Re-Posted SECTION L AND M COMBINED.pdf

W912PL21R0013Cultural Resources Services IDIQ South PacificDivision

Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

SECTION L

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

1.0 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND 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 in Section M.

1.1.2 Each Offeror must submit a Price Proposal, Volume I, and a Technical Proposal, Volume II. The Price Proposal and Technical Proposal must be received by the closing date and time set for receipt of proposals.

1.1.3 All information intended by the Offeror to be evaluated must be submitted as part of the Technical Proposal. No proposed price information should be included in the response 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. Margins on all sides should be not less than one inch. Failure to comply with this formatting instruction may result in the nonconforming portion to be excluded from evaluation.

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 others systems which do not facilitate the ready insertion of additional pages.

1.2.3 “Conf idential” 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”.

The Corps of Engineers (COE) 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 of

If supplemental information relative to these evaluation factors is included in another part of the technical proposal, its location must also be identified.

CONTENTS OF THE NON-PRICE PROPOSAL

TAB # 1

FACTOR 1

TECHNICAL MERIT, APPROACH, METHODS AND PROCEDURES

TAB # 2

FACTOR 2

EXPERIENCE ON SIMILAR CONTRACTS

TAB # 3

FACTOR 3

PAST PERFORMANCE

TAB # 4

FACTOR 4

MANAGEMENT ABILITY AND SUBCONTRACT MANAGEMENT

1.6.4 CONTENT OF THE NON-PRICE PROPOSAL: This inf ormation will be evaluated as part of this competitive negotiation procurement process. Offeror(s) shall submit the following as part of their offers and must be in accordance with Section M.

(A) For Tabs 2 and 3, identify all contracts, including Federal, State, local government and private/commercial for efforts similar to the Government requirement in scope, size, and complexity which are either currently ongoing or which were completed within the past three years.

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 1.6.4.E. below regarding required consent for release of subcontractor past performance information.

(B) Furnish a Perormance Assessment Report (PAR) for each referenced contract as an attachment to the past performance information submitted for each referenced project in Tab #3. If an official written performance evaluation/assessment was not received, so indicate. A performance questionnaire (PPQ) 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 Offeror received f rom the Owner/Customer at the time of contract performance/completion. However, the Offeror(s) is neither required not requested to have the Owner/Customer write such a letter for the purpose of this solicitation. Formats for the performance assessment report have been provided at the end of this Section titled: Format for Offeror’s Submission of Recent/Relevant Project Information. CPARS are acceptable forms in lieu of PPQ.

(C) Provide past performance questionnaire and cover letter to previous clients.

Formats for past performance questionnaire and cover letter have been provided at the end of this Section titled: Past Performance Reference Check and Sample Cover Letter. Please have clients return the forms directly to the Contracting Division at:

Department of the Army U.S. Army Engineer District, Los Angeles Contracting Division (Attn: Sandra Oquita) 915 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 930 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Email: Sandra.Oquita@usace.army.mil

(D) “Conf idential” projects cannot be submitted unless all the information required for evaluation purposes as specified herein can nonetheless be provided to the Government as part of the Offeror(s) non price 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 of of

PROPOSAL COVER SHEET

1. Solicitation Number: W912PL-21-R-0013

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.

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”.

(E) 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.

(F) Instructions regarding responses to the evaluation factors are detailed in Section M, entitled “Evaluation Factors for Award”.

1.8. PROPOSAL COVER SHEET:

1.8.1. 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 provide in f ull text in Section H.

The format is as follows:

of

SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

SUBMITTAL CONTENTS NUMBER REQUIRED

Volume 1 Price Proposal/Pro-Forma Requirements

“Proposal Cover Sheet” SF 33 Acknowledge Amendments in Block 14 Pricing Schedule Reps and Certs

Factor 1 – TECHNICAL

MERIT, APPROACH,

METHODS AND

PROCEDURES

Factor 2 –

EXPERIENCE ON

SIMILAR CONTRACTS

Factor 3 – PAST

PERFORMANCE

Factor 4–

MANAGEMENT

ABILITY AND

SUBCONTRACT

MANAGEMENT

1 Original Only

Volume 2 Non Price Proposal

1 Electronic Copy submitted to the DOD Safe Site in searchable

PDF

of

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT

(To be completed by Offeror)

1. Contractor (Firm being evaluated):

Name:

Address:

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

3. Solicitation Type: Negotiated or Sealed Bid

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

5. Routine Difficult (low to high) 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 perf ormance 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.

of

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 by email to Sandra Oquita@usace.army.mil.

The Government is requesting receipt of this information by 10:00 a.m. on 10 September 2020.

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 Sandra Oquita telephone (213) 452-3249.

Sincerely, Contractor

Attachment

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 Performance: 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 providedetails 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.

of

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.

(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.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

of

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)

E VG S M U N

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

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 E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lea d, manage andcontrolthe program)

E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

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

E VG S M U N

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

E VG S M U 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

E VG S M U N

back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with establishedbudgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplainedvariances (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 completelyterminatedfor 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

Yes No

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

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements. E VG S M U N

E VG S M U N

E VG S M U N

Yes No

E VG S M U N

if applicable

(If this job title differs from the one used in the solicitation to designate key personnel but the individual will be performing essentially the same functions, provide a cross-reference to the job title used in the solicitation.)

(Current employee of the Offeror, prospective employee of the Offeror, key subcontractor employee, prospective employee of a key subcontractor, etc.).

(If other than the Offeror)

(Estimated percentage of his or her time dedicated to working on the prospective contract.)

(Briefly describe the authorities, duties, and responsibilities this individual will have on the prospective contract.)

(Provide specific details, not general statements. Explain their relevance. Provide any other information pertaining to the qualifications of this person for this project not specifically addressed above that directly relates to this evaluation factor. A complete list of the individual’s prior experience is neither required nor desired. Tailor the information provided to this acquisition.)

Contents

1.0 OVERVIEW

1.0 OVERVIEW

2.0 EVALUATIONPROCESS

3.0

4.0 PRICE

5.0 VOLUMEII TECHNICALPROPOSAL(NON-

FACTORS)

South Pacific Division

SECTION M

demonstrates that its key personnel meet the qualifications specified in Section 4.1 of this solicitation.

For the above positions, the proposal must clearly show the project title, time in positions submitted, and the company history of employment showing the experience listed above. If requirements are not clearly addressed, the Offeror’s rating will be reduced.

The Government intends to give greater weight to proposals where the key personnel demonstrate more extensive experience working on relevant projects similar in size, scope, magnitude and complexity as the Scope of Work (SOW) for this contract.

If, because of reasons beyond the control of the construction firm, the individuals named in the proposal are not able to fulfill this obligation, replacement personnel with similar education, skills and experience shall be presented for acceptance and approval by the Contracting Officer.

Replacement individuals for his project shall be required to have qualifications and experience meeting or exceeding those identified in the proposal.

Technical/Risk Rating Scheme. After evaluating the Offeror’s Management Plan, under Factor 4, the SSEB will assign an overall factor rating to reflect the degree to which the proposal meets or does not meet the minimum requirements outlined above. This will be accomplished through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and any risks identified in the proposal.

Factor 4 will receive one of the combined technical/risk ratings described in Table 1.14.0

5.6 RATING SCHEME For Factors 1, and 3, and 4 the SST will assign the offeror one of the ratings shown in Table 1. For Factor 2 the SST will assign the offeror one of the ratings shown in Table 2 and 3. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered. These are combined to establish one performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

Table 1

FACTORS 1 & 4 RATING SCHEME

RATING DESCRIPTION

OUTSTANDING

Proposal meets requirements and indicate an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths faroutweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

GOOD

Proposal meets requirements and indicate a through approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses.Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

ACCEPTABLE

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

6.0 ON

7.0 FORDISCUSSIONS

7.1 In accordance with solicitation provision FAR 52.215-1, the Source Selection Authority (SSA)maychoose, to make a bestvalue decision and awarda contract on the basis of the initial proposals received without conducting discussions.

8.0 BASIS

9.0 OFOFFERORS

10.0 PROPOSALEXPENSEAND AWARDCOST