W912PP19R0022_Amend_0003.pdf

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

J

PAGE OF PAGES

1 2

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

07/23/2019

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

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

U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALBUQUERQUE

CORPS OF ENGINEERS

4101 JEFFERSON PLAZA, N.E.

ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO 87109-3435

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION

NO.

W912PP19R0022

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

06/21/2019

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

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 APPROPRIATION 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.

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

PROJECT: LAUER DAM REHABILITATION PROJECT, MODOC COUNTY, CA

1. This is Amendment No. 0003 to Solicitation No. W912PP19R0022; 23 July 2019. The following revisions shall be incorporated into the specifications. All other provisions shall remain unchanged.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

W912PP19R0022

AMENDMENT No. 0003

2. SPECIFICATIONS: Delete the following listed pages and substitute the pages attached hereto. On the revised pages, for convenience, changes are emphasized by STRIKETHROUGH for deletions and UNDERLINE for additions from the previous issue. All portions of the revised (or new) pages shall apply whether or not changes have been indicated.

Delete Page Insert Page

Section 00 22 16, 16-40/151 Section 00 22 16, 16-40/151

////////LAST ITEM////////

Section 00 22 16 - Supplementary Instructions to Proposers

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, EVALUATION CRITERIA, AND BASIS FOR AWARD

1.0 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

The intent of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is to solicit proposals for the Lauer Dam Rehabilitation Project Modoc County, North Fork Pit River, North of Alturas, California. The Government reserves the right to award a contract without discussions IAW FAR 52.215-1. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a technical and cost/price standpoint. Offerors shall organize their proposals as described herein. Proposals may be determined non-responsive for failure to follow this format.

The proposal shall describe the capability of the Offeror to perform the requirements of the Statement of Work (SOW). The proposal should be specific and complete in every detail; and should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the requirements. The proposal should be practical, legible, clear, and coherent.

In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information containing sufficient detail to allow review and evaluation by the Government. Proposal clarity, organization, and cross-referencing are mandatory. Failure to submit and organize proposals as requested may adversely affects an Offeror's evaluation.

Proposals shall not exceed the page limits described. Provide all information in tabbed sections.

2.0 SUBMISSION FORMAT

a. COVER SHEET & TABLE OF CONTENTS. Proposals shall consist of two (2) volumes. A cover sheet identifying the Offeror (name, address, point of contact), project description, and solicitation number shall be provided. The second sheet shall be a table of contents. The proposals shall contain a detailed table of contents. If more than one binder is used, the complete table of contents shall be included in each. Offers that violate these rules unnecessarily delay the evaluation process and may be rejected by the Government after the initial evaluation without receiving any further consideration. Neither the cover sheet nor the table of contents count toward the page limitations.

b. TABS. Written proposal materials shall be submitted in standard three ring loose-leaf binders. Proposals shall be tabbed and labeled as specified in a manner to afford easy identification from a Table of Contents.

c. FONT SIZE. Shall not be less than 10 point. Pages will be double-sided and each page shall be identified with the appropriate page number centered at the bottom of the page.

d. SHEET SIZE. Shall be 8-1/2 inches x 11 inches; however, if drawings, charts, or other graphics are submitted, sheets no larger than 11 inches x 17 inches and folded to 8-1/2 inches x 11 inches shall be used.

All sheets shall be dated and numbered.

e. PAGE LIMITS. The proposal shall not exceed the specified page limits. The Government will not review any information in excess of the page limits or information submitted in an appendix or attachment to the proposal. The Offeror shall not submit verbatim sections of this solicitation as part of their proposal.

Offers that do not meet these requirements may be subject to rejection.

a. NUMBER OF COPIES. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

Amendment 0003

PRINTED **DIGITAL MAXIMUM

VOLUME/TITLE COPIES COPIES PAGES

VOLUME 1: Technical Proposal Original +5 5 60*

VOLUME 2: Price Proposal Original +1 1 N/A*

* Past Performance Questionnaires, Representations and Certifications, performance recognition documents and Small Business Participation Past Performance documents are excluded from the page count.

** Provide files on CD in read only PDF format. An electronic copy of your price schedule.

3.0 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, PROPOSAL CONTENTS AND RELATED EVALUATION

FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS

Offerors shall submit their proposals in accordance with the following:

VOLUME 1 – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Factor/ Subfactor/ Element

LOCATION DESCRIPTION RELATIVE IMPORTANCE

FACTOR 1 TECHNICAL ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE

Subfactor A Vol 1 Tab A Relevant Contractor Experience ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE Subfactor B Vol 1 Tab B Organization and Technical

Approach

ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE

Subfactor C Vol 1 Tab C Proposed Contract Duration and Summary Schedule

ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE

FACTOR 2 Vol 1 Tab D PAST PERFORMANCE

ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE

FACTOR 3 Vol 1 Tab E SMALL BUSINESS

PARTICIPATION ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE

VOLUME 2 – PRICE PROPOSAL

Factor/ Subfactor/ Element

LOCATION DESCRIPTION

RELATIVE IMPORTANCE

N/A Vol 2 Tab 1 Proposal Cover Sheet Not Rated N/A Vol 2 Tab 2 SF1442 and Acknowledgement of Amendments Not Rated

FACTOR 4 3 Vol 2 Tab 3 SECTION 00 11 00, PRICING SCHEDULE

Award will be made to lowest – priced technically acceptable proposal

N/A Vol 2 Tab 4 Bid Guarantee (Bid Bond) Not Rated N/A Vol 2 Tab 5 Representations & Certifications Not Rated N/A Vol 2 Tab 6 Financials and Financial

Standing Questionnaire Not Rated

N/A Vol 2 Tab 7 JV Agreement (if applicable) and/or Corporate, Partnership, Joint Venture Certificate

Not Rated

Amendment 0003

L4CT9KM9

Cross-Out

L4CT9KM9

Cross-Out

L4CT9KM9

Cross-Out

L4CT9KM9

Cross-Out

L4CT9KM9

Cross-Out

L4CT9KM9

Cross-Out

L4CT9KM9

Cross-Out l4ctemlk l4ctemlk Cross-Out

*A RATING OF UNACCEPTABLE ON ANY FACTOR/SUBFACTOR WILL RESULT IN AN OVERALL

RATING OF UNACCEPTABLE.

3.0.1 Where the word “project(s)” appears, it is understood to mean a project(s), contract(s), task order(s), or any other contract document provided for in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR 2.101). Examples of projects submitted by the Prime Construction Contractor may be projects performed for a State or Federal Government Agency; or for a commercial or private sector customer.

3.0.2 Where the word “recent” appears it is understood to mean a construction type project for which construction is at least 70% complete (measured by performance period days) as of the RFP closing date or a construction type project that has been completed within 7 years of the RFP closing date. Projects completed more than 7 years before the RFP closing date will not be considered for evaluation purposes.

3.0.3 Where the word “relevant” appears it is understood to mean that project experience submitted is similar to the context of this solicitation in terms of scope and magnitude of effort and complexity as described and required in this RFP. For this RFP, “relevant” projects are defined as projects that are similar in terms of:

Scope (Dam Construction, Dewatering, Diversion and Care of Water, Fabric Reinforced Fill, Core Fill, Drain Gravel and Filter Sand Construction, Riprap, Reinforced Concrete, Restressed Concrete Bridges, Outlet and Canal Gates, Electric Motor Operated Gates, Gravel Road Surfaces Construction.)

Type (Concrete Structures, Compacted Embankment and General Excavation and Earthen Dam Construction.), Complexity (Working on Tribal lands, working in a remote location with little to no utilities available, providing irrigation water during construction, and working in difficult site conditions.)

Magnitude ($5 Million or above).

4.0 FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL – SUBFACTOR A: RELEVANT CONTRACTOR EXPERIENCE

4.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

4.1.1 The Offeror shall submit examples of construction projects which best illustrate the experience of the construction contractor on relevant projects of similar in scope, type, complexity, and magnitude as defined in section 3.03 above.

A minimum three (3) projects, but not more than 5, are to be submitted for the Prime Contractor. Each project example shall include a project narrative, discussing the project and providing specifics as noted herein. If a Joint Venture (JV) is proposing, provide examples for each prime contractor in the JV within the five project examples allowed.

4.1.2 Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contracts, where numerous Task Orders are summed to meet the minimum construction dollar value identified herein, are not acceptable.

4.1.3 The Government preference is that project examples submitted be of completed projects (i.e. construction complete). Projects still under construction will be evaluated only if they are more than 70 percent complete.

4.1.4 Information is to be compiled on the Contract Description Forms provided at the end of section 002216 and will be used to evaluate contractor experience. Responses to this factor should take into account experience of the management team proposed for the contract, timeliness of performance, safety and health record, customer satisfaction and cost control. Offerors are invited, but not required, to submit photographs of successful projects in conjunction with this section. Project experience submitted by the Offeror as a subcontractor will not be evaluated.

4.1.5 Each project example narrative should include the following information:

Project title and location Detailed scope of the project Original contract award amount and final construction cost

Original contract finish date and actual finish date Points of Contact, as described below Sub-contractors utilized on the project and if they are proposed to be utilized for the :Lauer Dam

Rehabilitation Project Prime Contractor Personnel on the project and if they are proposed to be utilized for the Lauer Dam

Rehabilitation Project Narrative description of the project, as described below

4.1.6 All project examples shall contain a Point of Contact (POC) as well as one alternate Point of Contact, to include the name, job title of the POC, address, telephone, and e-mail address. The POC and alternate shall be familiar with the construction performance of the proposer and be a representative of the owner/customer, not affiliated with the proposer. The POC and alternate shall be able to verify the experience cited.

4.1.7 Narratives for each project should include a brief overview of the project, discussing major features of the project and each project’s relevance and similarities to this project. The role and work assigned to any sub-contractors and/or personnel noted in the narrative shall be explained. All time growth and construction cost growth shall be explained in each project example narrative. The Government preference is that project examples submitted be of completed projects (i.e. construction complete).

4.1.8 Regarding relevant Prime Construction Contractor work, the Government will consider the types of work features that are self-performed, on-site, by the Prime Contractor’s own organization in addition to the construction management effort. If utilizing a Teaming Arrangement, as a part of their proposal, the Offeror must provide a contractor team agreement signed by all parties, identifying the legal name(s) of all entities and describing the nature of each entity’s relationship (teaming/partnering, joint venture, mentor/protégé, etc.) and their role on this project. This documentation shall be provided in Volume 2, Tab 8 of the Offeror's technical proposal. In the case of contractor team arrangements involving a prime contractor and subcontractor(s), where the prime contractor submits the proposal in response to this RFP, the prime contractor must have completed at least 50 percent of the total number of projects submitted for Factor 1 for consideration in response to the experience requirements of this RFP.

4.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

4.2.1 The Offeror's experience in construction of facilities similar to this project will be evaluated. Evaluation ratings will be given for project examples which are determined to be “relevant” to this project (similar in scope, type, complexity, and magnitude) and clearly demonstrate a contractor’s capabilities to construct a project of this nature, and execute the project successfully while containing costs and maintaining schedule.

4.2.2 Relevancy will be rated based on the following Relevancy Matrix. For a project to receive a “relevant” rating, it should include, at a minimum, three out of the six attributes detailed below.

5.0 FACTOR 1:TECHNICAL – SUBFACTOR B: ORGANIZATIONAL AND TECHNICAL APPROACH:

5.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

5.1.1 Provide information that describes the offeror’s organization and intended technical approach to executing the construction contract per the detailed requirements herein. Limit the information to 20 pages or less; clearly but concisely describe the organizational and technical approach to project management and execution. The narrative shall specifically address the below key points:

a. Describe how Dam construction functionality, processes and produces will be addressed on this project. Specifically discuss; Constructing outlet works and spillway at the existing dike/spillway, constructing a cast-in-place reinforced concrete core wall and plinth along the length of the dam alignment and at the spillway. Furnishing and installing reinforced cast-in-place concrete intake structures, outlet structures, impact basins, conduit encasement. Placing rockfill along the upstream and downstream sides of the concrete core walls and as backfill at retaining walls. Placing clay soil and/or geosynthetic materials where required.

b. Describe your approach to manage the physical site condition, dewatering procedures, working on Tribal land, and grading, reclamation, seeding, and establishing vegetation in areas disturbed by construction activities.

c. Offerors understanding of remote, constrained and environmentally sensitive site conditions affecting the site and construction process, including. Localized breach of the existing dam after construction of the new dam.

5.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

5.2.1 The Government will evaluate the strengths, weaknesses and any deficiencies in the plan. The offeror MUST, at minimum, address the key points listed above. Failure to address all of the key points will result in an Unacceptable rating. The Government will evaluate the firm’s understanding of the requirements described in the

RELEVANCY MATRIX

Similar Project

Attributes:

Earthen Dam Construction

Working w/ Concrete Structures, Compacted Embankment, Riprap, Bridges, Outlet & Canal Gates

Dewatering Diversion & Care of Water

Working on Tribal lands

$5M or greater Magnitude

Working in Remote Locations with little or not utilities available

RELEVANCY

RATING

Offeror Project 1 Offeror Project 2 Offeror Project 3 Offeror Project 4 Offeror Project 5

TALLY

Division 01 requirements and the plans and technical specifications of the Solicitation and the capability to execute the project.

5.3 FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL -- SUBFACTOR C: PROPOSED CONTRACT DURATION AND

SUMMARY SCHEDULE

5.4 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

5.4.1 The Offeror shall propose a contract duration in the summary schedule not to exceed the maximum contract duration specified in the Special Contract Requirement (SCR) entitled COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION, AND COMPLETION OF WORK. The proposed duration shall become the required contract duration.

5.4.2 Submit a summary level schedule (graphically and in narrative form) for construction including any construction phasing. Schedules or diagrams may be provided separately in a size that is easily read, but shall be clearly labeled as Tab 2. This summary schedule will, after contract award, be replaced with a project schedule as required by Section 01 32 01.00 10 PROJECT SCHEDULE. The summary schedule shall be task oriented, indicating the date each milestone will be achieved. Offeror may use a critical path or other method of his choice;

however, schedules shall be graphically represented. The proposed summary schedule shall reflect the proposed contract duration. Give attention to the following features:

(1) Show the overall construction phase for major items. At a minimum the contractor shall identify construction of key elements, including; constructing of outlet works and spillway at the existing dike/spillway, constructing a cast-in-place reinforced concrete core wall and plinth along the length of the dam alignment and at the spillway.

Furnishing and installing reinforced cast-in-place concrete intake structures, outlet structures, impact basins, conduit encasement. Placing rockfill along the upstream and downstream sides of the concrete core walls and as backfill at retaining walls. Excavating, placing, and compacting access roadway embankments, drainage provisions, and gravel surfacing (change accordingly to include critical schedule items).

(2) Show turnover of the project. Identify any proposed phasing or sequence of work activities. The time to complete the project and turnover to the Government must consider the requirement for the Contractor’s CQC completion inspection and the subsequent joint Contractor-Government turnover inspection.

(3) Show red-line as-built submissions.

(4) Constraints: Offeror must demonstrate the capability and flexibility to plan and schedule the complete project to meet the proposed contract completion period. Clearly identify any constraints in the narrative (e.g., labor or material availability, permits, weather, etc.). Indicate the anticipated overall critical path on the schedule.

The intent is to provide enough detail to demonstrate the Offeror’s understanding of the project; however, it is not the intent for the Offeror to provide the amount of detail that will be required in the pre-work submittals contained in Division 01 of this RFP.

5.5 EVALUATION CRITERIA:

5.5.1 Proposed Contract Duration: This duration will become the contractually binding completion period. The Government will evaluate the contract duration, as proposed by the Offeror, not to exceed the maximum allowed duration shown in the SCR entitled COMMENCEMENT, PROSECUTION AND COMPLETION OF WORK. In assessing the reasonableness of the proposed contract duration, the Government may take into account how well the proposed summary schedule supports the proposed duration, as well as use other information, such as but not limited to independent judgment concerning logic, constraints and typical construction durations. The Government will consider an unreasonably condensed contract duration, which places additional cost or schedule risk on the Government or which may create a risk of contract or performance failure, as a significant weakness or a deficiency, depending upon the evaluators' judgment.

5.5.2 Summary Schedule: The Government will evaluate the summary schedule for construction. The length of the schedule must match the proposed contract duration. A schedule shorter than the proposed contract duration may indicate the Offeror is placing additional risk on the Government for any delays between the scheduled completion date and the required contract completion period. Both parties shall assume field overhead costs are included in the contract price for the full proposed contract duration. The Government will evaluate the schedule to assess the strength of understanding of the project scope, restrictions which must be considered in the schedule e.g., permitting, long lead items, phasing, etc. The Government will evaluate the strength of understanding of events associated with coordinating submittals, the firm's capability to schedule the complete project within the proposed contract duration and the realism of the schedule.

6.0 FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

6.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

6.1.2 Information provided on the Contract Description Forms provided under Factor 1: Relevant Contract Experience will be used to evaluate Past Performance. .

6.1.2.2 Regarding relevant Prime Construction Contractor work, the Government will consider the types of work features that are self-performed, on-site, by the Prime Contractor’s own organization in addition to the construction management effort. If utilizing a Teaming Arrangement, as a part of their proposal, the Offeror must provide a contractor team agreement signed by all parties, identifying the legal name(s) of all entities and describing the nature of each entity’s relationship (teaming/partnering, joint venture, mentor/protégé, etc.) and their role on this project.

This documentation shall be provided in Volume 2, Tab 8 of the Offeror's technical proposal. In the case of contractor team arrangements involving a prime contractor and subcontractor(s), where the prime contractor submits the proposal in response to this RFP, the prime contractor must have completed at least 50 percent of the total number of projects submitted for Factor 1 for consideration in response to the experience requirements of this RFP.

6.1.2.3 If an Offeror has been required to take corrective action for any substandard performance (overall rating below Satisfactory, i.e. Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), the Offeror should explain the circumstances and the corrective actions taken. If an Offeror has experienced other performance problems such as cost overruns, extended performance periods, numerous warranty calls, etc., the Offeror should explain.

6.1.3 Past Performance Questionnaire (form PPQ-0). For all contracts identified in Section 1, Contract Descriptions, and pertaining to the Offeror (Prime Contractor) only, a Past Performance Questionnaire must be completed and submitted. The Past Performance Questionnaire included in this solicitation (at the end of section 02216) is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the customer/client for each project the Offeror includes in its proposal for the Past Performance Factor, Volume 1, Tab D. Do not obtain Past Performance Questionnaires for any subcontractors.

6.1.3.1 The Offeror shall complete Blocks 1 - 4 of the PPQ-0 form and send the questionnaire to the customer/client and if applicable, to both the Government Contracting Activity (Contracting Officer) and the Government Contract Administration Activity (ACO/COR) responsible for the past/current contract.

Customers/clients shall be instructed to complete Blocks 5 – 8 and the performance questions of the PPQ-0 form.

Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the customer/client point of contact.

6.3.1.2 Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a customer/client for a project(s) before the proposal closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ which will provide contract and customer information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with customers/clients to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. The Government reserves the right to contact the customer/client for verification or additional information. If the customer requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Kathleen Mayer, Contracting Officer, via email at kathleen.mayer@usace.army.mil, prior to the proposal closing date.

6.3.1.3 Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. I.e., Offerors cannot reference PPQ’s from other projects simply by stating “refer to PPQ submitted for

Project XX”. Complete PPQ’s must be submitted for this project. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

6.3.1.4 Offerors may include performance recognition documents received within the last seven years (7) such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition relative to the projects submitted for Tab B: Past Performance. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror.

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

6.3.1.6 Other types of past performance questionnaires, signed by a commercial customer or signed by a representative from another Federal or State agency, may be submitted as long as the information submitted has the same or similar information as that of the Past Performance Questionnaire provided at the end of this section, documenting the quality of the Offeror’s performance for the project submitted.

6.3.1.7 Past Performance Questionnaires previously completed by the customer/client may be submitted in lieu of having the customer/client complete a new questionnaire for the contracts identified in the Contract Description Forms. Previously completed surveys will be evaluated only if: (1) they match the projects identified in the Contract Descriptions Form and (2) they are submitted according to the instructions listed above.

6.1.4 Small Business Participation Past Performance. All Offerors shall submit information substantiating the Offerors’ past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8, “Utilization of Small Business”, maximizing opportunities for U.S. small business subcontractors. Offerors shall also provide a statement indicating whether any negative information has been reported in the past seven years concerning the Offerors’ past compliance with FAR 52.219-8. If any such negative information has been reported, the Offeror may submit explanations or comments responding to such negative information. Offerors with no prior contracts containing FAR 52.219-8 shall certify the same.

6.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the contract.

6.2.1 The Government will focus its inquiries on the Offeror’s record of performance as it relates to the solicitation requirements, including cost, schedule, performance and management of subcontractors. A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of the work can become an important consideration in the evaluation process. Therefore, Offerors will be reminded to include the most recent and relevant efforts (within the past seven years) in their proposal. Absent any recent and relevant past performance history, the Offeror will be assigned an “unknown confidence rating” and its proposal will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance. The Government may use data provided by the Offeror in its proposal and data obtained from other sources (i.e. PPIRS, CPARS, etc.) including data in Government files or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor and their current and past performance under Federal, State or Local government or commercial contracts for same or similar services as compared to the work outlined in the RFP. Data used in conducting performance risk assessments shall not extend past seven years prior to the closing date of the RFP, but may include performance data generated during the past seven years without regard to the contract award date.

6.2.2 Projects submitted must be “relevant” when compared to the project described in the solicitation.

For this RFP, “relevant” projects are defined at the beginning of this Section 00110 of the RFP.

6.2.3 Offerors shall submit contracts for the prime Offeror either currently in performance (at least 70% complete) or awarded during the past seven years, from the closing date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation.

7.0 FACTOR 3: SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION FACTOR

7.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

7.1.1 Utilizing the Small Business Participation Form at the end of this Section, offeror’s (Both Large and Small Businesses) must propose goals for Small Business Participation. Propose an overall goal accomplished through collective small business participation from any type of small business or subcategory small business. The work to be performed directly by a small business prime offeror will be evaluated as Small Business Participation. The goals are:

1. Total Small Business (any type of small business) 44% of total contract value

2. Sub-Category Small Business

a. HUB-Zone __% (to be proposed by the offeror)

b. Women Owned Small Business __% (to be proposed by the offeror)

c. Service-Disabled, Veteran-Owned SB __% (to be proposed by the offeror)

d. Veteran-Owned Small Business __% (to be proposed by the offeror)

e. HBCU/Minority Institutions __% (to be proposed by the offeror)

f. Small Disadvantaged Business __% (to be proposed by the offeror)*

*Note: In accordance with DFARS 219.705-4, the minimum subcontracting requirement for SDB is 5.0%

7.1.2 The small business participation commitment document will be included with the offer and a final small business participation commitment document shall be incorporated into the resulting contract.

7.1.3 Separate from the Small Business Participation Plan under Evaluation Factor 2, large business offerors must also submit a Subcontracting Plan (Individual Contract Plan) as required by FAR 52.219-9. Large businesses will not be eligible for award if they fail to submit an acceptable Subcontracting Plan. Subcontracting Plan shall reflect and be consistent with the commitments offered in the Small Business Participation Plan. In accordance with DFARs 215.304(c), when an evaluation assesses the extent that small businesses and HBCU/MI are specifically identified in proposals, the small businesses and HBCU/MIs considered in the evaluation shall be listed in any subcontracting plan submitted. Subcontracting Plans will be evaluated on an ACCEPTABLE/UNACCEPTABLE basis:

(a) Does the Subcontracting Plan adequately respond to each of the required elements of FAR 52.219-9(d) paragraphs (1) through (11)?

(b) Are the commitments in the Subcontracting Plan comparative to the commitments in the Small Business Participation Plan?

Note 1: Though different from each other, the Small Business Participation Commitment Document is a complement in part to a Small Business Subcontracting Plan for offerors required to submit a plan. Other than small business offerors need to ensure consistency between both documents where appropriate.

Note 2: The Subcontracting Plan is not a requirement for evaluation in source selection, but rather, a requirement for award to an other than small business. The small business subcontracting plan will be included with the offer and a final small business subcontracting plan, once determined to be acceptable, shall be incorporated into the resulting contract.

Amendment 0003

L4CT9KM9

Cross-Out

7.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

7.2.1 The offerors small business participation commitment will be evaluated on the following:

a. The extent to which small business concerns are specifically identified by name and socio-economic category in the proposal.

b. Commitment to use such firms (formal agreements/letters of intent).

c. Complexity and variety of the work small business firms are to perform.

d. Quantitative degree to which small businesses (including small businesses in all socio-economic categories) will participate in the acquisition relative to the total value of the acquisition. (A minimum quantitative requirement (MQR) of 44% or better of the total contract value for small business concerns participation is required. Small business primes participation is included in the 40% or better participation).

e. Does the proposed amount of small business participation logically reflect the scope, type, complexity, and magnitude of the project?

8.0 VOLUME II: COST/PRICE

8.1 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

This volume shall consist of all information required to support proposed prices. Certified cost and pricing data are not currently required; however, the Government reserves the right to request such data prior to award. The information submitted in this volume shall comply with FAR 15.408, Table 15-2, and the requirements set forth below. There are no page limitations for this volume. The Offeror shall ensure that the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and fully supports the amounts set forth in the price schedule, SF1442 and continuation sheets. Do not page number this volume.

(a) Offerors shall include a proposal cover sheet in Volume 2 as required by FAR 52.215-1 (c) (2). This provision, entitled “Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition,” is included in full text in Section 00110 of the solicitation. The proposal cover sheet must provide the following information:

1. Solicitation Number

2. Name, address, telephone and facsimile numbers, and electronic email address

3. DUNS, CAGE and Tax Identification numbers of the Offeror

4. 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 as reflected on the proposal schedule attached to the SF1442. (Note, failure to agree with all terms, conditions, and provisions in the solicitation may result in the Offeror’s proposal being rejected as non-responsive)

5. Names, title, telephone and facsimile numbers, and electronic email address of person(s) authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation.

6. Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal and any contract that may result from that proposal

7. Acknowledgement that your company’s data at the System for Award Management website is current per FAR Clause 52.204-7, System for Award Management. (This clause is in Section 00700 of this RFP)

(b) Following the proposal cover sheet, Volume 2 shall be organized into the following tabbed sections:

1. Standard Form (SF1442), Solicitations, Offer and Acknowledgement of Amendments. These documents should be secured within some form of document protector and not “hole-punched”. The SF1442 shall be completed by the Offeror and duly executed with an original signature by an official authorized to bind the company in accordance with instructions at FAR 4.102. Include with the Offeror’s name and address in Block 14 of the SF1442, your company’s DUNS, CAGE and Tax Identification numbers. Offerors shall acknowledge all amendments to the solicitation in block 19.

Amendment 0003

If the Offeror fails to acknowledge all amendments, the proposal (volume 1 and 2) will be considered as non-responsive and shall not be evaluated further.

2. Proposal/Price Schedule. Your proposed price for this project shall be in the form of the Proposal/Price Schedule provided in this solicitation. Offerors may not modify the price schedule wording or format. As this is a firm fixed-price contract, price proposals will not be considered which provide for subsequent increases in price. No qualified price proposal of any type will be accepted;

therefore, all offers containing such qualifications will be considered unacceptable. If the Offeror does not comply with all requirements of the proposal forms, the proposal may be considered unacceptable and eliminated from consideration.

3. Bid Guarantee/Bond (SF24): This tab shall contain an executed bid bond for either 20% or $3 Million, whichever is less. These documents should be secured within some form of document protector and not “hole-punched”.

4. Certifications/Representations and other Statements of Offerors. This tab shall contain Section 004500, Certifications/Representations which are provided in this solicitation. Fill in all applicable areas. Offerors may print and insert in this tab their completed Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) in lieu of Section 004500.

5. Financials and Financial Standing Questionnaire. Offerors shall provide their latest balance sheet and income statement, including the names of banks or other financial institutions with which your firm conducts business. If the financial statements are more than 60 days old, a certificate should be attached stating that the financial condition is substantially the same, or if not the same, state the changes that have taken place. The financial statements will be treated as confidential. The Financial Standing Questionnaire provided at the end of this Section of the RFP is required to be completed and submitted under this section.

6. JV Agreement and/or Corporate, Partnership, Joint Venture Certificate. If applicable, the offerors shall provide a copy of the firm’s JV Agreement. The offer shall provide a completed copy of the Corporate, Partnership, Joint Venture Certificate provided in the RFP.

8.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA

8.2.1 The contract will be a Firm Fixed Priced (FFP) contract. The Government will evaluate price reasonableness for the fixed priced effort. The base bid and all options shall be included in the price evaluation.

Should the Government determine that the proposed prices are unrealistically low, this will be considered a performance risk.

8.2.2 The RFP requires firm-fixed-prices contract line items. A price reasonableness approach will be utilized by the Government to determine that the proposed prices offered are fair and reasonable and that unbalanced pricing between CLINs or Options is not occurring. In evaluating price reasonableness, other than cost and pricing data shall be utilized.

8.2.3 The Government will examine price proposals for artificially low unit prices when unit pricing is applicable. Offers found to be unreasonably high, unrealistically low, or unbalanced, may be considered unacceptable and may be rejected on that basis.

9.0 LOWEST PRICE TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE (LPTA) SOURCE SELECTION PROCESS.

9.1 The proposal that provides the lowest price and is otherwise technically acceptable in all factors will be accepted for award. To be considered technically acceptable, no factor in the proposal may be rated as “Unacceptable.” The failure of a proposal to meet all of the requirements under any Factor will result in a technically unacceptable rating and preclude award. If a proposal is found to be technically unacceptable in any one of the three evaluated areas (technical, past performance, and cost/price), this will render the proposal as technically unacceptable overall, and the offer will be removed from further consideration for award.

9.2 The Government will conduct technical evaluations of proposals as follows. Each proposal will be evaluated by the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) against the evaluation factors established in Section 00 22 16.

9.3 The Contracting Officer may establish a competitive range consisting of the most highly rated proposals after the initial review of both the technical and price proposals. Once the competitive range is established, the Government will engage in Discussions with all offerors included in the competitive range. After receipt of the Offeror’s responses raised during Discussions, responses will be rated again in the same manner as described above for the initial evaluation.

10.0 BASIS FOR AWARD.

10.1 Subject to the provisions contained herein, award will be made to one (1) Offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR, who conforms to the solicitation requirements, and whose proposal, judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria and other considerations specified in this solicitation, meets the technically acceptable standard for the non-cost factors and provides the lowest evaluated price.

11.0 EVALUATION

11.1 Each member of the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) will independently consider all information provided in the technical proposal. Once these individual analyses are completed, the team will meet and determine a rating for each of the evaluation factors by consensus decision. The evaluation team will document strengths (e.g., advantages), weaknesses (e.g., disadvantages), and other comments (e.g., deficiency and/or clarification) to support the rating for each factor, as well as the overall rating. The ratings for Technical Factors will be expressed in an adjectival assessment of Acceptable and Unacceptable.

11.2 The past performance factor considers each Offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying construction services that meet the contract requirements. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation: relevancy and contractor performance.

11.2.1 RELEVANCY: The first aspect of the past performance evaluation is to assess the Offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. Relevancy is not separately rated; however, the following criteria will be used to establish what is relevant. These criteria shall include similarity of service/support effort, scope, complexity, dollar value, contract type and other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the solicitation requirements Past Performance Relevancy Ratings are Relevant and Not Relevant.

11.2.1.1 Relevancy will be rated based on the Matrix in Factor 1.

11.2.2 QUALITY OF PRODUCTS AND SERVICES. The third aspect of past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. Past Performance information will be reviewed to determine the quality of the offeror’s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate these into the performance confidence assessment.

11.2.1 CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE: The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The past performance evaluation gathers information from customers on how well the Offeror performed those past contracts. The past performance evaluation considers each Offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance and results in an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the contract requirements. In determining contractor performance, each Offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings identified below. One rating is assigned for each Offeror after evaluating the Offeror’s recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements. Contractor Performance Ratings are Acceptable and Unacceptable.

11.2.2 Offerors (a) for whom compliance with FAR 52.219-8 Utilization of Small Business Concerns has been established; and/or (b) for whom no negative information has been reported; or (c) certifying no past performance history of contracts containing FAR 52.219-8 will be rated as “complying with FAR 52.219-8.” Such a rating shall have neither positive nor negative impact on the Offeror’s overall Past Performance evaluation. Offerors for whom negative information has been reported shall have such negative information, along with any explanations or comments responding to such negative information supplied by the Offeror, evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria for Past Performance. Such evaluation shall be substantiated and factored into the Offeror’s overall Past Performance evaluation.

11.3 Documentation and comments are required for all ratings. This consensus rating will be provided to the Source Selection Authority who, independently exercising prudent business judgment, will select the most qualified contractor.

12.0 RATING ADJECTIVES AND DEFINITIONS

12.1 RATING ADJECTIVES (TECHNICAL FACTORS)

Acceptable - Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Unacceptable - Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable.

12.2 RATING ADJECTIVES (CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE)

Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

12.3 DEFINITIONS

Clarifications. Limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when it is anticipated that discussions will not be necessary to award the project.

Communications. Exchanges, between the Government and offerors, after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range. Those include, but are not limited to, exchanges with:

a. Offerors whose past performance information is the determining factor preventing them from being included in the competitive range. Such communications will address adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not had a prior opportunity to respond; and

b. Offerors (other than those discussed above) whose exclusion from or inclusion in the competitive range is uncertain.

c. Communications may be conducted to enhance Government understanding of proposals; allow reasonable interpretation of the proposal; or facilitate the Government’s evaluation process. Communications cannot be used to cure proposal deficiencies or material omissions, materially alter the technical or price elements of the proposal, and/or otherwise revise the technical or price elements of the proposal. Such communications may be considered in rating proposals for the purpose of establishing the competitive range, if required. Communications shall not provide an opportunity for the Offeror to revise their proposal, but may address ambiguities in the proposal or other concerns (e.g. perceived deficiencies, weaknesses, errors, omissions, or mistakes and information relating to relevant past performance).

Discussions - Negotiations conducted in a…