Solicitation_W912WJ-17-R-0003.pdf

SPECIFICATION titled "Low er Harbor Dredging, New Bedford Harbor Superfund Site, New Bedford, Massachusetts" dated December 2016.

REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS, Section 00600; CONTRACT CLAUSES, Section 00700; SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIRMENTS, Section 00800.

This solicitation is an unrestricted requirement w hich w ill be conducted under full and open competition.

PLEASE NOTE: All Offerors must complete the annual representations and certif ications electronically via the online System for Aw ard Management (SAM) w ebsite at http://sam.gov. Please ensure your f irm is registered in the SAM Database.

The applicable NAICS Code and Size Standard for this procurement are as follow s:

NAICS Code: 237990

Size Standard: $27,500,000.00

ROBERT C GARRAHAN 978-318-8814

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS

NEGOTIATED

20-Jan-2017

(RFP)

(IFB)

X

CALL:

B. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

See Item 7

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID

3. DATE ISSUED

9. FOR INFORMATION A. NAME

SOLICITATION

NSN 7540-01-155-3212 1442-101 STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 4-85)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(e)

11. The Contractor shall begin performance w ithin _______15 calendar days and complete it w ithin ________336 calendar days after receiving aw ard, X notice to proceed. This performance period is X mandatory, negotiable. (See _________________________Section 08000

12 A. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES," indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12B.)

X YES NO

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

A. Sealed offers in original and __________3 copies to perform the w ork required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by ___________ local time ______________27 Feb 2017 (date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers must be publicly opened at that time.

shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

B. An offer guarantee X is, is not required.

C. All offers are subject to the (1) w ork requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

D. Offers providing less than _______120 calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due w ill not be considered and w ill be rejected.

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

1. SOLICITATION NO.

IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

4. CONTRACT NO.

7. ISSUED BY CODE

U S ARMY ENGR DISTRICT, NEW ENGLAND

696 VIRGINIA RD

CONCORD MA 01742-2751

W912WJ

PAGE OF PAGES

1 OF

CODE

(Title, identifying no., date):

12B. CALENDAR DAYS

02:00 PM (hour)

Sealed envelopes containing offers

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NO. 6. PROJECT NO.

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If Other Than Item 7)

978-318-8207FAX:TEL: TEL: FAX:

W912WJ-17-R-0003 85

20B. SIGNATURE

(REV. 4-85)STANDARD FORM 1442 BACK

TO SIGN

NSN 7540-01-155-3212

SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD (Continued) (Construction, Alteration, or Repair)

CODE FACILITY CODE

17. The offeror agrees to perform the w ork required at the prices specif ied below in strict accordance w ith the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in w riting w ithin ________ calendar days after the date offers are due.

the minimum requirements stated in Item 13D. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13D.)

AMOUNTS SEE SCHEDULE OF PRICES

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT NO.

DATE

20A. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN

OFFER (Type or print)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT 23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

CODE

(Insert any number equal to or greater than

20C. OFFER DATE

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO

10 U.S.C. 2304(c) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)

CODE27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY:26. ADMINISTERED BY

(Include ZIP Code)14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include area code)

See Item 14

(Include only if different than Item 14)16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS

30B. SIGNATURE

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.)

document and return _______ copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees Your of f er on this solicitation, is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award con-to f urnish and deliv er all items or perf orm all work, requisitions identif ied summates the contract, which consists of (a) the Gov ernment solicitation and on this f orm and any continuation sheets f or the consideration stated in this y our of f er, and (b) this contract award. No f urther contractual document is contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be necessary .

gov erned by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certif ications, and specif ications or incorporated by ref er-ence in or attached to this contract.

30A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED 31A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

30C. DATE

(Type or print)

TEL: EMAIL:

31B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 31C. AWARD DATE

BY

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

(Contractor is required to sign this28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT

(M ust be fully completed by offeror)OFFER

Section 00010 - Solicitation Contract Form

BIDDING SCHEDULE

Refer to Section 01 22 00 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT

Item Estimated Unit Estimated No. Description Quantity Unit Price Amount

Base Bid Items

0001 Mobilization / Demobilization for Dredging Operations 1 Job Job $

0002 Required Mechanical Dredging and Disposal, Material from Dredge Areas (See Table in Section 01 11 00, 1.1.1) 137,753 CY CY $

TOTAL ESTIMATED AMOUNT, BASE BID ITEMS $

Optional Items

0003 Replace Portions of Turbidity Curtain

0003AA First 4,000 LF 4,000 LF $ $

0003AB Over 4,000 LF 4,000 LF $ $

TOTAL ESTIMATED AMOUNT, OPTIONAL BID ITEMS $

Note 1: Bidders must bid all items. The work will be awarded as a whole to one bidder. Offers will be evaluated and the low bidder determined by the Total Estimated Amount for Line Items 0001 through 0003 including the Base Bid Items and the Optional Items. The minimum work awarded will be the Base Bid work.

Note 2: Option 0003AA and 0003AB "Replace Portions of Turbidity Curtain" if exercised will add three additional days (each option) to the performance period. Installation of the turbidity curtain assumes that the existing piles will remain on-site and in place.

Note 3: In the event there is a difference between a unit price and the extended total, the unit price will be held to be the intended bid. If the bidder shows only the total price but fails to enter a unit price, the total divided by the estimated quantity will be held to be the intended unit price.

Note 4: Item Number 0003 above is an Optional Line Item that may, at the option of the Government, be exercised within 336 calendar days of the notice to proceed.

Note 5: Item Number 0003 is subdivided into two estimated quantities and is to be separately priced. The Government will evaluate these items on the basis of the total price of their sub-item. See SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS, Clause "VARIATIONS IN ESTIMATED QUANTITIES - SUBDIVIDED ITEMS

- UAI 52.211-5001."

Plant and Equipment List

Mechanical Dredge/Excavator

Dredge/Excavator Name and Type

Manufacturer / Age

Bucket Type / Size

Mode of Anchoring /Propulsion

Draft Dredge and Bucket Positioning System

Bottom Dump Scows

Name / Type

Manufacturer / Age

Length and Beam

Draft ‐ light Draft ‐ Loaded

Capacity (Cubic Yards)

Number and Size of Pockets

Attendant Plant (Give columnar information pertinent to items listed, if to be used.)

Name Manufacturer / Age

Type and HP of Engine

Draft / no.

Screws

Length and Beam

Remarks

Tug

Tug

Launch

Plant and Equipment List

Mechanical Dredge/Excavator

Dredge/Excavator Name and Type

Manufacturer / Age

Bucket Type / Size

Mode of Anchoring /Propulsion

Draft Dredge and Bucket Positioning System

Bottom Dump Scows

Name / Type

Manufacturer / Age

Length and Beam

Draft ‐ light Draft ‐ Loaded

Capacity (Cubic Yards)

Number and Size of Pockets

Attendant Plant (Give columnar information pertinent to items listed, if to be used.)

Name Manufacturer / Age

Type and HP of Engine

Draft / no.

Screws

Length and Beam

Remarks

Tug

Tug

Launch

Section 00100 - Bidding Schedule/Instructions to Bidders

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

(Instructions, Conditions & Notices to Offeror)

1. INTRODUCTION

The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted in hard copy, with accompanying digital copies, as set forth below. The RFP shall provide the Government address and receipt date for proposal submittal.

Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the technical requirements or the Drawings and Specifications with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Each volume shall be submitted in a separate “Slant D” or similar three-ring binder (no heat or spiral bound volumes). Each binder shall be clearly labeled with its Title and a copy number (e.g., copy 1 of 5).

If discussions are held and proposals are changed, any pages of the proposal that are changed resulting from discussions must be of a different color and have changed information clearly marked by a vertical line in the right margin of the page. The revised pages shall be dated.

Printing shall be single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or Times New Roman fonts are required. Double sided printing is allowable.

Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscaped. Proposals are to be submitted as follows:

VOLUME

TITLE

VOLUME TITLE COPIES DIGITAL

COPIES

PAGE

LIMIT

I Technical 4 1 130* II Price and Small

Business Participation Plan

2 1 NA

* If the proposal is offered in completely double-sided format, the maximum number of sheets permitted is 65 sheets. Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed or not read and will not be evaluated by the Government.

EXCEPTIONS:

Equipment manufacturers’ specification sheets (i.e. dredge bucket, dredge bucket positioning system, tugs, scows, hydrographic survey firm, etc.)

shall be included as an appendix to the work plan provided under Factor No. 3 – Technical Approach Work Plans and page numbers shall be independent of the rest of Volume I. The appendix will not be counted against the maximum page limitation. Information other than specification sheets included in the appendix will not be reviewed and specification sheets included within the body of the work plan will be counted against the maximum page limitation.

Past Performance Questionnaires will not to be counted against the maximum page limitation.

3. PROPOSAL FILES

a. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled.

Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume shall be consecutively numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and RFP number in the header and/or footer. Pages that exceed the page limitation will not be read or evaluated by the Government. A Table of Contents should be created using the Table of Content feature in MS Word. MS Word (doc) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1” Gutter – 0” From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5” Page Size, Width – 8.5” Page Size, Height – 11”

NOTE: 11X17 folded pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations. However, each 11X17 page counts as two pages.

The following additional restrictions apply:

b. File Packaging. All of the proposal electronic files shall be in their native format, i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc., and provided on CDs or DVDs. Zip disks or USB drives are not permitted. In addition, files using searchable PDF files shall also be provided. All price breakdown information to aide in the price evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format and viewable in Microsoft Excel 2007. Each disk shall be externally labeled with the volume number, date, and the offeror’s name. **Please note – Self extracting exe files are not acceptable. ** If the hard-copy proposal differs from the electronic version, the hard copy will govern.

c. Content Requirement. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file.

Proprietary information shall be clearly marked. The following shall be included in the Narrative discussion:

(1) VOLUME I - TECHNICAL INFORMATION. The volume shall be organized as follows:

(a) Factor 1 - Company/Project Team Experience The offeror is to provide documentation of the team’s experience in successfully working on a minimum of one project, maximum of three projects, of similar size, scope, and complexity to the solicitation. The project(s) submitted for consideration may be completed or ongoing but each project must demonstrate that a minimum of 50,000 cubic yards (CY) have been completely dredged to final depth over a minimum area of 10-acres to be considered eligible for consideration. Additionally, the work on the project(s) must have been performed within five years of the date of this solicitation.

For each project proposed, demonstrate, at a minimum, similar experience regarding the size, scope, and complexity to the solicitation and the Offeror’s proposed approach in Factor 3 with the following elements:

(1) dredging accuracy

(2) thin dredge cuts

(3) dredge monitoring and positioning systems

For each project proposed, demonstrate, at a minimum, experience with three of the elements that is similar in size, scope, and complexity to the solicitation and the Offeror’s proposed approach in Factor 3 with the following elements:

(1) type of bucket

(2) water depth

(3) surface bathymetry

(4) water quality requirements

(5) disposal location

(6) project location

Offerors shall submit excerpts from the project specifications for each of the projects provided that address the dredging requirements related to the above referenced elements. PDFs of plans and cross-sections demonstrating the minimum volume of 50,000 CY dredged and the minimum area of 10 acres shall be included. File names shall clearly indicate which project the file relates to and whether it relates to pre-dredge or post-dredge bathymetric survey information.

(b) Factor 2 - Past Performance The offeror shall provide, at a minimum, a NAVFAC/USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) forms for all projects submitted for consideration under Factor 1 – Company/Project Team Experience unless existing reports exists for those projects in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the proposal closing date, the offeror shall fill in and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment 1), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). The Government will utilize the PPIRS database for any projects submitted that have extant reports in the PPIRS database. Additional PPQ forms may be submitted for up to a maximum of three other projects. The additional projects submitted may be for prime or subcontractor projects. For all PPQs submitted, the project owner shall complete Blocks 5-8 along with the two page questionnaire and return to the offeror in a sealed envelope. The offeror shall insert the sealed envelope in its proposal (Volume I).

(c) Factor 3 - Technical Approach The offeror is to provide a sample work plan (WP) for dredge management unit DMU-33 B- C in a narrative format and may use figures and diagrams if necessary to further illustrate elements of the proposed approach, such as bucket cut patterns. DMU-33 B- C includes the dredging of sediments within the shallow, moderate, and deep depth ranges expected under this project. The WP shall address all physical, equipment and schedule constraints outlined in the Plans and Specifications of the RFP. The WP shall address, at a minimum, the following points:

(1) Provide an equipment list which identifies if the equipment is owned (by the prime or subcontractor) or will be rented (identify rental source). This equipment list shall include:

o Dredge Include owner, the name, dimensions and draft, excavator, bucket size.

o Hydrographic Surveying Identify the bathymetry hardware and software proposed for daily quality control surveys.

o Attendant tugs Include owner, name, type, size, draft, and horsepower.

o Scows Include the owner, name, type of scow, size, draft, and volume.

(2) Describe in detail the dredging operations to include proposed bucket size, the bucket cut patterns (bucket size and cut patterns which optimize overlap and dredging efficiency), initial and final cut depths to allow for a uniform final dredge pass, the scow operations and traffic sequences, planned hours of operation of the dredge with an explanation if the Offeror’s approach is to not dredge to the full daily duration permitted by the specifications, and how the operations will minimize unnecessary over-dredging while attaining the project target elevations.

(3) Discuss procedures for mitigation of contaminated sediment re-suspension and impacts to air and water quality (use of oil booms and other measures, etc.)

(4) Discuss procedures to prevent vessel propeller sediment scouring while moving floating equipment in the dredge areas and entering the CAD Cell.

(5) Identify steps to mitigate adverse Water Quality impacts with the dredging operation (i.e. to include but not be limited to the containment of overflow water from the passive de-watering of sediments from the scows during operations).

(6) Describe the passive de-watering and water treatment systems.

(7) Describe the application of the of state-of-the art dredge monitoring and positioning systems to minimize over-depth dredging.

(8) Describe procedures to be employed for large debris if it is encountered.

(9) Describe the disposal positioning system to be utilized in the CAD cell to deposit the sediments evenly throughout the CAD cell.

Failure to address each of the above 9 items will result in an unacceptable rating for this factor.

(d) Factor 4 - Key Personnel Provide the qualifications for the offeror’s key personnel listed in the table below. The proposal shall address how the offeror’s proposed personnel qualifications meet the requirements of this solicitation as outlined in Section C, Evaluation Approach. The resumes submitted shall cite the years of experience in the position titles below and special qualifications specific to requirements of the solicitation, the complete experience record, and should demonstrate ability to perform the work under this solicitation.

The qualifications for additional personnel may be submitted for consideration. If additional personnel are submitted, these additional personnel will also be considered key personnel.

Please note: in order for this factor to be found acceptable, the proposed dredge engineer shall, at a minimum, demonstrate five years of experience working with differential global positioning systems (DGPS), angle and rotation sensors data, and positioning and tracking software. The resume for the dredge engineer shall explicitly demonstrate this experience.

Position Years of Experience Project Manager 5 Dredge Engineer 5 Dredge Operator(s) 5 Positioning Systems Specialist 3 Hydrographic Surveyor 5

(2) VOLUME II SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION AND PRICE- The Price Proposal shall be submitted in a separate binder marked “and Small Business Participation and Price”. The electronic copy of the Volume II shall be on CD or DVD and shall contain a PDF of the offeror’s price proposal, as well as a Microsoft Excel file as described in item (a) below. There are no page limitations for this volume.

The offeror shall submit as part of Volume II:

(a) The name(s) and title(s) of the person(s) authorized to negotiate and sign a contract. Also, provide Certificate of Corporate Authority or other applicable documentation of authorized signature(s) for each authorized individual.

(b) The Offer (the SF1442) duly executed with an original signature by an official authorized to bind the company. Only required from the prime or JV. Joint Ventures shall submit a fully executed JV agreement. Failure to provide this may be grounds to reject the offer.

(c) Acknowledgement of all amendments to the solicitation in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30 (amendment form). Only required from the Prime or JV.

(d) The completed Section 00600 of the solicitation (i.e., Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors).

(e) Small Business Joint Ventures must submit a copy of their executed JV that is fully compliant with the SDVOSB, 8(a), and HUBZone regulations. All Joint ventures shall submit the information requested in Attachment 3.

Volume II shall also contain the following sections at a minimum:

(a) Factor 5 - Small Business Participation

The Offeror shall articulate within the Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP), in Attachment 2, how they intend to meet the small business objectives and include information regarding the type of small business or sub-category small business and the services/supplies to be provided by each business.

Offeror’s proposals must meet the minimum mandatory Total Small Business Participation Goal of 20% of total contract value (through collective small business participation from any type of small business or sub-category small business). All Offerors, Small or Large Business, shall articulate how small businesses will participate through performance as a Small Business Prime Offeror; or, for Large Businesses, ‘first tier’ small business subcontracting only. Second and third tier small business subcontractors will not be considered towards the Total Small Business Participation percentage in this factor.

(1) Offerors must specifically identify small business firms, as defined in FAR Part 19, in proposals to include the company name and address along with CAGE Code and DUNS Number. If proposed subcontractors do not have a CAGE code and/or DUNS number, the offeror shall indicate that the subcontractor’s small business status has been validated.*

*If the Offeror does not provide the information listed above, this may result in a weakness.

(2) Provide documentation regarding enforceable commitments e.g. mentor protégés, joint ventures, subcontracting or partnership letters of commitment(s), etc. to utilize any Small Business category, as defined in FAR Part 19, as subcontractors. Documentation validating business relationships described must be submitted. Enforceable commitments must be with small businesses, be specific to the subject requirement, and be signed by both parties;

(3) Identify and discuss the complexity and variety of work to be performed by small businesses). See Paragraph d in Attachment 2, Small Business Participation Plan Evaluation Form;

(4) Past Performance in Utilizing Small Businesses (Large Business Only):

Offeror shall submit detailed documentation that demonstrates small business achievements in three recent and relevant contracts. Submissions may include ISR (Individual Subcontracting Report) or other documentation validating offerors small business achievements from local, state or federal agencies. Offeror must indicate small business goals for each project and indicate if the goals were achieved. If small business goals were not achieved, Offerors are required to provide an explanation why the goals were not achieved. All information submitted demonstrating an Offeror’s goal/achievements must be verifiable; therefore, provide Government or other Point Of Contact information. In addition, 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) and eSRS.*

* If the Offeror does not provide the information listed above, this may result in a weakness.

(a) Factor 6 - Price The award will be a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) arrangement. 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.

DISCUSSIONS

The Government intends to award without discussions. However, in accordance with FAR 15.306(d), discussion sessions with offerors may be held. Should discussions take place, all offerors in the competitive range will be allowed to submit Final Proposal Revisions. If the Government does conduct discussions, the Contracting Officer will communicate recorded findings (weaknesses, deficiencies, and uncertainties) to Offerors using Evaluation Notices (ENs).

The Government may reject all proposals received in response to this solicitation, if doing so is in the best interest of the Government.

A. BASIS OF AWARD

The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, based on the following evaluation factors listed in descending order of importance: Company/Project Team Experience; Past Performance; Technical Approach; Key Personnel; Small Business Participation and Price. All evaluation factors other than Price, when combined, are significantly more important than Price. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for all non-price factors (Factors 1, 2, 3 and 4) and at least “neutral confidence” for Factor 2. Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price proposal offered.

B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

During evaluations of each proposal, the Government will assign an adjectival rating for Factor 1 (Company/Project Team Experience), Factor 3 (Technical Approach), Factor 4 (Key Personnel), and Factor 5 (Small Business Participation).

Factor 2 (Past Performance) and Factor 6 (Price) will not receive an adjectival rating and will be evaluated in accordance with Section C Evaluation Approach.

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal.

1. Factor 1 - Company/Project Team Experience The offeror’s experience in implementation of a minimum of one (1) project, maximum of three (3) projects similar to this solicitation in size, scope, and complexity will be evaluated under this factor as outlined in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section.

The project(s) submitted for consideration may be “completed” or “ongoing”.

The offeror must demonstrate completion of dredging a minimum of 50,000 cubic yards (CY) over a minimum area of 10-acres in accordance with the design. Performance of the completed work project(s) must be within five years of the date of this solicitation.

2. Factor 2 - Past Performance Each offeror’s past performance will be reviewed to determine relevancy (including context of the data), recency and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information) as outlined in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section. The past experience ratings shall be based on the same project(s) included by the offeror under Factor 1 – Company/Team Experience and other projects completed in the past 5 years that clearly demonstrate the firm’s experience performing contracts/projects that similar to this solicitation in size, scope, and complexity.

3. Factor 3 - Technical Approach The offeror’s sample work plan (WP) for Dredge Management Unit (DMU)-33 B - C will be evaluated under this factor as outlined in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section. DMU-33 B-C include the dredging of sediments within the shallow, moderate, and deep depth ranges expected under this project. This WP shall address the approach to dredging DMU-33 B- C including shallow, moderate and deep depths, proposed sequencing of dredging, dredge overlap patterns, approach to minimize any generated residual contamination, implementation of multiple pass approach with a uniform final pass based on proposed bucket size, and all physical, equipment and schedule constraints outlined in the Plans and Specifications of the Request for Proposal (RFP).

4. Factor 4 - Key Personnel Qualifications for the offeror’s key personnel shall be evaluated to determine the proposed personnel’s qualifications relative to the requirements of this solicitation as outlined in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section

5. Factor 5 - Small Business Participation The extent of small business participation will be evaluated for this unrestricted acquisition. The completed forms set forth in Attachment 2 Small Business Participation Plan will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of small businesses in the performance of the contract relative to the objectives and goals established in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section.

6. Factor 6 - Price The resulting award will be under a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) arrangement. Price reasonableness will be utilized in the evaluation of the Firm- Fixed Price effort.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

1. All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Team (SST). The overarching evaluation approach for all factors is as follows:

1. Adequacy of Response The proposal shall be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the RFP.

2. Feasibility of Approach The proposal shall be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal shall be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

2. The Technical Factor Ratings, focus on the strengths, deficiencies, weaknesses, risks and uncertainties of the offeror’s proposal. The adjectival ratings shown in Table 1 will be used to evaluate how well the offeror’s proposal meets the requirements for Factors 1, 3, and 4.

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

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

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

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

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

a. Factor 1 - Company/Project Team Experience. This factor evaluates the offeror’s proposed company/project team experience in successfully implementing ongoing or completed projects similar to this solicitation in size, scope, and complexity. Marginal levels of proposed experience could indicate a lack of understanding concerning mission requirements and may result in the entire proposal receiving an unfavorable rating and/or being eliminated from the competitive range. Offerors submitting more projects (up to the limit designated in Section 00100), submitting more completed dredged volume and area for ongoing projects, or submitting more successfully completed projects rather than on-going projects may be rated more highly.

An Acceptable rating will be assigned to proposals with one ongoing or completed project demonstrating:

o That the project meets the dredge volume/acreage criteria.

The, offeror must demonstrate they have completed a minimum of 50,000CY/over 10 acres for a minimum of one ongoing or completed project that is similar in size, scope, and complexity to the solicitation in accordance with the design of the submitted project(s).;

o That is similar in size, scope, and complexity to the solicitation with (1) dredge accuracy, (3) thin dredge cuts, and (3) use of dredge monitoring and positioning systems.

The offeror must demonstrate they have accomplished the

(1) similar dredge accuracy, (2) thin dredge cuts, and (3) use of dredge monitoring and positioning systems over a minimum of 50,000 CY/10 acres;

o That demonstrates it has met a minimum of three of the following six elements: (1) type of bucket; (2) working in similar water depths, (3) performing surface bathymetry,

(4) executing work with the established Water Quality (WQ) criterion, (5) disposal in Confined Aquatic Disposal cells, and (6) similar project location including tidally influenced harbor environments. The offeror must demonstrate they have accomplished each criteria over a minimum of 50,000 CY/10 acres; AND o That demonstrates experience with the Offeror’s proposed approach in Factor 3.

Proposals may be rated more highly than Acceptable if they demonstrate:

o Project(s) (ongoing or completed) that is/are similar or exceed(s) the solicitation requirements for size, scope, and complexity and demonstrates the project(s) has/ have exceeded the solicitation requirements for dredge accuracy and thin dredge cuts;

o More projects up to a maximum of three (ongoing or completed) that is similar or exceed the solicitation requirements for size, scope, and complexity;

o Completed project(s) that is/are similar or exceed(s) the solicitation requirements for size, scope, and complexity; OR o Project(s) that demonstrate experience in more than three of the following: type of bucket, working in similar water depths, performing surface bathymetry, executing work with the established WQ criterion, disposal in Confined Aquatic Disposal cells, or tidally influenced harbor environments.

b. Factor 2 - Past Performance

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s and subcontractor’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the requirements of this solicitation. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of the data) and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

The Offeror will be evaluated on whether the submitted projects are recent and relevant to the work under the contract. Recency will be determined by similarity of projects completed within the last five years. Relevancy will be determined by similarity of projects submitted to the work under this contract. The role the Offeror played in past projects will be considered when determining relevancy.

Government past performance databases such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) may be utilized in obtaining past performance information. Past performance questionnaires will also be utilized to gather past performance information. The past performance of offerors will be assessed based on this information.

For each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1 - Company/Project Team Experience, the offeror shall submit a Past

Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) if no report for that project is available in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). Offerors will use the PPQ form entitled “NAVFAC I USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) - Form PPQ -0 (9/30/11)” and included as Attachment 1 to this solicitation. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs shall be submitted with the proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before the proposal closing date, the offeror shall fill in and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment 1), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

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 received through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), 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 Awardees’ Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have neutral past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “neutral” shall be considered “acceptable.”

The past performance factor considers each Offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality which are combined to establish one performance confidence assessment for each offeror.

RECENCY: The first aspect is to evaluate the recency of the offeror’s past performance. Recent past performance will be determined by similarity of projects completed within the last five years.

RELEVANCY: The next 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. The following criteria will be used to establish what is relevant which shall include similarity of scope, complexity;

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.

QUALITY ASSESSMENT: The quality of the offeror’s past performance will be assessed on those recent efforts that were determined relevant by determining how well the contractor performed on the contracts. Documented results from Past Performance Questionnaires, interviews, CPARS, and other sources form the support and basis for this assessment. The Quality Assessment will be reflected in the confidence assessment.

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT: The final step is for the team to arrive at a single consensus performance confidence assessment for the offeror, selecting the most appropriate rating from the chart below. This rating considers the assessed quality of the relevant/recent efforts gathered. It also ensures the rationale for the conclusions reached are included.

c. Factor 3 - Technical Approach This factor evaluates the offeror’s technical approach to all work required for the representative Dredge Management Unit (DMU) 33 B- C as described in the offeror’s sample work plan (WP). A WP for DMU-33 B- C that provides a reasonable and realistic approach and addresses all physical, equipment and schedule constraints outlined in the Plans and Specifications of the RFP and addresses all elements required by the “Proposal Submission” section of this solicitation will be rated as Acceptable. A WP for DMU-33 B- C that meets the above standard for Acceptable and provides an exceptional approach to some or all of the constraints outlined in the Final Plans and Specification of the RFP or an exceptional approach to some or all of the elements required by the “Proposal Submission Requirements” section of this solicitation may be more highly rated.

d. Factor 4 - Key Personnel Qualifications for the offeror’s key personnel shall be evaluated relative to the requirements of this solicitation as outlined in the Plans and Specifications. Resumes that demonstrate meeting the cited years of experience in the table below for the positions identified will result in an Acceptable rating. Experience for each key personnel shall be demonstrated in the position title identified for that personnel, and shall be in projects of similar size, scope, and complexity to this solicitation. Please note: in order for this factor to be found acceptable, the proposed dredge engineer shall, at a minimum, demonstrate five years of experience working with differential global

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.

positioning systems (DGPS), angle and rotation sensors data, and positioning and tracking software.

Proposals may be rated more highly than Acceptable if:

o Key personnel demonstrate more than the minimum years of experience o Key personnel demonstrate work on contour/remediation dredging projects o Additional key personnel are proposed other than those identified below whose experience would significantly improve the offeror’s effectiveness in completing the project.

However, note that qualifications for the key personnel listed below will be weighted more heavily than additional key personnel.

a. Factor 5: Small Business Participation

All offerors (both large and small businesses) will be evaluated on the level of proposed participation of small businesses in the performance of the contract (as small business prime offerors, small business team members or subcontractors) relative to the objectives and goals established herein.

The extent to which the Offeror meets or exceeds the Small Business Goal of 20% will be considered. These goals are a percentage of the total contract value. The offeror shall also provide goals for other socio-economic categories as follows: Small Disadvantaged Business, Woman-Owned Small Business, HUBZone small business, Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business and Veteran-Owned Small Business.*

The extent of commitment to use small business firms will be evaluated (and enforceable commitments will be considered more favorably than non-enforceable ones).

The Government will evaluate the complexity and variety of work to be performed by small businesses.

Position Years of Experience Project Manager 5 Dredge Engineer 5 Dredge Operator(s) 5 Positioning Systems Specialist 3 Hydrographic Surveyor 5

The Government will evaluate large businesses (Large Businesses Only) based on their past performance with utilizing small businesses.

(For Large Businesses Only, Past Performance in Utilizing Small Businesses will be evaluated.

(Note, for example, that a participation plan that reflects {10%} of the contract value for WOSB would also count towards the overall Small Business Goal;

and percentages for SDVOSB also count towards VOSB).

NOTE: Prime Contractors can only get credit for first tier subcontracting. It is important to note this when it comes to submission of the price proposal and how obtaining small business credit is achieved. This information will also flow into the Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (www.esrs.gov).

This is a requirement of the contract that the prime contractor has to go into this system twice a year to fill out the small business subcontract data on the project.

This factor will be evaluated using the combined Technical/Risk ratings in Table 4.

Table 4 Small Business Participation Factor Rating Definitions

Color Rating Description

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

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

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

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

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives

b. Factor 6 - Price The award resulting from this solicitation will be issued as a firm fixed price construction contract. Price will be evaluated for fairness and reasonableness through the use of a price analysis.

Attachment 1

ENCL D-1: NAVFAC I USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

Form PPQ -0 (9/30/11)

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

CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

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

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

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

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

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

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

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

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

8. Client’s Signature:

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

FORM.

NAVFAC I USACE Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

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