W912QR25R0016_CERT_Final_Specs-0007.pdf

CIVIL/OPS/ENVIRONMENTAL BR

ATTN: ADYSON MEDLEY

600 DR M L KING JR PL RM 821

LOUISVILLE KY 40202-2236

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

SEE SUMMARY OF CHANGES

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 4

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street , County, State and Zip Code) X W912QR25R0016

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

20-Dec-2024

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

01-Jul-2025

CODE

U. S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, LOUISVILLE

600 DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. PLACE

ROOM 821

LOUISVILLE KY 40202-2239

W912QR 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE W912QR

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912QR25R0016_CERT_Final_Specs-0007

W912QR25R0016

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE (SF 30)

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0007 CHANGES

Solicitation W912QR25R0016 for Rough River Dam Modification is hereby amended with the following changes:

1. The following SPECIFICATION SECTIONS have been revised and replaced in their entirety:

00 08 00.00 06 SPECIAL PROVISIONS

00 31 19.23 06 WEATHER AND WATER STAGE DATA AND RESTRICTIONS

01 52 13.30 08 LABORATORY TESTING FACILITIES

03 70 00 MASS CONCRETE

2. The due date is hereby extended from 07 May 2025 at 10:00AM to 01 August 20525 at 10:00AM.

3. The solicitation is hereby amended to comply with the Recision of Class Deviation 2025-O0002 dated 02 June 2025, the follwing have been re-added:

Factor Section 4.6 Volume I - Factor IV - Price, Fab F Project Labor Agreement Table 5 - Project Labor Agreement (PLA) Assessment Factor Section 8.6 Tab F - Project Labor Agreement Clause 52.222-33 Clause 52.222-34

4. Wage Determination KY20250041 dated 6 June 2025 are hereby amended and incorporated.

SECTION 00 10 00 - SOLICITATION

The required response date/time has changed from 07-May-2025 10:00 AM to 01-Aug-2025 10:00 AM.

SECTION 00 70 00 - CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT

The following have been added by full text:

52.222-33 NOTICE OF REQUIREMENT FOR PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT (JAN 2024)

(a) Definitions. As used in this provision, the following terms are defined in clause 52.222-34, Project Labor Agreement, of this solicitation "construction," "labor organization," "large-scale construction project," and "project labor agreement."

(b) Offerors shall--

(1) Negotiate or become a party to a project labor agreement with one or more labor organizations for the term of the resulting construction contract; and

(2) Require its subcontractors to become a party to the resulting project labor agreement.

(c) The project labor agreement reached pursuant to this provision shall--

W912QR25R0016

(1) Bind the Offeror and subcontractors engaged in construction on the construction project to comply with the project labor agreement;

(2) Allow the Offeror and all subcontractors to compete for contracts and subcontracts without regard to whether they are otherwise parties to collective bargaining agreements;

(3) Contain guarantees against strikes, lockouts, and similar job disruptions;

(4) Set forth effective, prompt, and mutually binding procedures for resolving labor disputes arising during the term of the project labor agreement;

(5) Provide other mechanisms for labor-management cooperation on matters of mutual interest and concern, including productivity, quality of work, safety, and health; and

(6) Fully conform to all statutes, regulations, Executive orders, and agency requirements.

(d) Any project labor agreement reached pursuant to this provision does not change the terms of the resulting contract or provide for any price adjustment by the Government.

(e) The Offeror shall submit to the Contracting Officer a copy of the project labor agreement with its offer.

(End of Provision)

52.222-34 PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENT (JAN 2024)

(a) Definitions. As used in this clause--

Construction means construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, modernization, alteration, conversion, extension, repair, or improvement of buildings, structures, highways, or other real property.

Labor organization means a labor organization as defined in 29 U.S.C. 152(5) of which building and construction employees are members.

Large-scale construction project means a Federal construction project within the United States for which the total estimated cost of the construction contract(s) to the Federal Government is $35 million or more.

Project labor agreement means a pre-hire collective bargaining agreement with one or more labor organizations that establishes the terms and conditions of employment for a specific construction project and is an agreement described in 29 U.S.C. 158(f).

(b) The Contractor shall maintain in a current status throughout the life of the contract the project labor agreement entered into prior to the award of the contract.

(c) Subcontracts. The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (c), in subcontracts with subcontractors engaged in construction on the construction project.

(End of Clause)

(End of Summary of Changes)

PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL OF OFFERS AND PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. Overview.

1.1 The intent of this solicitation is to select one contractor for the Rough River Cutoff Wall and Outlet Works contract. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein, and award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible offeror, whose proposal conforms with all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and whose proposal is determined to represent the overall best value to the Government, all factors considered.

1.2 The basis of award is the Best Value Trade off Process. The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible offeror whom the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable and offers the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered. All factors other than cost or price, when combined, are approximately equal to cost or price. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers.

1.3 The target ceiling for contract award is $325 Million based on the funds made available for this project. The Government cannot guarantee that additional funds will be available for award. Offerors are under no obligation to approach this ceiling.

2. Submittal of offers.

2.1 Offerors submitting proposals for this project should limit submissions to data essential for evaluation of proposals so that a minimum of time and monies will have been expended in preparing information required herein. However, in order to be effectively and equitably evaluated, the proposals must include information sufficiently detailed to clearly describe the offeror's past performance, technical approach and management capabilities necessary for successful completion of the project.

Requirements stated in the Request for Proposal (RFP) are minimums. Proposals should follow in the order of sequence set forth in the RFP. Information provided out of sequence may not be evaluated and may result in the offeror’s disqualification from award.

2.2 Any information, presented in a proposal that the Offeror wants safeguarded from disclosure to other parties must be identified and labeled in accordance with the requirements of Provision “FAR 52.215- 1 Alt. I, Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition (Oct 1997),” subparagraph (e). The Government will endeavor to honor the restrictions against release requested by Offerors, to the extent permitted under United States law and regulations.

2.3 Offerors are required to submit a proposal consisting of the information identified in paragraphs 2.4.

All proposal materials shall be submitted electronically with a table of contents that identifies each section and page number. Proposal sections should parallel the submission requirements identified herein. Each proposal has a limit of 200 pages, 8 ½” by 11” in size using a minimum font size of 12 and a minimum margin size of one-half inch on all sides. Format restrictions must be adhered to and will be strictly enforced. Information submitted which exceeds the specified limit will not be evaluated

2.4 Volume I shall be submitted electronically in accordance with the Proposal Submission Instructions in Section 00 21 00 and include the following information:

Volume I – Factor I: Technical Approach Volume I – Factor II: Past Performance Volume I – Factor III: Small Business Participation Plan Volume I – Factor IV: Price

NOTE: Failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate section (factor or sub-factor) may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information. Any specified page limits will be strictly adhered to and enforced. Information submitted which exceeds the specified limit will not be evaluated.

3. Proposal Evaluation Process.

3.1. A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of representatives of the Corps of Engineers, User/Customer, and other required personnel will evaluate the proposals. Offerors are advised that the technical evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence.

Technical proposals will be reviewed and rated without knowledge of the price offered. The number and identities of offerors are not revealed to anyone who is not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other offerors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is the Tradeoff Process.

3.2 The evaluation process essentially consists of four parts: proposal compliance review and responsibility determination, technical evaluation, price evaluation, and cost/technical trade-off analysis.

3.2.1 Proposal Compliance and Responsibility Review: Upon receipt of proposals the Government will conduct an initial screening to ascertain that each offeror has submitted all of the required information, including electronic media, in the quantities and format specified in the RFP. Followed by a review to determine that the offeror is financially capable of sustaining performance under the contract and is able to obtain the required level of performance and payment bonds from an acceptable surety.

3.2.2 Technical Evaluation: The SSEB will evaluate and rate the Volume I proposals against the RFP requirements. Factor I – Technical Approach will be rated using Table 1 below. Factor II – Past Performance will be rated using Tables 2 and 3 below. The rating will be based on overall confidence in performance, with the final confidence assessment rating based on the extent of recent, relevant past experience and the quality of the offeror’s performance. Factor III – Small Business Participation Plan will be rated using Table 4 below.

3.2.3 Price Evaluation: The SSEB and Contracting Officer/SSA will evaluate price proposals independent of the technical evaluation. The SSEB will not have access to price information until completion of the technical evaluation.

3.2.4 Cost/Technical Trade-off Analysis: After all above evaluations are complete, the Contracting Officer/SSA will compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of technical proposals and compare prices. The Source Selection Authority (SSA) will then consider all factors to select the proposal offering the best value to the Government.

4. Proposal Information and Related Evaluation Factors.

4.1 Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the factors below, listed in relative order of importance. All evaluation factors, other than cost or price, when combined are considered approximately equal to cost or price. Offerors are reminded to include their best technical and price terms in their initial offer and not to automatically assume that they will have an opportunity to participate in discussions or be asked to submit a revised offer. The Government may make award of a conforming proposal without discussions, if deemed to be within the best interest of the Government.

4.2 Volume I- Factor I – Technical Approach

- Critical Area A Cutoff Wall Design and Construction

- Means and Methods for Cutoff Wall Construction

- Means and Methods for Tunnel Construction

- Means and Methods for Remaining Outlet Works Construction

4.3 Volume I – Factor II – Past Performance

4.5 Volume I – Factor III – Small Business Participation Plan

4.6 Volume I – Factor IV - Price

Tab A Standard Form 1442 and Price Breakout Schedule Not Rated

Tab B Joint Venture and Mentor – Protégé Agreements Not Rated Tab C Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding and Not Rated

Proof of Financial Ability Tab D Pre-Award Information Not Rated

Tab E Subcontracting Plan Not Rated Tab F Project Labor Agreement Not Rated

4.7 Ratings: Evaluators will apply the adjectival rating for the definition that most closely matches the evaluation.

Table 1

Technical Assessment Ratings Adjectival Rating Definition

Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

Table 2

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the 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.

Table 3

Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Definition Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Table 4

Small Business Assessment

Rating Definition

Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

4.7 Definitions

1. Deficiency. is a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

2. Strength. is an aspect of an offeror's proposal with merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the advantage of the Government during contract performance.

3. Significant Strength. is an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal with appreciable merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the considerable advantage of the Government during contract performance.

4. Weakness. means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

5. Significant Weakness. in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

6. Uncertainty. is any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offer is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission, or mistake).

7. Clarification. are limited exchanges between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussion is contemplated. See FAR 15.306(a)(1).

8. Adverse Past Performance. Past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation. Adverse past performance that must be addressed with Offerors includes unfavorable comments received from sources such as those received from respondents from past performance questionnaires or interviews that have not been finalized within a formal rating system. 5.0

5.0 Volume I – Factor I – Technical Approach

All factors other than cost or price, when combined, are approximately equal to cost or price.

The technical approach for will be rated based on the following:

a) Evaluated on clarity, adequacy, and understanding of the overall project;

b) Technical evaluation of requested information for each subfactor and conformance to plans and specifications; and

c) Safety, cost, and efficiency for offeror design elements and proposed means and methods.

5.1 Submission Requirements:

5.1.1 - Critical Area A Cutoff Wall Design and Construction

The offeror’s proposal shall contain a narrative and conceptual Cutoff Wall Design schematics including, as a minimum:

a) Critical Area A Cutoff Wall: Submit a narrative, sequence of work, and plans with details for completion of the work at Critical Area A per the plans and specifications. Include the sequence for: abandoning the outlet works; slurry control grouting; means and methods for severing and removing the conduit; and the cutoff wall placement at Critical Area A. All drawings shall include:

example dimensions and spacing for primary and secondary elements; example element classification; example grout hole designations, demolition, cutoff wall, and grouting equipment requirements; material requirements; and notes on project phasing to communicate the means and methods necessary to install the cutoff wall at Critical Area A. The narrative shall include personnel, QC staffing, safety, anticipated extended operations, or other key elements proposed.

Evaluation Criteria for Critical Area A Cutoff Wall Design and Construction: The SSEB will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach to construct the general cutoff wall, abandonment of the existing outlet works, advancement of the cutoff wall through the existing conduit at Critical Area A, the work platform, conducting drilling and grouting, downstream filter drain construction and retreat channel abandonment, and site restoration at the dam along with all other required features of the contract specific to the cutoff wall and site restoration, including the methods utilized to verify the completed elements meet criteria established in the plans and specifications. The technical approach must include methods to be utilized to verify the completed elements meet criteria established in the solicitation. This project is Design Bid Build, but there will be a very minimal amount of design elements as part of the Solicitation that the offeror will submit in compliance to the requirements outlined in the solicitation. The offeror shall be responsible for designing the work platform, trench slurry, and the method for installing the cutoff wall through the existing conduit in compliance with the performance criteria outlined within the solicitation. The offeror must also be responsible for evaluating the method of complying with specified contractual tolerances.

Although these design elements will be required, they will account for less than 3% of the total contract value. Indicate any concurrent cutoff wall work to be completed prior to outlet works completion.

5.1.2 - Means and Methods for Cutoff Wall Construction

a) General Cutoff Wall: Submit a narrative, sequence of work, and plans with details for completion of the general cutoff wall per the plans and specifications. Clearly identify the technical approach and means/methods to complete general cutoff wall including: the test section; primary and secondary panels; slurry control and operations; and the excavation and disposal required for the cutoff wall. All drawings shall include example dimensions for: elements; spacing equipment requirements; material requirements; and notes on project phasing to communicate the means and methods necessary to install the cutoff wall per the plans and specifications. The narrative shall include personnel, QC staffing, safety, anticipated extended operations, or other key elements proposed. The narrative shall also include a plan view and narrative showing the contractor work areas including, but not limited to, construction work platform dimensions, grout plants, concrete plants, de-sanding and slurry plants, slurry containment areas, sedimentation ponds, haul roads, emergency materials and emergency staging locations. The narrative shall also include the following information related to emergency management:

Cutoff Wall Slurry loss or excavation instability.

Excessive slurry loss as defined in the specifications (if used) Discharge or blowout of grout, slurry or concrete Excessive seepage or blowout of water from embankment Inability to remove equipment from the excavation

b) Work Platform: Submit conceptual narrative and plans for the work platform. The narrative and plans shall include: the proposed work platform dimensions and height; proposed means and methods for installation; and proposed materials to be utilized, to facilitate work platform construction per the requirements detailed in the plans and specifications. The narrative shall include how the proposed work platform system will incorporate protection of the existing instrumentation located at the dam. The work platform shall include typical cross sections in the valley and right abutment showing the relationship of the work platform to the parapet wall, cutoff wall, grout lines and existing instrumentation in accordance with the plans and specifications. The narrative shall include personnel, QC staffing, safety, anticipated extended operations, or other key elements proposed.

c) Dam Restoration Activities: Submit a narrative of the dam restoration activities including work platform removal, retreat channel abandonment and filter construction, instrumentation restoration and new installations, and road relocation. The narrative shall include personnel, QC staffing, safety, anticipated extended operations, or other key elements proposed.

Evaluation Criteria for Means and Methods for Cutoff Wall Construction: The SSEB will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach to construct the general cutoff wall, abandonment of the existing outlet works, advancement of the cutoff wall through the existing conduit at Critical Area A, the work platform, conducting drilling and grouting, downstream filter drain construction and retreat channel abandonment, and site restoration at the dam along with all other required features of the contract specific to the cutoff wall and site restoration, including the methods utilized to verify the completed elements meet criteria established in the plans and specifications. The technical approach must include methods to be utilized to verify the completed elements meet criteria established in the solicitation. This project is Design Bid Build, but there will be a very minimal amount of design elements as part of the Solicitation that the offeror will submit in compliance to the requirements outlined in the solicitation. The offeror shall be responsible for designing the work platform, trench slurry, and the method for installing the cutoff wall through the existing conduit in compliance with the performance criteria outlined within the solicitation. The offeror must also be responsible for evaluating the method of complying with specified contractual tolerances.

Although these design elements will be required, they will account for less than 3% of the total contract value. Indicate any concurrent cutoff wall work to be completed prior to outlet works completion.

5.1.3 Means and Methods for Tunnel Construction

The offeror’s proposal shall contain a narrative and conceptual schematic for tunnel construction including, as a minimum:

a) Tunnel and Portals: Submit a narrative with a plan view showing the sequence of tunneling work including portal construction per the plans and specifications. Proposed tunneling means and methods for the entire tunnel from beginning to completion including proposed initial support methods, life safety precautions and safety procedures, surveys, mucking, spoil and disposal, access, tunnel lining etc. Include at least one (1) typical cross section and profile for the upstream portal, mainline tunnel, and downstream portal. Include at least four (4) details for proposed initial support methods. Discuss the collection and removal of water within the tunnel. Include any shop drawings and narratives required to convey safety requirements such as lighting, ventilation, pedestrian zones and safety inspections. The full sequence of a typical round of tunneling should be detailed including excavation, safety inspections of unsupported rock, foundation mapping, installation of initial support, dewatering and control of water, general safety and environmental controls, mucking, and all other items necessary for completion of an excavated segment prior to beginning the next segment of excavation within the tunnel/portals. The means and methods identified must meet or exceed the requirements in the Solicitation including EM 385-1-1.

Evaluation Criteria for Means and Methods for Tunnel Construction: The SSEB will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach to construct the tunnels and portals along with other required features for this feature of work, etc. This project is Design Bid Build, but there will be a very minimal amount of design elements as part of the Request for Proposal that the offeror will submit in compliance with the performance criteria outlined within the solicitation. The offeror shall design temporary support for the upstream portal and tunnel along with means and methods and any safety items required to safely construct the tunnel as required in the solicitation. Although design elements will be required, they will account for less than 1% of the total contract value.

5.1.4 Means and Methods for Remaining Outlet Works Construction

The offeror’s proposal shall contain a narrative and conceptual schematic for outlet works construction to include mass excavation and disposal, control tower construction, stilling basin construction, the retreat channel and the approach channel including necessary site work such as cofferdam. Submit a narrative and at least two (2) elevations, two (2) cross sections, each including a maximum of 2 details each for the control tower and stilling basin features of work. Submit the following narratives and working sequences:

a) Mass Excavation and Disposal (includes blasting): Submit mass excavation narrative and drawings to convey the anticipated mass excavation means and methods, sequencing of excavation and spoils, spoil processing and general disposal broken out by project feature including the Approach Channel Excavation, Control Tower Excavation, Stilling Basin Excavation, and Retreat Channel Excavation in accordance with the plans and specifications. Include expected production rates.

b) Control Tower Construction: Include control tower construction sequencing for the control tower transition constructed in the upstream portal, installation of the service and emergency gates, bulkhead gates, and any mechanical/electrical systems to expedite installation of the control tower gates. Include a discussion of any long lead items and how they will be procured without delay to the project schedule.

c) Stilling Basin Construction: Submit a narrative to include initial excavation to the tunnel invert elevation and final excavation to the design stilling basin excavation depth. Include construction sequencing and phasing required to complete the excavation and concrete placements.

Evaluation Criteria for Means and Methods for Remaining Outlet Works Construction: The SSEB will evaluate the offeror’s technical approach to construct the new outlet works; specifically, the control tower, the stilling basin, and the approach and retreat channels, along with other required features as indicated in the Solicitation. This project is Design Bid Build, but there will be a very minimal amount of design elements as part of the solicitation that the offeror will submit in compliance with the performance criteria outlined within the solicitation including the general approach for mass excavation consisting of blasting, mechanical excavation, underwater excavation and spoils disposal as indicated in the Solicitation.

Although design elements will be required, they will account for less than 1% of the total contract value.

6.0 Volume I – Factor II – Past Performance

The Prime Offeror/JV shall submit a combination of relative experience and past performance to demonstrate the required relevant experience necessary to successfully complete the project. Since it is unlikely that any single Prime contractor would possess all the experience necessary to successfully complete the project, the Prime Offeror/JV can augment previous experience with the experience of Key Specialty Subcontractors to meet the base qualifications required herein. This combination of experience shall be referred to as the Offeror’s Construction Team.

6.1 Submission Requirements:

6.1.1 The Offeror shall provide descriptions for a portfolio of 5-7 projects that are complete or substantially complete (90% complete) by the proposed Offeror’s Construction Team within the last twenty five (25) years of the solicitation closing date and that are similar to this project in size and scope. Each individual project must include, at a minimum, one key feature of work and as a whole the portfolio must encompass all key features. Projects combining two or more features of work will be considered more favorably/highly. Each of the major features listed below contain the size and scope requirements. Individual projects will be evaluated on a relevance scale, with an overall confidence rating being given based on the relevance of recent projects and how well offerors/subcontractors performed on those projects.

6.1.2 Each offeror’s past performance will be reviewed to determine recency, relevancy, and confidence assessment. All previous project experience shall be based on using the same general means and methods proposed to complete the work at Rough River Dam. The offeror’s proposal shall contain a portfolio of 5-7 projects that are complete or substantially complete projects of similar size, scope, and complexity for each major feature identified below:

Major Features:

a) Cutoff Wall – To be considered similar in scope a project must be construction of a cutoff wall using the construction methods proposed in response to this solicitation. To be considered similar in size the project must have a concrete seepage barrier that is not less than 500-feet in length and installed at a minimum depth of 100 feet from the dam crest into bedrock.

b) Dam Foundation Grouting (Slurry Control) - To be considered similar in scope a project must be dam foundation grouting on high hazard dams using the construction methods required in this solicitation. It must also have employed the use of an automated grouting control data collection system and ability to comply with USACE requirements for instrumented packers and procedures to isolate the dam embankment and prevent hydrofracture. To be considered similar in size the project must have over 10,000 LF of rock drilling/grouting.

c) Tunnel/portal Construction - To be considered similar in scope a project must have used the methods required in this solicitation including mechanical excavation and excluding tunnel boring machines and blasting. To be considered similar in size the tunnel must be at least 200-feet in length and at least 10 feet in diameter.

d) Mass Excavation Construction – To be considered similar in scope a project must have of been mass excavation in hard rock (includes surface, underwater blasting, floating plant operations) using the methods required in this solicitation. To be considered similar in size the excavation must have been a minimum of 50,000 cubic yards of excavation.

e) Hydraulic Structures - To be considered similar in scope a project must have been for outlet works, dams, spillways or similar hydraulic structures for high velocity water conveyance.using the construction methods required in this solicitation. To be considered similar in size the project must have included a minimum of 20,000 cubic yards of mass concrete specific to hydraulic structures construction.

6.1.3 Projects considered similar to this project in scope are: See each Major Features identified in 6.1.2

6.1.4 Projects considered similar to this project in size are: See each Major Features identified in 6.1.2

6.1.5 At least 15% of the cost of the contract performance incurred for personnel must have been spent on the prime contractor’s own employees to be considered similar.

6.1.6 Additional consideration may be given for:

a) Projects involving experience with the US Army Corps of Engineers.

b) Projects involving dam safety modifications with the US Army Corps of Engineers.

6.1.7 The following information shall be provided for each project:

a) Project Title, Geographic Location, and Contract Number/Unique Identifier

b) Current percentage of construction complete and the date it was or will be complete

a. For projects that are not yet complete, provide description of work remaining to be completed.

c) Scope of the project, to include purpose/use of facility

d) Size of the project

e) Portion and percentage of work that was self-performed

f) Any applicable additional consideration factors

g) Two references for all of the experience identified in paragraph 6.1. Reference information should include owner's name, point of contact, telephone number, and email address.

h) Any ratings, letters, awards, etc. which support past performance on these projects. A sample Past Performance Questionnaire is attached for your convenience. If used, the Past Performance Questionnaire must be submitted by the offeror with the proposal submission and not sent directly to the agency from the reference.

NOTE: For purposes of evaluating past performance, the Prime Contractor is defined as the contractor identified in Block 14 of the Standard Form 1442. If more than one contractor is listed in Block 14, then a signed joint venture must be submitted with the proposal and the joint venture shall be registered as such in the System for Award Management (SAM). However, each party of the Joint Venture must submit their own Unique Entity Number with the JV proposal. Each party in the Joint Venture may submit project examples. If the Offeror’s Construction Team includes Key Specialty Subcontractors, the Key Specialty Subcontractors’ past performance will be evaluated. Projects performed by other contractors than the offeror, such as teaming partners or subcontractors, will not be evaluated for past performance, unless those other contractors are part of the joint venture offeror as demonstrated by a signed joint venture agreement, or the key specialty subcontractor on the Offeror’s construction team.

6.2. Evaluation Criteria:

6.2.1 The SSEB will first evaluate the relevancy of recent past performance identified in the proposal for Factor III. By using the criteria identified above, the SSEB will determine how relevant a past project is when compared to the scope, size, and magnitude of effort and complexities of the solicited project. Extensive relevant experience paired with above satisfactory ratings may provide the Government a higher level of confidence. A relevancy rating will then be assigned to each submitted project.

6.2.2 The SSEB will next review how well the offeror performed on those projects. The Government reserves the right to check any or all cited references to verify supplied information and to assess owner satisfaction. The Government also reserves the right to not contact the provided references. In addition to the information submitted by the offeror, the Government reserves the right to review any other sources of relevant information for evaluating past performance, including projects other than those submitted by the offeror. The Government will, at a minimum, review past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/Unique Entity Identifier numbers. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved from inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

6.2.3 The SSEB will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the offeror’s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate this information into the performance confidence assessment. The SSEB will assign a final, overall Performance Confidence rating, using the ratings in the Performance Confidence Assessment table above, based on the SSEB’s assessment of (1) the degree of the offeror’s recent, relevant experience, and (2) how well the offeror performed that experience.

7.0 Volume I – Factor III: Small Business Participation Plan

7.1 Submission Requirements

ALL OFFERORS ARE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN.

The Small Business Participation Plan shall be based on the offeror’s best effort and is required to address each of the following areas individually:

The extent to which the small business programs listed in FAR 19 (small business, small-disadvantaged business, woman-owned small business, HubZone, service disabled veteran owned small business, etc.) are specifically identified in the Small Business Participation Plan;

The extent of participation of such firms in terms of the value of the total acquisition in %’s for the base year and for each individual option year; the extent of commitment to use such firms (for example, enforceable commitments, i.e., teaming agreements signed, are to be considered more heavily than non-enforceable ones);

The complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform on this acquisition;

The practicality of the Small Business Participation Plan, i.e., aggressive goals.

The Small Business Participation Plan shall be organized as follows:

(1) Prime Contractor type of business (check all that apply):

( ) Large ( ) Small (also check type of small business) ( ) Small Non-Disadvantaged Business ( ) Small Disadvantaged Business ( ) Woman-Owned Small Business ( ) HUBZone Small Business ( ) Veteran Owned Small Business ( ) Service Disabled, Veteran Owned Small Business

(2) Percentage of your participation as a prime contractor: __________________ %

NOTE: Small Business primes’ self-performance counts as Small Business Participation, and small business primes may achieve small business participation goals through their own performance/participation as a prime and/or through subcontracting to other small businesses.

(3) Percentage of total contract value of subcontracts planned for:

% of Total

Contract Value Large % Total Small % Small Non-Disadvantaged % Small Disadvantaged % Small Woman Owned % Small HUB Zone % Small Veteran Owned % Small Service Disabled Veteran Owned

Each percentage above shall be accompanied by detailed supporting documentation regarding individual commitments.

NOTE: The sum of the percentages of Small Non-Disadvantaged and Small Disadvantaged should equal the entries for the Total Small; however, the sum of all of the percentages need not equal 100% since the prime is not included and individual subcontractors may be counted towards more than one category.

(4) List principal supplies/services (be specific) to be subcontracted to:

Name of

Company Type of

Service/Supply Large Small Non-Disadvantaged Small Disadvantaged Small Woman Owned Small HUB Zone Small Veteran Owned Small Service Disabled Veteran Owned

(5) Prior Performance Information: Provide any information substantiating the offeror’s track record of utilizing small business on past contracts.

(6) For Large and Small Businesses provide descriptive information for all small business categories. Any information concerning long-term relationships with Small Business subcontractors, such as mentor-protégé relationships, should be provided.

(7) Extent of Commitment: Provide documentation regarding enforceable commitments to utilize any small business category as defined in FAR Part 19 as subcontractors.

(8) Small Business Subcontracting Plan: Each Large Business Offeror shall provide a Small Business Subcontracting Plan that contains all of the elements required by FAR Clause 52.219-9 Alt II. This Plan shall be submitted separately from the Small Business Participation information required above which applies to both Large and Small Businesses. The Subcontracting Plan is not a requirement for evaluation in source selection but rather a requirement for award to a Large Business. The approved Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be incorporated into any resultant contract(s).

7.2 Evaluation Criteria:

ALL OFFERORS ARE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN.

The Small Business Participation Plan will be evaluated based on the offeror’s best efforts, the level of small business commitment that is being demonstrated for the proposed acquisition, and the prior level of commitment to utilizing small businesses in performance of prior contracts. The Small Business Participation Plan must meet the minimum Total Small Business Participation goal of 20% of the total contract value (through collective small business participation from any type of small business or sub-category small business).

Pursuant to DFARS PGI 215.304(c), the following elements will be considered in evaluating an offeror’s Participation Plan:

The extent to which such firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in plans;

The extent of commitment to use such firms (enforceable commitments will be weighted more heavily than non-enforceable ones);

The complexity and variety of the work such firms are to perform;

The realism of the plans;

Past performance of offerors in complying with the requirements of the Subcontracting Plan

Goals for such firms and monetary targets for participation;

The extent of participation of such firms in terms of the proposed subcontracted value; and The extent to which the offeror provides detailed explanations/documentation supporting the proposed participation percentages, or lack thereof. The Department of Defense (DOD) has established small business goals to help ensure small business receives a fair proportion of DOD awards.

8.0 Volume I Factor IV - Price and Performa Information

8.1 Tab A - Standard Form 1442 and Proposal Price Breakout Schedule.

8.1.1 Submission Requirements:

The offeror shall complete and submit Standard Form 1442 and Price Breakout Schedule. The Price Breakout Schedule can be found in Section 00 10 00 of this solicitation.

8.1.2 Evaluation Criteria:

The price will be evaluated on the base proposal. The price will be reviewed by the SSEB and Contracting Officer/SSA for fair and reasonableness through the use of a price analysis. Price will also be checked for unbalancing of line items. Offerors are cautioned to distribute costs appropriately.

8.2 Tab B – Joint Venture and Mentor-Protégé Agreements

8.2.1 Submission Requirements:

Small business offerors (e.g., 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSBC, etc) submitting a proposal as a Joint Venture or Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture shall submit evidence from the Offeror's SBA Servicing Agency that the Offeror has notified and discussed the proposed joint venture for this specific project with the appropriate SBA Representative or Business Opportunity Specialist. Joint Venture agreements and approved 8(a) Mentor-Protégé agreements must be submitted with the proposal.

8.2.2 Evaluation Criteria:

Joint Venture Agreements and Mentor-Protégé agreements must comply with the relevant regulations in Title 13 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

8.3 Tab C- Evidence of Ability to Obtain Bonding and Proof of Financial Ability

8.3.1 Submission Requirements:

A. Financial Capability. Submit Proof of Financial Ability (Most recent financial statement covering assets and liabilities). Include the name, address and telephone number of firm's banking institution.

B. Bonding Capability. Submit information showing offeror's ability to be bonded for this project. Include the name, address and telephone number of the firm's bonding company.

8.3.2 Evaluation Criteria:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

8.4 Tab D - Pre-Award Information

8.4.1 Submission Requirements:

A. The offeror shall submit one completed copy of Representations and Certification.

B. The offeror shall submit the following information:

a) Number of years the firm has been in business

b) Name, address and telephone numbers of two credit/trade references

c) A list of present commitments, including the dollar value

8.4.2 Evaluation Criteria:

This information will be used for the purpose of completing the Pre-Award Survey and will not be rated.

8.5 Tab E - Subcontracting Plan

8.5.1 Submission Requirements:

Large business offerors shall submit a Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR Clauses 52.219-8 and 52.219-9 Alt II. To be acceptable, plans must adequately address the required statutory elements and provide sufficient information to enable the Contracting Officer to answer affirmatively questions 1 through 13 of Appendix DD, Part 3, AFARS 5119.705-4. The offeror may use the attached sample sub-contracting plan as a starting point. Percentage goals apply to the total amount being subcontracted.

8.5.2 Evaluation Criteria:

Submitted information will be…