amendment of solicitation/modification of contract … › federal government... · (a) address...

W9123818R0046

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 30APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83)Prescribed by GSAFAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to:(a) Address change to section 00 22 10 Basis of Aw ard para 4.4.2.1 (4).(b) Clarif ication made in Section 00 22 10 Basis of Aw ard Section 4.3- Six years. Intended to match section 4.4.2.1.a.(c) Added Lead Based Paint Report(d) Update scope of w ork on seed project: Period of Performance on Seed Project updated from 360 Days to 540 days.(e) Provide Updated Wage Determinations. Note: WD CA32 did not change.(f) Seed Project Magnitude disclosure IAW FAR 36.204 (f) $1,000,000 and $5,000,000.00. See Summary of Changes for clerical f ixes.//////////////////////////////////////////////LAST ITEM//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 27

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 22-Aug-2018

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 W9123818R0046

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)27-Jul-2018

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONSX The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer 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 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.

00052. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

22-Aug-2018CODE

US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, SACRAMENTOCONTRACTING DIVISION1325 J STREETSACRAMENTO CA 95814-2922

W91238 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9123818R0046

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE SUMMARY OF CHANGES SECTION 00 01 10 - TABLE OF CONTENTS The Table of Contents has changed from: Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE Attachment 1 Base MATOC

Specifications 09-MAY-2018

Attachment 2 DB Wage Determination CA09

27-JUL-2018


27-JUL-2018


27-JUL-2018


27-JUL-2018

Attachment 6 PPQ 13-JUL-2018 Attachment 7 Seed project 1 pkg

appendix 1-5 19-JUL-2018

Attachment 8 Seed Project SOW Tainter Gate Coating

06-AUG-2018

Attachment 9 Bid Schedule See Project 09-AUG-2018 to: Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE Attachment 1 Base MATOC

Specifications 1545 09-MAY-2018

Attachment 10 Lead Paint Test 7 24-APR-2012 Attachment 2 Attachment DB CA

18009 51 17-AUG-2018

Attachment 3 Attachment 3 DB CA180029

80 17-AUG-2018

Attachment 4 Attachment 4 DB CA180031

29 17-AUG-2018


25 27-JUL-2018

Attachment 6 PPQ 4 13-JUL-2018 Attachment 7 Seed project 1 pkg

appendix 1-5 311 19-JUL-2018

Attachment 8 Attachment 8 Updated SOW Pine Flat Dam Tainter Gates

6 22-AUG-2018

Attachment 9 Attachment 9 Bid Schedule Seed Project

1 09-AUG-2018

W9123818R0046

SECTION 00 22 00 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS The following have been modified: BASIS OF AWARD-SOURCE SELECTIO SECTION 00 22 10

PROPOSAL BASIS OF AWARD, GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS, PHASE I

INSTRUCTION AND EVALUATIONS, AND CONTRACT AWARD 1. OVERVIEW.

a. This will be a lowest price technically acceptable source selection process on the best value

continuum under FAR 15.101-2 looking to award Multiple Task Order Award Contracts which will cover a wide range of repairs and replacement of components on all facets of dams owned by the Sacramento District of the US Army Corps of Engineers (SPK), within the State of California. The Contracting Officer will award three (3) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOC) to the three lowest priced technically acceptable offers, and one (1) Task Order to the lowest price offeror for the seed project in this solicitation.

b. The Government does not intend to conduct discussions/exchanges or request for revised proposals. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions, if it deems such to be in its best interest in accordance with FAR 15.306.

c. Anticipated future projects under the MATOC.

(1) The purpose of the MATOC is to provide a streamlined contract vehicle to cover the wide range of repairs and replacement of components on all facets of dams owned by the Sacramento District of the US Army Corps of Engineers (SPK), California. The North American Industry Classification Systems (NAICS) code is 237990, Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction, with a size standard of $36.5 million. The minimum ordering limit will be $3,000.00, the maximum ordering limit will be $5 million, and the minimum guaranteed amount will be $10,000.00. All future task orders will be a firm fixed-price task order based on competition among the IDIQ Contractors on Lowest Price Technical Acceptable offer. A combined total of all contracts awarded under this solicitation shall not exceed $30 million at any one time

(2) The potential project types to be issued under the resulting contract as individual task

orders include, but are not limited to: repair and/or replacement of the following: Emergency/service gates, low flow gates, “Tainter” radial gates, measuring and monitoring equipment, piezometers, plumb line stations, relief wells, float-wells, conduit liners, penstocks, breast-walls, trash racks, bulk head gates, all facets of

W9123818R0046

painting and paint removal, all facets of concrete repair, spillways, intake structures, plumbing systems, electrical systems, hydraulic systems, pump systems, wing walls, drain holes, vertical drains, conduits, gate seals (including metal Babbitt seals). The wide range of repairs and/or replacement of components will be performed at various dams and projects located within the State of California, including, but not limited to, the following locations: Lake Isabella, Success Lake, Lake Kaweah, Pine Flat Lake, Hensley Lake, Eastman Lake, New Hogan Lake, Englebright Lake, Martis Creek, Black Butte Lake, and Merced County Stream Group (Burns, Bear, Owens, and Mariposa Dams).

2. BASIS OF AWARD.

The MATOC awards will be made to the three lowest priced of technically acceptable proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors stated in herein. To be considered technically acceptable, the Offeror must receive an “Acceptable” rating on all technical factors. The failure to meet any of the acceptability standards for non-cost factors will result in an overall technically unacceptable rating and will be precluded from award. 2.1. ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD.

In accordance with the requirements of FAR Part 9.103, all contracts shall be awarded to responsible prospective contractors only. No contract shall be entered into unless the contracting officer ensures that all requirements of law, executive orders, regulations, and all other applicable procedures, including clearances and approvals, have been met. This includes the FAR requirement that no award shall be made unless the contracting officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must meet the general standards in FAR Part 9.104 and any special standards set forth in the solicitation.

2.2. SOURCE SELECTION USING THE LOWEST PRICE TECHNICALLY

ACCEPTABLE PROCESS. A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) shall review all proposals for acceptability and provide the /Source Selection Authority (SSA) with a written technical analysis of each Offeror’s proposal. The Contracting Officer, in conjunction with the Project Delivery Team (PDT), will review these for correctness and completeness. Proposals will be evaluated for acceptability, but not ranked using non-cost/price factors. Tradeoffs will not be permitted. To be considered technically acceptable, no technical factor in the proposal may be determined to be unacceptable. The failure of a proposal to meet any of the acceptability standards for non-cost factors will result in a technically unacceptable rating and preclude award. *** Award of Multiple Award Task Order Contracts will be made to the three (3) lowest priced, technically acceptable proposals. Award of the seed project task order will be made to the lowest priced technically acceptable offeror.

Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Evaluation Process

W9123818R0046

The Source Selection Authority will give all proposals to the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). Although each offeror's price proposal will not be revealed to members of the SSEB, the Board will review technical proposals in ascending order of the value of each offerors' price proposal. Accordingly, the Board will first consider the technical proposals of the three lowest-priced offerors. If these proposals are found to be technically acceptable, no further technical proposals will be evaluated. If the lowest-priced offeror's technical proposal is not found acceptable on any of the technical factor, the SSEB will set aside that technical proposal and will review the next lowest-priced offeror's technical proposal. This process will continue until the Government finds three acceptable technical proposals. While the Government’s intent is to award without discussions, any debriefing of an offeror whose proposal was reviewed but not selected for contract award will be limited to an explanation of the deficiencies that prevented the Government from finding the proposal acceptable as to all factors contained in this solicitation. No debriefing can be provided to offerors whose proposals were not evaluated by the Government.

2.3. EVALUATION OF THE PRICE PROPOSAL.

a. Price analysis will be performed to determine fairness and reasonableness as well as to assure an understanding of the work and ability to execute the contract at the price proposed.

b. The Price Evaluation Adjustment for Small Disadvantaged Businesses will not apply to this procurement as it is currently suspended for Department of Defense.

c. Information required to be submitted in the Price Proposal volume in addition to the

executed SF 1442 with acknowledgement of amendments and the completed pricing schedules for the Seed Project will be used to determine the offeror’s eligibility for contract award in accordance with paragraph 2.1 above (for example, the offeror’s representations and certifications; the bid guarantee; and the offeror’s pre-award survey information). The Government may enter into exchanges with offerors about such information without it constituting discussions, subject to applicable FAR limitations, including FAR 15.306, Exchanges with offerors after receipt of proposals; and FAR 28.101-4, Noncompliance with bid guarantee requirements.

2.4. THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

a. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s technical proposal to determine whether it clearly meets the minimum requirements for the solicitation as explained in the instructions below, and on the basis of past performance information on related projects provided from references or obtained from other sources. Each of three required sections comprising an Offeror’s technical proposal (see instructions below) will be evaluated by the Government and an acceptability rating will be determined by consensus of the Government evaluation board for each technical factor other than past performance. For

W9123818R0046

the Past Performance factor a relevancy and confidence acceptability level will be determined by consensus of the Government evaluation board.

b. The evaluation factors correlate directly to the main organizational tabs identified in the

proposal submission instructions.

(1) Factor 1: Experience and Capability (2) Factor 2: Organization, and Technical Approach to Seed Project (3) Factor 3: Past Performance

2.4.1. GENERAL TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

a. The Offeror’s conformance with the specified format and submission requirements will be considered during the technical evaluation. Failure to comply with the formatting and/or submission requirements may be seen as indicative of the type of problems that could be expected during contract performance. More than a nominal number of errors/mistakes or egregious errors/mistakes may affect the Offeror’s ability to clearly meet the minimum requirements. Material omission(s) may cause the technical proposal to be rejected as unacceptable. However, in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, the Government may waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals.

b. Technical proposals which do not provide the specified information in the specified location

in accordance with the submission instructions may be found to be unacceptable. The Government is under no obligation to search for information that is not in the specified location.

c. Proposals which are generic, vague, or lacking in detail may be found unacceptable.

Responses that are essentially blanket offers of compliance are not adequate substitutes for the detailed and complete technical information necessary to establish that an Offeror can meet US Government needs. The proposal submission instructions are written to give prospective contractors, where feasible, an indication of the level of detail desired by the Government. The Offeror’s failure to include information that the Government has indicated should be included may result in the proposal being found unacceptable if inadequate detail is provided.

d. Any prescribed page and formatting limitations will be strictly adhered to and enforced

by the Government. The Government will not evaluate any excess information resulting from the Offeror’s failure to comply with the submission instructions. Examples: If an Offeror were to submit three pages in response to an item with a two page limitation, the information on the first two pages would be evaluated but the information on the third page would not be evaluated. If an Offeror were to submit a fold-out sheet (e.g. 11”x17”) in response to a one-page limitation where fold-out sheets were not authorized, only the information that could reasonably have been submitted on one 8-1/2 x 11 inch sheet would be evaluated. If an Offeror were to submit three 8-1/2 x 11 inch pages in response to a one not-to-exceed 11 x 17 inch page limitation, only the information that could reasonably have been submitted on one 11 x 17 inch sheet would be evaluated. If

W9123818R0046

an Offeror submitted alternates that were not requested (e.g. key subcontractor), the information will not be evaluated.

e. The degree of risk to the Government inherent in the Offeror’s technical proposal will be

a consideration under every evaluation factor. f. The Government cannot make award based on an unacceptable offer. Therefore, a rating

of “Unacceptable” under any factor will render the offer ineligible for award, unless the Government elects to enter into discussions with that Offeror and the revised proposal is found to be acceptable.

2.4.2. Technical Ratings: The below rating system will be used to evaluate the Offeror’s technical proposal.

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

ADJECTIVAL RATING

DESCRIPTION

“ACCEPTABLE”

Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

“UNACCEPTABLE”

Proposal does not clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

2.5. GENERAL PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION. a. Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each offeror after evaluating the offeror's recent past performance, focusing on performance that is relevant to the contract requirements. b. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate 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 second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The Government will review this past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance confidence assessment.

W9123818R0046

c. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings: The following rating system will be used Past Performance relevancy evaluation:

RATING DESCRIPTION “Relevant” Present/past performance effort involved essentially the

same 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.

d. Past Performance Confidence Assessments - In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each Offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings in the table below:

Adjectival Rating

Definition

“Acceptable” Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the Offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note below.)

“Unacceptable” Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: 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 unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.” 3. GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS. 3.1 . GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS. 3.1.1 . Media, Page Size, Margins, Fonts, and Page Limitations. Submit only the hard-copy paper documents and electronic files specifically authorized elsewhere in this section. Do not submit excess information, to include audio-visual materials, electronic media, etc. Do not include links to information on websites in lieu of incorporating the information physically into the proposal. Except where another size is specifically authorized for a specific submission, use only 8 1/2” x 11” paper. Use at least 1 inch margins, which may include headers and footers. Do not justify the right margin. Ensure that all text and graphics are clearly legible. Do not use a font size smaller than 10, unusual font styles such as script, or condensed fonts. For submissions with page limitations, the pages will be

W9123818R0046

counted as follows: One side of the paper is one page; information on both the back and front of one sheet of paper will be counted as two pages. Where authorized, a foldout sheet will count as one page. Pages furnished for organizational purposes only, such as a “Table of Contents” or divider tabs, are excluded from page limitations.

3.1.2 . Proposal Binding. The preferred method for assembling proposals is a method that enables the rapid insertion or deletion of pages such as three ring binders. Ensure recommended capacity is not exceeded and that pages turn freely. Do not use spring clamps, spiral binding systems, or heat binding systems.

3.1.3 . Conditioning of Offer. Do not include exceptions to the terms and conditions of the solicitation in either the technical or price proposal volumes. Inclusion of any standard company terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in a determination that the offer is unacceptable and thus ineligible for award. Resolve questions about the terms and conditions or technical requirements of the solicitation prior to submission of the offer; see “Inquiries”, located in Section 00 21 00 Technical Instructions in the Solicitation, for instructions for submitting inquiries related to proposal procedures. Notwithstanding the above, the offeror must clearly describe in the proposal cover sheet submitted with the price volume any exceptions, within the offer, to the contractual and/or technical terms and conditions of the solicitation.

3.1.4 . Restrictions on Offeror-Provided Information. “Confidential” projects cannot be submitted to demonstrate capability unless all of the information required for evaluation as specified herein can nonetheless be provided to the Government as part of the offeror’s technical proposal. Offerors that include in their proposals information that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, must clearly mark the information in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, “Instructions to Offeror – Competitive Acquisition”, paragraph (e), “Restriction on disclosure and use of data”. Files shall not contain classified data.

3.2. GENERAL PROPOSAL PREPARATION. The proposal shall be submitted as summarized below and as required by the specifications

a. Technical Proposal: Volume 1

(1) Submittal Information:

(a) The completed Standard Form 1442 with continuation pages, duly executed with an original signature by an official authorized to bind the company. Ensure that

W9123818R0046

the firm’s DUNS or DUNS+4 Number is entered in the block with its name and address.

(b) Your acknowledgement of any and all Amendments to the solicitation in accordance with the instructions on the Standard Form 30 Amendment.

(c) Joint Venture Agreement, if any. (d) Your completed Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of

Bidders/Offerors (Section 00 45 00). (2) Preface.

(3) Technical Factors.

a) Factor 1: Experience and Capability b) Factor 2: Organization for IDIQ MATOC and Technical Approach to Seed

Project c) Factor 3: Past Performance

b. Cost/Price Proposal: Volume 2

(1) Standard Form 1442 (2) Financial information- in accordance with FAR 9.104-3 Acceptable evidence of

ability to obtain resources as necessary and of which normally consists of a commitment or explicit arrangement, that will be in existence at the time of contract award, to rent, purchase, or otherwise acquire the needed facilities, equipment, other resources, or personnel. Consideration of a prime contractor’s compliance with limitations on subcontracting shall take into account the time period covered by the contract base period or quantities plus option periods or quantities, if such options are considered when evaluating offers for award.

(3) Acknowledgement of any and all Amendments (4) Pricing Schedules for Seed Project with Work Breakdown Structure (5) Representations and Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors (6) Pre-award Survey Data Information (7) Bid Guarantee

c. Both volumes must be received at the location shown in Block 8 of Standard Form 1442,

not later than the date and time specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442. The information in the two volumes is evaluated separately and independently. Therefore, all information intended by the offeror to be evaluated as part of the price volume must be submitted as part of the price volume. All information intended by the offeror to be evaluated as part of the technical volume must be submitted as part of the technical volume. Do not merely cross-reference similar material between the technical and price volumes.

W9123818R0046

W9123818R0046

Volume 2 tab 6- Pre-Award Survey Information. a. The Contracting Officer is required to make an affirmative pre-award determination of the prospective contractor’s responsibility in accordance with the mandatory requirements of Part 9 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and its supplements. The Contracting Officer must have sufficient information available to determine that a prospective contractor meets these minimum standards. Therefore, the offeror is requested to provide the pre- award survey information described below with its price proposal:

(1) The completed Construction Contractor Data Form with Supplemental

Schedules A- C (see format which follows). If the offeror is a large multi-segmented business concerns, the data provided on the supplemental schedules may be limited to information that directly pertains to the specific segment of the business concern (e.g., the division, group, unit, etc.) proposed to perform work under the prospective contract with its own work force. If the offer is being submitted by a Joint Venture, submit a separate form for each Joint Venture participant. The offeror may submit pre-award survey information in another format, provided that the information furnished is substantially the same as that which would be furnished on the Construction Contractor Data Form and its supplemental schedules.

(2) Current financial statements. If the financial statement is more than 60 days

old, submit a certificate stating that the firm's financial condition is substantially the same, or, if not the same, state the changes that have taken place. If a Joint Venture, provide this information for each participant in the Joint Venture.

(3) Banking information. Provide letters from banks or other financial institutions with which the contractor conducts business. The letters should contain information about your firm's accounts, loans, lines of credit, etc. The Government is interested in financial stability, timely payments, the length and nature of the relationship between the firm and the financial institution, and the firm's financial ability to perform the contract. The letters should also provide the name and telephone number of the bank representative the Government may contact. If a Joint Venture, provide this information for each Joint Venture participant.

(4) The Government will treat the pre-award survey information submitted by the

offeror as proprietary.

W9123818R0046

(Tab 7 of the Price Proposal: Pre-Award Survey Information) CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR DATA DATE: Firm Name and Telephone Number Main Office Address (Street, City, and State)

Branch Offices Services Rendered Construction Design Consultant

Organization Individual � Joint Venture Partnership � Corporation

Date Organized Date Incorporated: State:

Names of Officers and Other Key Personnel

I – PRESENT PAYROLL PERSONNEL (List Number of Each Category Below) Partners: Officers: Other Key:

Remainder: Subtotal Permanent: Maximum Personnel at Any Time: Date:

Total:

II—EQUIPMENT OWNED III—FINANCIAL DATA AS OF (DATE): Present Value ($)

Current Assets: Acquisition Cost ($) Current Liabilities:

Net Worth: IV—TOTAL VALUE OF CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WORK IN PAST 6 YRS EXCLUSIVE OF JOINT VENTURE (LIST MOST RECENT FIRST)

V—LARGEST JOB EVER CONTRACTED (If Other Than in Past Six Years)

$ LARGEST JOB IN PAST 6 YRS Contract Amount: Date: Description:

Owner:

$ Contract Amount: Date: Description:

Owner:

$ $ $ $ Avg. Annual Income $ VI—TYPE OF WORK IN WHICH FIRM SPECIALIZES

NAME AND POSITION/TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING SIGNATURE

See attachment for explanations or detailed description of item(s) reported above.

W9123818R0046

(Tab 7 of the Price Proposal: Pre-Award Survey Information) CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR DATA – SCHEDULE A – EXISTING COMMITMENTS

List below the construction projects your firm currently has under way, including recent awards. Also list construction projects for which your firm is the apparent successful offeror/bidder, but for which a contract has not yet been awarded.

CONTRACT NUMBER

CONTRACT AMOUNT

DESCRIPTION/ LOCATION

ORGANIZATION/ CONTACT PERSON/ PHONE NUMBER

PERCENT COMPLETE

W9123818R0046

(Tab 7 of the Price Proposal: Pre-Award Survey Information) CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR DATA – SCHEDULE B – COMPLETED PROJECTS

List below the principal construction projects your firm has completed within the past six years, including all DoD contracts with a total value exceeding $25,000,000.00.

CONTRACT NUMBER

CONTRACT AMOUNT

DESCRIPTION/ LOCATION

ORGANIZATION/ CONTACT PERSON/ PHONE NUMBER

PERCENT SUBLET

W9123818R0046

(Tab 7 of the Price Proposal: Pre-Award Survey Information) CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR DATA – SCHEDULE C – CONSTRUCTION AND/OR TECHNICAL EQUIPMENT

List total equipment and facilities owned for performing the prospective contract and present status as to whether or not it is currently committed to existing contracts.

QUANTITY

DESCRIPTION

CONDITION

YEARS OF SERVICE

PRESENT STATUS

W9123818R0046

of 27

3.2.1 . Marking of Proposal Volumes. Mark each volume as either the “Price Volume” or the “Technical Volume”. Additionally, mark the outside front cover of each volume with the project title and location, solicitation number, name and address of the offeror, and volume copy number. (Markings which identify the offeror are not required on either the back cover or on the spline/binding.)

3.2.2 . Tabbing of Proposal Volumes. Offers are to be formatted and tabbed in accordance with the instructions that follow for each proposal volume.

3.2.3 . Table of Contents. Include a table of contents for each proposal volume.

4. PROPOSAL. 4.1. NUMBER OF SETS OF THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL AND PRICING PROPOSAL. Both Technical Proposal and Pricing proposal are to be submitted in one hard “original” and 2 (two) copies. In addition, submit one complete copy of each technical proposal and pricing proposal on Compact Disk (CD) using a searchable “pdf” file format. 4.2. FORMAT, CONTENTS, AND LIST OF TABS FOR THE TECHNICAL VOLUME

Use 8-1/2” x 11” pages for the narrative portions of the proposal. There is not a page limit for the overall technical proposal; however, there may be limits imposed at the tab level. Page limitations, where specified in the RFP, shall be considered a maximum. Organize your technical proposal as indicated below. The tabs directly correlate to the technical evaluation factors. Although the Government may use information contained anywhere within the technical proposal in its evaluation of any technical evaluation criteria, the Government is not obligated to search for or to consider information that is not located in the specified location. Number the pages. Do not include information pertaining to your proposed pricing for this project in the technical proposal. Limit your submittals to the information specified; excess information will not be evaluated.

4.3. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL.

TAB CONTENT 1 Technical Proposal: Factor 1 – Experience and Capability:

-Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor example projects demonstrating

W9123818R0046

of 27

Six years of experience, and meeting each of seven capabilities identified in the evaluation criteria.

2 Technical Proposal: Factor 2 – Organization and Technical Approach

Organization Chart Technical Approach – Seed Project

3 Technical Proposal: Factor 3 – Past Performance -Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Example Projects Past

Performance on the projects submitted under Tab 1. 4.4. DETAILED SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL. 4.4.1. Preface – Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Introduction.

a. The Offeror is required to propose a specific project team including key subcontractors for evaluation in response to this Request for Proposals. For purposes of this procurement, the terms “key subcontractors” are used to refer only to the prospective subcontractors whose qualifications, experience, and past performance will be evaluated by the Government as part of the source selection process. For reasons of efficiency, not all of the subcontractors critical to successful post-award contract performance have been included in this group. In order to streamline the proposal submission and evaluation process, please limit your submission to the information specifically requested. Information pertaining to other subcontractors not designated as “key” by the Government will be considered excess and may not be evaluated.

b. For the purposes of this procurement, a key subcontractor is defined as any

subcontractor performing “key” major work elements for which capability information is required to be submitted for evaluation as part of the Offeror’s technical proposal. The Government has designated the following major work elements as “key”:

(1) Qualified Hazardous Paint Removal (2) Specialty Painting (3) Any Subcontractor performing work greater than $500,000.00 on any single project.

c. For the purposes of this procurement, a key subcontractor is defined as any person

proposed for a key position who would be listed in the narrative and as part of the Organizational structure and thus submitted for evaluation as part of the Offeror’s technical proposal. The Government has designated the following positions as being considered “key”:

(1) On-Site Project Superintendent

W9123818R0046

of 27

(2) Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System Manager (3) Site Safety and Health Officer

d. The Offeror’s attention is directed to the clause in Specification, Section 00 73 00 titled

“Key Personnel and Subcontractors”. In accordance with this clause, any post-award changes to the key personnel and/or key subcontractors in the accepted proposal will require contracting officer approval.

e. Provide a brief introduction narrative. Identify and provide the name, DUNS number,

address, POC e-mail address, and a brief description of the role and authority of each firm that will be involved in performance of this contract at the prime contractor and key subcontractor level. If the proposed prime contractor is a Joint Venture or teaming arrangement (i.e. mentor protégé), describe the relationship, role, and authority (to include management authority) of each firm. (Note: If a proposed firm has branch offices, provide information for each individual branch office that will perform work under the contract with its own workforce.) List the major work elements to be self-performed by the offeror’s in-house work force, the major work elements to be performed by each key subcontractor, and any other major work to be subcontracted to other contractors. The submission is limited to two pages.

f. The Government will not evaluate the Preface - Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor

Introduction. The purpose of this narrative is to provide a brief introduction for information purposes; however, if applicable, the government reserves the right to consider it throughout the evaluation of the other factors.

4.4.2. Tab 1 of the Technical Volume: Factor 2 – Experience and Capability 4.4.2.1. Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Example Projects Demonstrating Experience and Capability.

a. Example Projects. Provide sample projects of similar size, scope, and complexity that were are substantially complete (for this purpose, “substantially complete” means that only punch list items remain for the project acceptance or that the majority of the elements of the project have been turned over to the customer for the beneficial occupancy) within six (6) years preceding the date of this solicitation. The Government will consider a project is relevant if the example project demonstrates similar size, scope, and complexity as the scope of work for the seed project as well as reflect experience with civil works projects having been constructed (1) above and below water; (2) above and below ground and/or (3) in confined spaces as it relates to the technical specifications for the base MATOC. In addition, example projects must meet each of the seven (7) below capability areas that demonstrate the prime’s and/or key subcontractor’s experience and capability to successfully complete the example project. Multiple projects can demonstrate an experience and capability or an example project can demonstrate multiple experiences and capabilities.

(1) At least one with no more than two example projects demonstrating the

W9123818R0046

of 27

offeror’s project management experience and capability as a prime contractor on a construction project of similar type and scope;


experience and capability as the prime contractor on a construction project which includes abrasive blasting and painting of hydraulic steel structures in wet and humid confined spaces;


experience and capability of the firm (prime or subcontractor) on a construction project which includes vertical and overhead welding in confined spaces;


experience and capability of the firm (prime or subcontractor) on a concrete repair on a dam structure (i.e., core walls, spillways, stilling basins, control tower, outlet works, conduit, and slope protection).

(5) At least one with no more than two example projects each for slide gates, and

Tainter gates demonstrating the experience and capability of the firm (prime or subcontractor) on repair or replacement of slide gates, and Tainter gates;


experience and capability of the firm (prime or subcontractor) on replacement of 24" or larger gate valves ( butterfly, wedge, knife or slide) relating to dam water works;


experience and capability of the firm (prime or subcontractor) on repair or replacement of dam hydraulic power system including but not limited to hydraulic power units, gate controls, hydraulic hoists and hydraulic pistons.

b. Example projects submitted to demonstrate a firm’s experience and capability must

be relevant to the work that the firm will be performing under the prospective contract. The offeror should explain how the work performed by the proposed firm in the example project is relevant to the proposed acquisition

c. Do not submit construction projects that are not either complete or substantially

complete. For this purpose, “substantially complete” means that only punch list items remain for project acceptance or that the majority of the elements of the project have been turned over to the customer for beneficial occupancy.)

d. Provide a Summary Matrix that indicates which submitted example project(s)

demonstrates the experience(s) and capability(ies) of which firm (i.e. prime, subcontractor) will perform the capability area identified in paragraph “a.(1).”

W9123818R0046

of 27

above. For example:

e. Offeror shall provide project information in accordance with below project

information form.

PROJECT INFORMATION FORM

1. Example Project Number: Start with “1” for the first of all submitted projects and number consecutively.

2. Name of Contractor(s)/Key Subcontractor (s) that Project is Demonstrating Experience: Provide the name of the proposed firm(s) that this example project is demonstrating experience and capability.

3. Contract Number and Awarded Prime Contractor Name: Provide contract number assigned by the procuring Contracting Office and the name of the contractor that was awarded the contract.

4. Title and Location: Title and location of project or contract.

5. Month and Year Project Work Commenced and Month and Year Project was

Completed.

Capability #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6

1. Prime Project Management X X X

2. Largest Construction Capability X X X

3. Abrasive Blasting and Painting X X X

4. Vertical and Overhead Welding X X

5. Concrete Repairs X X

6. Slide gates and Tainter gates X X

7. 24” or larger Knife Gate Valves X X

8. Dam Hydraulic Systems X X

W9123818R0046

of 27

6. Project Owner: Project owner or user, such as a government agency or installation, an institution, or corporation or private individual.

7. Point of Contact Name: Provide name of a person associated with the project owner or the organization that contracted for the construction, who is very familiar with the project and the firm’s (or firms’) performance.

8. Point of Contact Telephone Number: Include area code.

9. Description of the Project: Provide contract type, dollar amount, physical size, and brief description of prime contracted effort. If the firm (prime/key subcontractor) performed as a subcontractor, describe the work effort pertaining to the subcontracted effort, not the prime contract requirement. For each firm (prime/key subcontractor) that was involved on the example project, provide sufficient detail to establish the relevance to the current project to include (1) the performance period in month and year, (2) final dollar value, (3) physical size and (4) principal elements and special features of the work self-performed by that contractor’s employees.

10. Provide name of firm(s) (prime/key subcontractor) and branch offices, if appropriate, that were involved in the example project, their roles, and their respective contract numbers.

4.4.2.2. Formatting and Other Restrictions.

(a) Start the information for each example project on a new page. The submission is limited to 8-1/2” x 11” page size and limited to 20 pages total.

(b) Use the “Project Information Form” below above to submit the example

projects. Use of an alternate format could result in a lower rating if all of the specified information is not provided. (Note: Do not submit a group of related jobs as one project unless all of the work was done under the same contract, or for indefinite delivery contracts, under one task order.)

(c) The Summary Matrix is limited to one page (NTE 11” x 17”).

4.4.2.3. Evaluation Criteria. For an Acceptable rating, the Offeror must meet the below minimum requirements. Failure of the offeror to meet the minimum requirments will result in an “Unacceptable” rating.

(a) The Government will evaluate the recent relevant experience of the offeror’s

provided example projects based on the below criteria. Projects not meeting the below criteria will be determined unacceptable.

Relevant: Example projects demonstrate that Offeror’s experience in similar size,

scope, and complexity as the scope of work for the seed project as well as

W9123818R0046

of 27

reflect experience with civil works projects having been constructed (1) above and below water; (2) above and below ground and/or (3) in confined spaces as it relates to the technical specifications for the base MATOC.

(b) Capability minimum requirements:

4.4.3. Tab 2 of the Technical Proposal: Factor 2 – Organization, and Technical Approach 4.4.3.1. Organization.

a. Provide information that describes the offeror’s organization including the Prime Contractor and Key Subcontractors for the duration of this IDIQ MATOC contract.

Capability Minimum Requirements 1. Prime Project

Management Provide at least one, but no more three example projects demonstrating the offeror’s project management experience and capability as a prime contractor on a construction projects ranging from $3 M to $5M in NAICS 237990 - Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction.

2. Abrasive Blasting and Painting

Provide one example project (Offeror/Key Subcontractor) demonstrating abrasive blasting and painting of hydraulic steel structures in wet and humid confined spaces.

3. Vertical and Overhead Welding

Provide one example projects (Offeror/Key Subcontractor) demonstrating vertical and overhead welding work in confined spaces.

4. Concrete Repairs Provide one example projects demonstrating repair of damaged dam concrete structures.

5. Slide gates and Tainter gates

1. Provide one example projects demonstrating repair or replacement of slider gates. 2. Provide one example projects demonstrating repair or replacement of Tainter gates.

6. Knife Gate Valves Provide one example projects demonstrating work experience on replacement of 24” or larger knife gate valves at the outlet works of a dam.

7. Dam Hydraulic Systems Provide one example project demonstrating repair or replacement of dam hydraulic power system; repair/replacement of hydraulic power units, gate controls, and hydraulic pistons.

W9123818R0046

of 27

b. IDIQ MATOC Organization: Describe how the Firm is organized by providing an Organization chart illustrating the organization, including the proposed quality control team. Provide narrative that describes the roles and responsibilities of the key positions listed on the Organization chart and how they are utilized on projects. Clearly describe any teaming or joint venture arrangements. Describe the proposed management structure for the team, describing how construction process will be managed and the authorities and the delegations of authority within the team or joint venture.

4.4.3.2. Technical Approach-Seed Project: Provide technical narrative describing your approach

to the Seed Project effort including Network Analysis Schedules (NAS) with construction activities in a logical sequence and exhibiting an achievable timeline for each Seed Project.

a. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s technical narrative approach to the seed

project to determine if the offeror’s proposed approach includes the requirements stated in the Seed Project; specifically addressing and meeting the Statement of Work requirements for cleaning, recoating hydraulic steel structures, and steel conduit liner.

b. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed Network Analysis Schedules for

the Seed Project to determine if the proposed phasing of work and construction activities are in logical sequence with an achievable timeline for the Seed Project. For the purpose of evaluation, the estimated Notice to Proceed date is 30 Oct 2018.

Note: Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements or the Scope of Work 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.

4.4.3.2. Evaluation Criteria

(1) Organization: The Offeror must meet the following minimum requirements to receive an “Acceptable” rating:

(a) The responsibilities and lines of authority between the Prime and key subcontractors are appropriate and well-defined; (b) The Joint venture participant’s/key subcontractor(s) contribution to the organization is commensurate with their skills and background.

(2) Technical Approach for the Seed Projects: The Offeror must meet the following

minimum requirements to receive an “Acceptable” rating:

W9123818R0046

of 27

(a) The offeror’s proposed approach includes the requirements stated in the Seed Project; specifically addressing and meeting the Statement of Work requirements for cleaning, recoating hydraulic steel structures, and steel conduit liner; and

(b) The Offeror’s Network Analysis Schedule will receive an “Acceptable” rating if

it presents a logical, reasonable, and achievable sequencing of project activities indicating an accurate understanding of the phasing, interrelationship and organization of tasks necessary to satisfactorily complete the full scope of the Seed Project within the allotted period of performance.

4.4.3.3. Formatting and Other Restrictions: The submission is limited to ten (10) 8-1/2” x 11” pages total. 4.4.4. Tab 3 of the Technical Proposal: Factor 3 – Past Performance. 4.4.4.1. General.

a. The information provided under this tab will be used in conjunction with the evaluation of the relevant past performance record of the offeror and proposed key subcontractors. Information other than that supplied by the offeror under this tab may be utilized by the Government in its evaluation of past performance.

b. Offeror must demonstrate past performance on projects that are of similar size, scope

and complexity to be considered relevant. The Source Selection Authority shall determine the relevance of similar past performance information.

4.4.4.2. Prime Contractor/Key Subcontractor Past Performance Submittal.

a. Offerors are to provide past performance evaluation information on the example projects submitted under the Experience and Capability factor (e.g. Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), questionnaire, similar performance evaluation, or other performance evaluations completed previously).

b. The Past Performance Questionnaire included in the solicitation is provided for the

offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 21 Experience and Capability. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed Past Performance questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project (s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, 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. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Tonja Dreke via email at [email protected] prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

W9123818R0046

of 27

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.

c. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information

for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting system (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

d. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of

providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

e. Formatting and Other Restrictions. Start the information for each example project on a

new page. There is not a page limitation for this submission.

4.4.4.3. Evaluation Criteria

(1) The Government will evaluate past performance information to assess the level of performance confidence assessment associated with the offeror’s probability of success in performing the requirements stated in the solicitation on the example projects submitted under Technical Factor 1. The currency and relevance of the information (as determined by the Government), the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the contractor’s performance may be considered.

(2) This confidence assessment of past performance information is separate from the

responsibility determination required under FAR Subpart 9.1. (3) For the purpose of the past performance evaluation, offerors shall be defined as

business arrangements and relationships, such as Joint Venture participants, teaming partners, and key subcontractor(s). The past performance record of each firm in the business arrangement may be evaluated by the Government.

(4) The evaluation may take into consideration the offeror’s quality;

Schedule/Timeliness of Performance; Customer Satisfaction; Management/Personnel/Labor; Cost/Financial Management; and Safety/Security.

(5) The evaluation may take into account the number and severity of problems, the

demonstrated effectiveness of corrective actions taken, and the overall work

W9123818R0046

of 27

record. (6) In the case of an offeror without a record of recent, relevant past performance (and

for which there is also no recent, relevant past performance information for its predecessor companies or key subcontractors), or for whom information on past performance is not available or cannot be verified, the offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. For the purpose of this procurement, an “Unknown Confidence” rating is considered to be a neutral rating that is neither favorable nor unfavorable. Notwithstanding the above, the Government is not precluded from making award to a higher-priced offeror with a favorable past performance record over a lower-priced offeror with a neutral past performance rating.

(7) The Government will call and confirm information provided by the offeror on the

Past Performance Assessment Questionnaire with the points of contact, to the extent necessary to conduct a meaningful evaluation. The Government reserves the right to interview other individuals if the point of contact is not available.

4.4.4.4. Key Subcontractor Commitment and Authorization Letters. Provide a letter of commitment and authorization from each proposed key subcontractor that:

a. States the business concern’s intent to work on this project in the proposed specified capacity if the offeror is awarded the contract; and

b. Provides authorization for the Government to disclose and discuss the key

subcontractor’s past performance record with the offeror in conjunction with the Government’s evaluation of the offeror’s technical proposal.

c. Failure of a key subcontractor to provide authorization for the Government to disclose

and discuss their past performance record with the offeror will not be considered a proposal deficiency. However, the Government will not be able to discuss in detail any past performance problems with the offeror.

d. Formatting and Other Restrictions. Each letter should be furnished on the business

concern’s letterhead and signed by an authorized representative of the concern. There is not a page limitation for this submission.

(End of Summary of Changes)

amendment of solicitation/modification of contract … › federal government... · (a) address...

Documents