and one copy). Additionally, in the same envelope, the offeror is to provide the entire proposal (VOL I and VOL II) in Portable Document file (PDF) format on compact disk (CD). Provide two (2) CDs, one for Volume I and one for Volume II. There is no page limit for Volume I. Do not load separate files, 1 file shall have the entire Volume I or II as one (1) file.

Arrange tabs as follows:

Proposal Cover Sheet. The proposal cover sheet is required by FAR 52.215-1 (c) (2). This provision, entitled “Instruction to Offerors – Competitive Acquisitions,” is included in full text in Section 00 21 16.

Provide the following information in the Proposal Cover Sheet:

• Solicitation Number

• Name, address, telephone and facsimile number of offeror (and electronic address if available).

• DUNS, CAGE, and tax identification number of the offeror.

• Statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation.

• Name, address, telephone and facsimile number of offeror (and electronic address if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation.

• Acknowledgment that the offeror is registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database, as required by FAR Clause No. 52.204-7, System for Award Management and DFARS 252.204-7004, Alternate A, System for Award Management.

Tab A- shall contain a complete Standard Form 1442, “Solicitation, Offer and Award” including the Certification Section 00 01 05. The SF 1442 and the Certification shall be completed by the offeror and duly executed with an original signature by an official authorized to bind the company in accordance with the instructions at FAR 4.102.

Tab B – Acknowledgement of any and all amendments to the solicitation in accordance with the instructions of Standard Form 30 Amendment.

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 3 of 29

Amendment 0001

Tab C – Official Online System for Award Management representations and Certifications.

Tab D – Bonding Capacity – Demonstrate bonding capacity for providing services for this project. This information shall be in the format of a letter of current bonding capacity from a bonding company. Offerors submitting a proposal shall demonstrate capability to bond a single project in an amount equal or greater than $4,000,000.00. If the offeror cannot demonstrate sufficient bonding capacity, further consideration of the proposal will be terminated and the offer will be rejected.

Tab E – Price Proposal – Section 00 10 00, Solicitation, Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Schedule. The complete Solicitation, Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Schedule with the Offeror’s proposed contract line item prices inserted in the appropriate spaces. Prices must be proposed for all contract line items and prices sub-line items, if any. Unit prices are to be extended to the actual “dollar and cents” amounts (i.e., to two decimal places). Do not round off to the nearest dollar. Check your pricing submissions very carefully for mathematical and clerical errors prior to submission.

Tab F – A Bid Guarantee, Standard Form 24, “Bid Bond.”

Tab G – (1) Submit a signed statement on the Offeror’s letterhead regarding the status of organizational conflict of interest disclosure; Organization Conflicts of Interest (OCI) Disclosure: The contractor shall provide a disclosure statement with its proposal which concisely describes all the relevant facts concerning past or present organization conflicts of interest relating to work on this project. In the same statement, and if applicable, the contractor shall provide information to assure the Government that the conflicts of interest have been mitigated and/or neutralized to the maximum extent possible. If a conflict of interest is discovered after award of this contract, the Contracting Officer will make a decisions whether to terminate the contract.

Tab H – Joint Venture agreement and Mentor Protégé agreement. (If applicable)

Tab I – Pre-Award Survey Data Information (e.g. Bank and Supplier References)

Tab J – If the Prime subcontractor is using subcontractors, please provide a letter of commitment from the subcontractor, and provide in this Tab.

1. Offeror shall provide a list of present commitments, including the dollar value thereof, and name of the organization under which the work is being performed. Include the names and telephone numbers of personnel within each organization who are familiar with the contractor’s performance. If the commitment value exceeds $1,000,000.00, the

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 4 of 29

Amendment 0001 offeror shall also submit a certified statement listing: (1) each contract award received within the preceding three month period exceeding $1,000,000.00 in value with a brief description of the contract; and (2) each contract award received within the preceding three year period not already physically completed and exceeding $5,000,000.00 in value with a brief description of the contract. For a newly formed JV, each JV must submit the aforementioned certified statement.

2. Submit a copy of your most recent financial statements. The statements must include a Balance Sheet and Income Statement. Include the names of banks or other financial institutions with which business is conducted (mailing addresses, Point of Contact and phone number). If the financial statements are more than 60 days old, attach a certificate stating that the financial condition is substantially the same, or if not the same, describe the changes which have taken place since the financial statements were prepared. Provide evidence of adequate financing arrangements, such as commitments from lending institutions, etc., to perform this contract. This information will be treated confidentially but may be verified. For a newly formed JV, each JV member must submit financial statements and information.

3. In accordance with FAR 9.103(a)… contracts shall be awarded to responsible prospective contractors only. To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must meet the standards at FAR 9.104 that requires a prospective contractor to have adequate financial resources to perform the contract or the ability to obtain them. As an aid in assessing responsibility, the offeror shall provide a letter from their bank or financial institution that contains the following:

Name and telephone number of bank and point of contact; Number of year’s business has be conducted with each bank Types of open accounts (checking, loans, etc) Balance of current accounts (the banks will provide a “range of figures” for this information, such as, medium five figures range) Means by which loans are secured and if paid as agreed

For the purpose of evaluating the pre-award survey information submitted hereunder:

Pre-award survey data information will be evaluated as it relates to the probability of the offeror successfully accomplishing the proposed effort.

The Government will use pre-award-survey data provided by the offeror and data obtained from other sources to perform this assessment.

Volume II, Technical Proposal:

Submit the Technical Proposal, clearly marked VOLUME II, TECHINCAL PROPOSAL in a

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 5 of 29

Amendment 0001 tabbed, three-ring binder identified by the Solicitation Number (W912PL-18-R-0004), project title (C-1 Feeder-Repair/Replace Overhead Distribution Line), name, address, and telephone number of the Offeror. Please arrange tabs as follows:

TAB A, FACTOR 1: Corporate Experience TAB B, FACTOR 2: Technical Solution TAB C, FACTOR 3: Key Personnel TAB D, FACTOR 4: Past Performance

2. Proposal Characteristics

a) Submit one (1) original and five (5) copies of Volume II. Each Volume shall contain a table of contents and all pages of each factor shall be sequentially numbered. All text must be legible and easily read. The page size of the offeror’s proposal shall not exceed 8-1/2 by 11 inches. Diagrams, charts and tables shall conform to the paper size. All text shall be typed single-spaced with a minimum size 10 font. Margins (1-inch) shall be clean and clear. If fold-out charts are unavoidable, and are to be utilized, all sheets shall be reproduced on 11 by 17 inch, and folded to 8-1/2 by 11 inch size. Offerors shall limit proposals to a maximum of 30 pages (Factor 1 – 15 pages, Factor 2 – 10 pages Factor 3 – no page count). A page is defined as text or information on one side of the paper. If it is printed double sided, each face will be counted as a page.

*OCR is a common method of digitizing printed texts so that they can be electronically searched, stored more compactly, displayed on-line, and used in machine processes such as machine translation, text-to-speech, key data extraction and text mining.

b) Offeror will submit a cover letter containing:

i. Solicitation number.

ii. Names, title, email, and telephone and fax numbers of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this RFP.

iii. Name, title and signature of the person authorized to sign the proposal.

iv. A statement specifying agreement with all terms, conditions and provisions included in the RFP.

c) For Joint Ventures, the information required by paragraph “Joint Ventures”.

d) Acknowledgement of all amendments to the RFP in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30 (amendment form).

e) The completed Section 00 45 00 of the RFP (Representations and Certifications), including

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 6 of 29

Amendment 0001 the SAM certification (System for Award Management extract will suffice) should be placed in a separate envelope labeled “Representation and Certifications” with one copy.

f) Letter from Surety stating Offer is capable of providing a Bid Guarantee as required in FAR

52.228-1.

4.0 INQUIRIES/QUESTIONS

Technical inquiries and questions relating to this solicitation shall be submitted via Bidder Inquiry in ProjNet at (https://www.projnet.org). To submit and review inquiry items, prospective offerors will need to use the Bidder Inquiry Key presented below and follow the instructions listed below the key for access.

A prospective offeror who submits a comment /question will receive an acknowledgement of their comment/question via email. Another email to the same address will notify the prospective offeror once the reply is available for viewing.

***Please Note: Offerors shall only submit one question per inquiry. All inquiries containing multiple questions shall be rejected.

The Solicitation Number is: W912PL-18-R-0004

The Bidder Inquiry Key is: PFBFCT-UCA4S4

Instructions for first-time ProjNet Bid Inquiry Access:

3. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

4. Identify the Agency. Select agency USACE.

5. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

6. Email. Enter the email address you would like to use for communication.

7. Click Continue. A page will then open saying that a user account was not found and will ask you to create one using the provided form.

8. Enter your First Name, Last Name, Company, City, State, Phone, Email, Secret Question, Secret

Answer, and Time Zone. Make sure to remember your Secret Question and Answer as they will be used from this point on to access the ProjNet system.

9. Click Add User. Once this is completed you are now registered within ProjNet and are currently logged into the system.

Instructions for future ProjNet Bidder Inquiry Access:

1. For future access to ProjNet, you will not be provided any type of password. You will utilize https://www.projnet.org/

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 7 of 29

Amendment 0001 your Secret Question and Secret Answer to log in.

2. From the ProjNet home page linked above, click on Quick Add on the upper right side of the screen.

3. Identify the Agency. Select agency USACE.

4. Key. Enter the Bidder Inquiry Key listed above.

5. Email. Enter the email address you used to register previously in ProjNet.

6. Click Continue. A page will then open asking you to enter the answer to your Secret Question.

7. Enter your Secret Answer and click Login. Once this is completed you are now logged into the system.

The Bidder Inquiry System will be unavailable for new inquiries ten calendar days before proposal due date in order to ensure adequate time is allotted to form an appropriate response to inquiries and amend the solicitation if necessary.

Offerors are requested to review the specification in its entirety, and review the Bidder Inquiry System for answers to questions prior to submission of a new inquiry.

The ProjNet call center operates weekdays from 8AM to 5PM U.S. Pacific Time Zone (Los Angeles, CA)

5.0 JOINT VENTURES/SUBCONTRACTORS/TEAMING PARTNERS

Joint Ventures shall submit the following additional documentation regarding their business entities:

1) A certified copy of their Joint Venture agreement.

2) A detailed statement outlining the following in terms of percentages, where appropriate.

a. The relationship of the joint venture parties in terms of business ownership, capital contribution, and profit distribution or loss sharing.

b. The management approach of the joint venture in terms of who will conduct, direct, supervise and control the project and have custody and control of the assets of the Joint Venture and perform the duties necessary to complete the work.

c. The structure of the joint venture and decision-making responsibilities of the Joint

Venture parties in terms of who will control the manner and method of performance of the work.

d. The bonding responsibilities of the Joint Venture parties.

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 8 of 29

Amendment 0001

e. Identification of the key personnel having authority to legally bind the Joint Venture to subcontracts and state who will provide or contract for the labor and materials for the Joint Venture.

f. Identification of party maintaining the Joint Venture bank accounts for the payment of all expenses and the deposits of all receipts, keep the books and records, and pay applicable taxes for the Joint Venture.

g. Identification of party furnishing the facilities, such as office supplies and telephone service.

h. Identification of party having overall control of the Joint Venture.

Other sections of the proposal shall identify, where appropriate, whether key personnel are employees of the individual Joint Venture parties and identify the party, or hired as employees of the Joint Venture.

If one of the Joint Venture parties possesses experience and/or past performance as a Federal Government contractor or as a Corps of Engineers contractor, that experience and/or past experience will be included as the experience and/or past experience of the Joint Venture.

If an offeror wishes to receive credit for the experience or past performance of a subcontractor or teaming partner, the offeror must submit a letter of commitment to use the proposed firm on the project, signed both by the subcontractor/teaming partner and the offeror. The commitment letter must be submitted even if the subcontractor/teaming partner is in some way affiliated with the offeror (for example, the subcontractor/teaming partner is a subsidiary of a joint venture partner, or a subsidiary of a firm to which the joint venture partner is also a subsidiary). Include the subcontractor letters of commitment in Volume 1, Factor 1: Corporate Experience. (Will not count to the page count of this factor)

In addition, any Joint Venture that is proposing as an 8(a) mentor protégé, MUST submit their SBA approved Mentor Protégé agreement. Offerors who do not submit their SBA approved mentor protégé agreement in conjunction with their joint venture agreement will be considered non-responsive.

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 9 of 29

SAMPLE LETTER OF COMMITMENT to USE SUBCONTRACTOR/TEAMING PARTNER

[COMPANY LETTERHEAD]

TO: Contracting Officer, Los Angeles District, United States Army Corps of Engineers

SUBJECT: Letter of Commitment for Proposed Task Order for [insert project name]

Dear Sir or Madam:

[Insert name of offeror] and [insert name of subcontractor/teaming partner] hereby make the unequivocal commitment that, in the event that the company receives award of the Task Order for [insert project name], [insert name of subcontractor/teaming partner] will perform the following work required by the Task Order.

[Insert list of tasks to be performed by the subcontractor/teaming partner]

Sincerely, [Authorized Official] [Legal Name of Offeror] Date:

[Subcontractor/Teaming Partner] [Legal Name of Firm] Date:

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 10 of 29

6.0 BASIS FOR AWARD

The agency will use One-step Design-Build Selection Procedures authorized by 10 U.S.C. 2862.

The selection will be based on the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA). There are four (4) non-price (technical) factors: Technical Factor 1 – Corporate Experience; Technical Factor 2 – Technical Solution; Technical Factor 3 – Key Personnel and Technical Factor 4 – Past Performance. Technical factors will be assigned an either acceptable or unacceptable rating. The non-price factors are of equal importance, and a table below represents all factors.

Table 1: Relative Importance of Factors

Factor

Number

FACTOR

1 Corporate Experience

2 Technical Solution

3 Key Personnel

4 Past Performance

5 Price

7.0 SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS coverage

All proposals received in response to this solicitation will be evaluated in accordance with formal source selection procedures. The principal objective of this process is to select a responsible offeror whose proposal represents the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable. The process is designed to ensure the impartial, equitable, and comprehensive evaluation of all proposals received in response to this solicitation.

Source Selection Team

All offers received in response to this solicitation will be evaluated in accordance with formal source selection procedures. The principal objective of this process is to select the best price for the government from a contractor who is technically capable.

(a) Source Selection Team

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 11 of 29

The Source Selection Team is established as a separate organization and management chain of command whose only purpose is to accomplish the objective above. The organization consists of a Source Selection Authority (SSA) and a Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). The organization is designed to ensure active ongoing involvement of appropriate contracting, technical, logistics, legal, small business, and other functional staff management expertise.

(a) Source Selection Procedure

The source selection procedures will begin with an initial review of proposals received in response to this solicitation. The SSEB shall evaluate the proposals based solely on the evaluation criteria identified below.

To be considered for evaluation, each offeror shall specifically address each of the evaluation factors listed below. Sufficient detail shall be provided, citing specific data as may be required, such that the proposal may be adequately evaluated. The proposal must show clearly that the offeror has an understanding of the work tasks required and has the capability and responsibility to accomplish the work.

The Government will select the most highly qualified offeror based on if their proposal received all acceptable ratings and offered the lowest price.

The Government is not responsible for information overlooked during the evaluation which is not located in the appropriate proposal section. To ensure the evaluation credit is appropriately received for proposal material submitted, do not incorporate by reference documents not contained in the proposal. References to sections of the proposal shall be by specific paragraph number (and name, if applicable), page number, and section.

8.0 TECHNICAL RATING

The evaluation factors shall be set forth in this solicitation give enough depth to communicate what will be evaluated. The evaluation factors shall be the primary determinant of the detailed information requested in the solicitation’s instructions to offerors. The factors to be evaluated will be on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis. These factors will identify the minimum requirements that are key to successful contract performance. All LPTAs shall evaluate cost/price and the acceptability of the product or services. For LPTAs, this is done through the establishment of requirements to be evaluated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis. Proposals are evaluated for acceptability, but not ranked using the non-price factors. In order to be considered awardable, there must be an “acceptable” rating in every non-price factor. Past performance has a different description, but is still rated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis. It is described in more depth in the past performance section.

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 12 of 29

Table 2. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

9.0 DEBRIEFING OFFERORS

Offerors may request a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505 Pre-award Debriefing of offerors, and FAR 15.506 Post-award Debriefing of offerors.

10.0 TECHNICAL FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

Table 3. EVALUATION FACTORS

Location Factor Number Description Tab A Factor 1 Corporate Experience

Tab B Factor 2 Technical Solution Tab C Factor 3 Key Personnel Tab D Factor 4 Past Performance

VOLUME 1, TAB A – FACTOR 1 – Corporate Experience

Submission Requirements

The offeror shall submit a project portfolio containing at least two (2) and no more than four (4) example projects to demonstrate the offeror’s relevant military or commercial construction and design experience, with working on the RFP project. If more than four projects are submitted, only the first four projects will be evaluated. Each example project will not exceed three (3) pages. This entire factor will not exceed twelve (12) pages.

Use the following format to provide project information:

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 13 of 29

Amendment 0001

(a) Project Title

(b) Location

(c) Contract Number

(d) Contract Type (Design/Build, Design/Bid/Build)

(e) Role of Offeror (address type of work performed, including design, percentage of work performed by the offeror, as applicable, and any proposed team members that were directly involved in this project, including work performed, roles and responsibilities)

(f) Total Dollar Amount;

(g) Start and Completion Dates. If project is not complete, indicate percentage complete and anticipated completion date

(h) Brief Description of Project. (Address how this project is similar to the types of task orders to be issued under this contract)

(i) Customer Primary Point of Contact (name, relationship to project, agency/firm, phone number, and e-mail address). The Government may contact and interview project references.

Reference information will not be revealed to other parties.

If the offeror represents the combining of two or more companies, state if the example project represents a joint venture of the listed parties.

Evaluation Criteria The Government will evaluate how the projects identified by the Offeror demonstrate the extent of the offeror’s Corporate Experience to design and build new C-1 Feeder, Repair/Replace Overhead Distribution Line project described in this solicitation’s Statement of Work. The Government will evaluate the extent of experience of the Prime contractor and proposed subcontractors in design, construction and design build, as similar to their role on this project.

a) Offerors proposing as a joint venture SHALL submit a project of similar scope for both/all joint venture partners. Offerors who do not provide an example project of all offerors will be considered unacceptable.

Offerors who submit an example project that successfully demonstrates all of the below evaluation criteria must still submit at least two (2) total example projects of similar scope to be considered successful. Government will evaluate the content of each offerors' submitted Corporate Experience and will assign a pass/fail based on how well each offeror's proposal demonstrates the following. :

a) At least one (1) Design-Build Construction Experience project of similar scope with a range of

$2MIL - $4MIL and a minimum of 4 miles of 12kV overhead electrical line.

b) A Project involving construction of similar scope and magnitude, as the RFP Project.

c) A Project that demonstrates experience and capability in setting poles in rugged terrain, planning power outages, and commissioning line with minimum down time with successful relationships with subcontractors (i.e. electrical, civil, etc.)

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 14 of 29

Amendment 0001

d) A Project where an environmental person (i.e. Biologist, Archeologist) has experience in writing the environmental protection plan and conducting compliance monitoring and avoidance of biological and/or culturally sensitive areas.

e) Completed or substantially complete within the last 7 years as of the proposal submission date.

The project will be considered substantially complete if it is 95% or more complete. If an Offeror presents a project that is less than 95% complete, the proposal must include an explanation why that project should be considered substantially complete. The Government will determine whether the explanation is sufficient to consider the project substantially complete.

f) At least one example project must be on a military installation.

VOLUME 1, TAB B - FACTOR 2 - Technical Solution

Submission Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit a technical and design approach of the project for this proposal that meets the intent of the provided design-build Scope of Work (SOW). The technical approach will be used to determine the Offeror’s understanding of the Scope of Work. The Offeror shall include all of the following information: drawings of the pole locations, narrative describing technical design approach, construction approach, information regarding material and system quality and sustainability. The technical approach documents should not exceed fourteen (14) pages or seven (7) pages back to back.

Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate the Design-Build approach to the Scope of Work (SOW) provided for this project. A successful proposal will address each one of the following criteria, failure to address all of the criteria will result in a failing evaluation for this factor:

- Design-Build Approach. Narrative discusses the design, demolition, and construction activities as they apply to demonstrate the proposal meets or exceeds the minimum Solicitation requirements.

- Describes relevant architectural, structural, civil, environmental, and electrical considerations, constraints, and risks.

- Civil/Site Design-Build approach. Provide brief narrative on sequencing of work regarding placing poles, foundation pads, traffic and pedestrian circulation, fast tracking, security requirements, lay down area, material storage, utilities, lights, and environmental management.

- Exterior and site improvements Design-Build Approach. Narrative shall include design and construction for all site work, to include above and below ground conduit approach.

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 15 of 29

Amendment 0001

- Electrical system, commissioning and minimum outages Design-Build Approach. Narrative discusses the design, demolition, and construction with conceptual level information regarding electrical overhead system quality, and sustainability. Provides information relevant to electrical distribution, and pertinent substation. Describes electrical components system and components proposed in terms of maintenance considerations, operability, durability, sustainability, and energy consumption.

- Structural Design-Build Approach. Narrative shall include the design, demolition, and construction of poles with conceptual level information. (i.e appropriate loading)

- Schedule approach – Narrative approach shall address the design and construction schedule to include scheduled outages, commissioning, the identification of the poles. Describes the mitigation plan for each identified issue/risk and the impact on overall project schedule. Proposal demonstrates the capability and flexibility to plan and schedule the complete project to meet the proposed contract completion period. Clearly identify any constraints on schedules presented (e.g., labor or material availability, permits, weather, etc.). Indicates the anticipated overall critical path for the schedule.

VOLUME 1 TAB C – FACTOR 3 – Key Project Personnel

Offeror shall provide a brief resume (limited to two page per individual) to provide information regarding the personnel that will fill the following key positions in the performance of task orders under this contract:

a. Project Manager

b. Construction Superintendent

c. Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System Manager

d. Design Manager

e. Architect

f. Civil Engineer

g. Geotechnical Engineer

h. Electrical Engineer

i. Structural Engineer

j. Environmental (biologist/archeologist)

Resumes shall indicate: (1) the individual’s experience in the relevant key position and the beginning and end dates for each position. (2) Key Personnel resumes should name projects and roles that the respective personnel played on the project as well as the time in that designated role. (3) Resumes should reflect if

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 16 of 29 the person was on any of the Projects submitted for Factor 1 and their role in the project.

Evaluation Criteria:

The Government will evaluate the resumes to determine the extent to which the Offeror demonstrates that its key personnel show experience on Design-Build and Design-Bid-Build projects. Key Personnel should meet at a minimum the following qualifications (Please note: If the minimum qualifications are not met for a particular key personnel, the resume will be evaluated as unacceptable. If the offeror fails to meet the minimum qualifications for ALL Key Personnel, they will receive an unacceptable rating for this factor):

a. Project Manager: 5 years’ relevant experience similar to this contract as a Project Manager employed by the Offeror as prime contractor

b. Construction Superintendent: 5 years relevant experience to this contract as superintendent employed by the Offeror as prime contractor and managing multiple trades and subcontractors

c. Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System Manager: Must be a graduate engineer, or a graduate of construction management, with a minimum of 5 years construction experience on construction similar to this contract. PER Spec Section 01 45 00 Para. 3.4 Quality Control Organization.

d. Design Manager: 3 years’ design experience or 5 years’ construction management experience and at least 2 years as a Design Manger. Must be licensed in the State of California.

e. Architect: 3 years’ design experience and professionally licensed to practice in California

f. Civil Engineer: Graduate Civil Engineer or Construction Manager with 2 years’ experience in the type of work being performed on this project or technician with 5 years related experience. Must be licensed in the State of California.

g. Electrical Engineer: Graduate Electrical Engineer with 2 years related experience or person 5 years of experience supervising electrical features of work in the field with a construction company and professionally licensed to practice in California.

h. Structural Engineer: Graduate Electrical Engineer with 2 years related experience or person 5 years of experience supervising electrical features of work in the field with a construction company and professionally licensed to practice in California

i. Environmental/Biologist: Bachelor’s degree in biology, natural resources management or a closely related subject. At least one year of biology-related field experience on the Central Coast of California. Ability to identify California red-legged frog, Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp and Seacliff Buckwheat, the host plant of the El Segundo blue butterfly (ESBB). Experience with these organisms in context of Endangered Species Act section 7 or section 10(a) authorizations/recovery permits is preferred. Per Section 01 10 10 – 13.

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 17 of 29

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 18 of 29

VOLUME 1, TAB D – FACTOR 4 – Past Performance

For each of the projects submitted under Factors 1, the offeror shall provide a CPARS Evaluations or a Past Performance Questionnaire(Form PPQ-0, included in the solicitation), CPARS is preferred. If a CAPRS evaluation cannot be obtained, submit the PPQ to a representative of the owner who can provide the owner’s opinion of the offeror’s past performance for the project. Completed PPQ-0 forms should be submitted with your proposal. A copy of a previously completed PPQ can be submitted if it reflects a substantially complete evaluation of the project. The PPQ-0 does not have to be sent directly from the client. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ-0 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-0, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. 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 contact, Michael Robinson, via email at Michael.g.robinson@usace.army.mil prior to proposal closing date. The offeror is responsible for ensuring that the completed questionnaires are submitted by the closing date. If you have questions regarding the attached questionnaire, or require assistance, please contact the Contract Specialist at (213- 452-3311).

For each of the projects submitted under Factors 1, to ensure the agency has all relevant past performance information, the offeror also should submit copies of Federal/DoD/Navy/Army performance reviews that are likely already in the agency’s databases or likely within the agency’s arm’s reach, i.e., Contractor’s copy of CCASS or CPARS evaluations. To improve accuracy of database searches, the offeror will also provide the CAGE Codes for the prime contractor and all teaming partners, (i.e. design firms, key subcontractors, Joint Venture Partners) whose experience is being relied on Factor 1. If a submitted proposal includes a final CCASS/CPARS evaluation for a Factor 1 Corporate Experience project, it is not necessary to submit a completed PPQ for the same project.

Offerors should organize all Past Performance Information based on the Factors 1 Projects, which normally have project titles and are numbered 1-4, so that reviewers can match the owner’s opinion with the corresponding Factor 1 Projects. All Past Performance Information presented will be identified with the Corresponding Project Number and Title from Factor 1. There is no page limit for this factor.

The Government will evaluate the responses from the customers from which Past Performance Questionnaires have been received. The Government may contact and interview the owner’s representative on the PPQ-0, and reserves the right to interview other individuals acting for the owner’s representative, if the owner’s representative is not available. 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.

mailto:Michael.g.robinson@usace.army.mil

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 19 of 29

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency.

At no time during this process, nor during the debriefing, nor after award, will the names of the individuals providing reference information about an offeror’s past performance be revealed to the offerors or to any other party. If discussions are held, offerors may be afforded the opportunity to respond to adverse comments made by references in accordance with guidelines identified in FAR Part 15.3. In this case, comments will be extracted and provided to the offeror. Copies of the questionnaires will not be furnished to the offeror and will remain confidential.

NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

Evaluation Procedure Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note above)

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Firstly, Past performance will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s present/past performance is recent, and relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration should be given to what aspects of an offeror’s contract performance history would give the most confidence that the offeror will satisfy the requirements of the contract that is contemplated to be awarded as a result of the evaluation of proposals in the current procurement.

Second, the past performance evaluation should determine how well the offeror performed on the prior contracts. The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 20 of 29

Amendment 0001 the offeror performed those past contracts.

To be determined recent, the government would like to see projects submitted that are at least seven (7) years from the proposal due date. Additionally, projects should be similar in scope, magnitude and complexity, and shall be substantially completed. Offerors shall include past performance for all projects shown in factor 1.

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.

-END OF SECTION-

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 21 of 29

SAMPLE TRANSMITTAL LETTER

AND

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRE

To: Date:

We have listed your firm as a reference for work we have performed for you as listed below. Our firm has submitted a proposal under a project advertised by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), an evaluation of our firm’s past performance will be completed by the Corps of Engineers. Your candid response to the attached questionnaire will assist the evaluation team in this process.

We understand that you have a busy schedule and your participation in this evaluation is greatly appreciated. Please complete the enclosed questionnaire as thoroughly as possible. Space is provided for comments. Please respond in time for us to include the questionnaire with our proposal, which is due on ________. Only one response from each office is required. If at all possible, we suggest that you individually answer this questionnaire and then coordinate your responses with that of , to forge a consensus on one overall response from your organization. Please return completed questionnaires to the following:

If you would prefer to respond directly to USACE, your completed questionnaire may be sent to the following address:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District ATTN: CESPL-CTW Michael Robinson 915 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 930 Los Angeles, CA 90017

The questionnaires can also be e-mailed to michael.g.robinson@usace.army.mil

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 22 of 29

Amendment 0001

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:

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)

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 23 of 29

Amendment 0001

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:

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 24 of 29

Amendment 0001

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.

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.

XUMU 08-1476B

00 22 10 - Page 25 of 29

Amendment 0001

(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.

(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.

Vandenberg Air Force Base Source Selection Plan C-1 Feeder- Repair/Replace Overhead Distribution Line W912PL-18-R-0004 Project No.: XUMU 08-1476B

Section 00 22 10

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT

PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING

WHICH BEST REFLECTS YOUR

EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S

PEFORMANCE

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)

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)

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

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?

d) Overall customer…