Fiber Reinforced Polymer Matting

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested, and a written solicitation will not be issued.

Combined Syopsis/Solicitation Number W912HZ19Q5071 is being issued as a Request for Proposal (RFP) with the intent to award as a simplified acquisition. The solicitation document and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular 2019-03.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC), Geotechnical & Structures Laboratory (GSL) at Vicksburg, MS has a requirement for the following:

Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) Matting

Potential vendors may access the following attachments below:
Attachment 01 (Description of Requirements)
Attachment 02 (Mat Detail Drawings- Part 1 of 4)
Attachment 03 (Mat Detail Drawings- Part 2 of 4)
Attachment 04 (Mat Detail Drawings- Part 3 of 4)
Attachment 05 (Mat Detail Drawings- Part 4 of 4)
Attachment 06 (Offer Submission Form)

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers intends to award a firm-fixed-price contract as a result of this combined synopsis/solicitation.

The North American Industry Classification System Code for this procurement is 326130 (Laminated Plastics Plate, Sheet (except Packaging), and Shape Manufacturing with a small business size standard of 500 employees.

In accordance with the attached Description of Requirement (Attachment 01), an award for this acquisition will be provided to the vendor whose proposal is the best value to the government.

FAR 52.212-2 - Evaluation -- Commercial Items (Jan 1999)
(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the government, price and other factors considered.
The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Factor I - Technical
Factor II - Past Performance
Factor III - Price

The offeror selected for award will be the responsible offeror whose proposal is determined to be the best overall value to the Government considering technical, past performance and price.

The basis for award will be an acceptable proposal, the price of which may not be the lowest. However, if the award is not based on the lowest price, the proposal must be sufficiently more advantageous than the lowest priced proposal so as to justify the payment for additional costs.

Factors I (Technical) and Factor II (Past Performance) are approximately equal in importance and are significantly more important than Factor III (Price). Factor III (Price) may become more significant to the source selection decision if competing proposals offer comparatively equal Technical and Past Performance.

Factor I - TECHNICAL

Offerors shall provide a narrative that specifically addresses the following:

Demonstrated experience performing this type of work and understanding of managing contractor personnel by providing a responsive organizational and management structure to anticipate and quickly resolve issues without impacting contract performance.

Ability to provide oversight of teaming/subcontractor arrangements, if any, to insure successful performance of contract requirements so that such arrangements have no negative impact.

Quality Control (QC) Plan demonstrating ability to assure that requirements outlined in the statement of work of the contract are met and services performed in a quality manner.

TECHNICAL APPROACH
Demonstrated understanding of requirements of the DOR. Demonstrated approach to meet technical requirements of the DOR. Sound solution of equipment/materials and sufficient detail to explain how the FRP matting will be manufactured to meet the requirements of the DOR. The solution should also provide detailed information on the raw materials used to produce the FRP matting. The solution should describe how the Contractor will ensure that all components of the FRP matting set will be produced to ensure quality of fit, including positioning of anchor and joining bushings.

PRODUCTION PLAN
A detailed description of the proposed timetable of producing FRP with the expectation of having all work completed by 31 December, 2019. The offeror shall provide production capacity in terms of time to produce a complete set of FRP matting. The offeror shall allow three weeks for the Government to provide FAT results to allow the offeror to proceed with production.

Factor II - PAST PERFORMANCE.

The evaluation of Past Performance is an assessment of the Offeror's Past Performance on contracts of a similar nature, size, scope, and complexity, utilizing a comparable number of personnel with like skills. The Government will consider the Offeror's previous and current record of contractual performance. The Government will consider the combined Offeror's and proposed subcontractor's experience and performance in providing services consistent with the scope and complexity of our requirement during the last five years.

The Government's assessment will focus on contracts that meet the following conditions:

Relevancy is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the source solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance.

Performance Confidence Assessment is an evaluation of the likelihood (or Government's confidence) that the offeror will successfully perform the solicitation's requirements; the evaluation is based upon recent, relevant past performance information.

Aspects to be considered in the past performance evaluation include the Offeror's record of: 1) quality; 2) schedule/timeliness of performance; 3) customer satisfaction; 4) management/personnel/labor; 5) cost/financial management; and 6) safety/security. Any significant achievement, problem or lack of relevant data in any element of the work can become an important consideration in the source selection process. A negative finding under any element may result in an overall high-risk rating. Therefore, Offerors are reminded to include all relevant past efforts, including demonstrated corrective actions, in their proposal. In the case of an offeror without any relevant past performance history, past performance will be evaluated as "neutral". If the past performance information is negative, the offeror may be given an opportunity to provide rebuttal if it has not previously had such an opportunity.

Factor III - PRICE

The offeror's proposed prices will not be rated or scored, but will be evaluated for realism, reasonableness, and completeness. The purpose of the price evaluation will be to determine whether each offeror's proposed price is realistic and complete in relation to the efforts required under the solicitation and the efforts described in the offeror's technical proposal.

Price analysis will be accomplished in accordance with FAR 15.404-1 and will consist of evaluation all prices. This analysis is to ensure that costs are realistic for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirements, and are consistent with the efforts described in the offeror's technical proposal. An excessively high or low price proposal will be considered an indication of a limited understanding of the task or an inefficient organization and may be render the offeror as non-responsive.

The rating for Technical will be expressed as an adjectival assessment of Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, or Unacceptable. The adjectival ratings will be evaluated utilizing the following adjectival rating methodology:

TABLE 1 - COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS
Color Rating Description
Blue Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.
Purple Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.
Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.
Yellow Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.
Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

Past Performance/Risk Rating:

The evaluation of Past Performance is an assessment of the Offeror's Past Performance on contracts of a similar nature, size, scope, and complexity, utilizing a comparable number of personnel with like skills. The Government will consider the Offeror's previous and current record of contractual performance. The Government will consider the combined Offeror's and proposed subcontractor's experience and performance in providing services consistent with the scope and complexity of our requirement during the last five years.

The Government's assessment will focus on contracts that meet the following conditions:
• Relevancy is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the source solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance.

• Performance Confidence Assessment is an evaluation of the likelihood (or Government's confidence) that the offeror will successfully perform the solicitation's requirements; the evaluation is based upon recent, relevant past performance information.

In the case of an offeror without any relevant past performance history, past performance will be evaluated as "neutral". If the past performance information is negative, the offeror may be given an opportunity to provide rebuttal if it has not previously had such an opportunity.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings. Relevancy is not a separate factor but a component of the overall Past Performance assessment.
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.

Performance Confidence Factor Rating Definitions. A rating of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Limited Confidence, No Confidence or Unknown Confidence (as defined below) will be assigned to the Past Performance Evaluation. The Past Performance Confidence ratings will be evaluated utilizing the following adjectival rating methodology:

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.
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.
Unknown Confidence (Neutral) 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.

Price Factor:

The offeror's proposed prices will not be rated or scored, but will be evaluated for realism, reasonableness, and completeness. The purpose of the price evaluation will be to determine whether each offeror's proposed price is realistic and complete in relation to the efforts required under the solicitation and the efforts described in the offeror's technical proposal.

Price analysis will be accomplished in accordance with FAR 15.404-1 and will consist of evaluation all prices. This analysis is to ensure that costs are realistic for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirements, and are consistent with the efforts described in the offeror's technical proposal. An excessively high or low price proposal will be considered an indication of a limited understanding of the task or an inefficient organization and may be render the offeror as non-responsive.

The vendor must submit the following so the Government can evaluate the Offeror's technical acceptability:
The written proposal will be the primary basis on which the Government will determine the capability of the Offeror to perform this work. It shall be specific, complete, thorough, clear and concise, and must address each requirement stated in the Description of Requirement.

The Offeror must include a completed Proposal Submission Form (Attachment 02).
The full text of a FAR provision or clause may be accessed electronically at www.farsite.hill.af.mil.
The following provisions apply to this acquisition:
52.204-7 System for Award Management Registration
52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Items
52.212-2 Evaluation-Commercial Items
52.212-3 Offerors Representations and Certifications- Commercial Items
The following clauses apply to this acquisition:
52.212-4 Contract Terms and Conditions Commercial Items
52.212-5 Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders--Commercial Items
52.223-1 Biobased Product Certification
52.223-2 Affirmative Procurement of Biobased Products Under Service and Construction Contracts
52.223-3 Hazardous Material Identification And Material Safety Data
52.223-4 Recovered Material Certification
52.223-5 Pollution Prevention and Right-to-Know Information
52.223-9 Estimate of Percentage of Recovered Material Content for EPA-Designated Items
52.223-10 Waste Reduction Program
52.223-11 Ozone-Depleting Substances
52.223-12 Refrigeration Equipment and Air Conditioners
52.223-13 Acquisition of EPEAT - Registered Imaging Equipment
52.223-14 Acquisition of EPEAT -Registered Televisions
52.223-15 Energy Efficiency in Energy-Consuming Products
52.223-16 Acquisition of EPEAT (R) - Registered Personal Computer Products
52.223-17 Affirmative Procurement of EPA-Designated Items in Service and Construction Contracts
252.203-7005 Representation Relating to Compensation of Former DoD Officials
252.204-7011 Alternative Line Item Structure
252.209-7001 Disclosure of Ownership of Control by Government of a Terrorist Country
252.212-7000 Offeror Representations and Certifications--Commercial Items
252.212-7001 Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statues or Executive Orders applicable to Defense Acquisitions of Commercial Items
252.225-7000 Buy American Statute-Balance of Payments Program Certificate
252.225-7001 Buy American Act and Balance of Payments Program
252.232-7010 Levies on Contract Payments
Additionally, the following clauses/provisions located within FAR 52.212- 5 apply to this acquisition:
52.204-10 Reporting Executive Compensation and First-Tier Subcontract Awards
52.209-6 Protecting the Government's Interests when Subcontracting with Contractors Debarred, Suspended, or Proposed for Debarment
52.219-6 Notice of Total Small Business Set-Aside
52.219-28 Post Award Small Business Program Representation
52.222-3 Convict Labor
52.222-19 Child Labor Cooperation With Authorities And Remedies
52.222-21 Prohibition of Segregated Facilities
52-222-26 Equal Opportunity
52.222-36 Equal Opportunity for Workers with Disabilities
52.222-50 Combating Trafficking in Persons
52.223-18 Encouraging Contractor Policies to Ban Text Messaging While Driving
52.232-33 Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer-Central Contractor Registration

Quotes are due 16 August 2019 not later than 2:00 p.m. Central Time by email to Janalyn.H.Dement@usace.army.mil. For all technical inquiries and questions relating to this solicitation, email Janalyn Dement the email address provided.

.