MODIFICATION
Y -- WA-MCNARY NWR ASPHALT TRAIL
- Notice Date
- 5/30/2019
- Notice Type
- Modification
- NAICS
- 237990
— Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
- Contracting Office
- FWS, DIVISION OF CONTRACTING AND GE<br />EASTSIDE FEDERAL COMPLEX<br />911 NE 11TH AVENUE<br />PORTLAND<br />OR<br />97232-4181<br />US<br />
- ZIP Code
- 97232
- Solicitation Number
- 140F0119R0011
- Response Due
- 6/25/2019
- Archive Date
- 7/10/2019
- Point of Contact
- Lautzenheiser, Karl
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Contracting and General Services (CGS) Region 1 has a requirement to procure a firm fixed price order for a contractor to provide all labor, equipment and materials (with the exception of those listed as provided by the government in the scope of work) to perform all work required to construct an asphalt surfaced ABA accessible hiking trail on McNary National Wildlife Refuge in Burbank Washington (Walla Walla County). Exhibit A of the associated Statement of Work includes a map which illustrates Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 trail work contemplated. Project is a small business set-aside. Applicable NAICS code is 237990. Small business size is defined as $36.5 million or less annually when averaged over a three year period. Work cannot be started before July 15, 2019 and must be completed by September 30, 2019. Project magnitude is between $100,000.00 and $250,000.00. Site Visit: For firms interested in attending a site visit, parties will meet on June 11, 2019 at 10 AM local time at the above address. If planning on attending the site visits, please contact Karl Lautzenheiser at karl_lautzenheiser@fws.gov at least a couple days prior to the site visit. Date for submission of Questions: Contractors should submit any questions on this project directly to Karl Lautzenheiser at karl_lautzenheiser@fws.gov by no later than close of business on June 13, 2019. Questions will be consolidated and answers provided by issuance of an amendment directly thereafter. BASIS FOR AWARD The "Lowest-Priced, Technically-Acceptable (LPTA)" Source Selection Process shall be utilized in accordance with (IAW) FAR Part 15.101-2 as the basis for award. For the basis of determining the lowest priced proposal, the lowest price includes the base bid item in making a determination of overall price fair and reasonableness and if funding is available at the time of award, one or more of the option items listed above. Incomplete bids will not be considered. For option bid item(s) that may not be able to be funded at the time of award, the Government reserves the right to award and incorporate by modification within 30 days of award. Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of an offer meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. There will be two (2) non-cost evaluation factors: Recent Relevant Experience and Recent Relevant Past Performance. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than `Acceptable ¿ must be achieved for Recent Relevant Experience and Recent Relevant Past Performance. The Government will first conduct a price analysis to determine fairness, reasonableness and if unbalanced pricing exists. Offerors proposals will then be ranked from the lowest to the highest-priced. The Government will then evaluate the technical proposal of the apparent, lowest-priced offeror. If the apparent, lowest-priced offeror's technical proposal is "Unacceptable" the Government will then evaluate the technical proposal of the apparent, second lowest-priced offeror. This process will continue until a lowest-priced offeror's technical proposal is "Acceptable." Once the Government identifies the lowest-priced, technically-acceptable offeror, an award will be made and no other proposals will be evaluated from offerors who proposed higher pricing. B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED The following evaluation factors and will be used to evaluate each proposal: FACTOR 1 - RECENT RELEVANT EXPERIENCE FACTOR 2 - RECENT RELEVANT PAST PERFORMANCE FACTOR 3 - PRICE Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. Evaluation of the offeror's proposal shall address each factor as it applies to the statement of work, specifications and drawings. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in paragraph c below (Evaluation Approach) below. An offer will receive an `Acceptable ¿ rating if it meets the minimum requirements of all evaluation factors described below. C. EVALUATION APPROACH FACTOR 1 - RECENT RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Offerors shall be evaluated to determine whether they have performed similar contracts, in terms of scope and price, to the work required within the solicitation. Offerors shall provide the minimum requested project information on at least one (1) recent, relevant project for construction of an asphalt paven trail (ten page limit). For a project to be considered, the offeror shall have been the Prime Contractor on it. Projects do not have to have been with a Federal Agency to be considered. A project is considered `recent' if it has been completed within the past five (5) years or is currently ongoing (but at least 25% complete). A project is considered `relevant' if it is similar in terms of scope and price to the work required within the solicitation. To be considered similar in scope, one project shall demonstrate work experience in construction of an asphalt paven trail and the project shall have a contract value of at least $100,000.00 or more. Please note that FACTOR 1 (Recent Relevant Experience) differs from FACTOR 2 (Recent Relevant Past Performance). FACTOR 1 determines whether or not an offeror has performed similar work whereas FACTOR 2 evaluates how well the offeror performed. FACTOR 1 RECENT RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Rating Description Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation for this factor. Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation for this factor. FACTOR 2 - RECENT RELEVANT PAST PERFORMANCE Offeror's past performance shall be reviewed to determine relevancy and confidence assessment. Offerors shall provide at least one (1) recent, relevant project for construction of an asphalt paven trail (ten page limit). Projects shall include current points of contact and phone numbers. The contractor is solely responsible for the accuracy of this information as the Government will not pursue incorrect contact data. For a project to be considered, the offeror shall have been the prime contractor on it. In addition to scope, each project shall have a current or final contract value greater than $100,000.00 and have been completed within the past five past five (5) years or be currently ongoing (but at least 25% complete). Furthermore, for each project to be considered, the offeror shall have been the Prime Contractor on it. Projects do not have to have been with a Federal Agency to be considered. Offerors may submit the same projects as those proposed for FACTOR 1 (Recent Relevant Experience). 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 Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE / Unique Entity Identifiers (i.e. DUNS) of team members (i.e. partnerships, joint ventures, teaming arrangements or parent companies / subsidiaries / affiliates) identified in the offeror ¿s proposals, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS) and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. 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. FACTOR 2 RECENT RELEVANT PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RATINGS DEFINITION Rating Description 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 IAW FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv); therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of `Acceptable ¿ / `Unacceptable, ¿ unknown past performance shall be considered `Acceptable. ¿ FACTOR 3 - PRICE Price - For the basis of determining the lowest priced proposal, the lowest price includes the base bid item in making a determination of overall price fair and reasonableness and if funding is available at the time of award, one or more of the option items listed above. Incomplete bids will not be considered. For option bid item(s) that may not be able to be funded at the time of award, the Government reserves the right to award and incorporate by modification within 30 days of award. If any of the tasks appear to be unbalanced, a review of the breakdown of each task will be conducted. Offeror's prices for each item within the bid schedule shall represent the best price in response to the solicitation. Prices will be evaluated using price analysis IAW FAR 15.404-1(a)(2) and 15.404-1(b). Prices shall be evaluated to determine fairness, reasonableness and if unbalanced pricing exists. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over or understated. If price analysis techniques indicate that a proposal is unbalanced, the contracting officer shall consider the risks to the Government associated with the unbalanced pricing. An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government (no page limit). Solicitation Number 140F0119R0011 with attachments is being posted on or about May 30, 2019 with proposals due by 2 PM PT on June 25, 2019. Proposals submitted by mail channels must be received by no later that date/time specified with a 20 percent bid bond or proposals can be emailed to karl_lautzenheiser@fws.gov along with a copy of the bid bond and the original bid bond must also mailed no later than the date/time for receipt of proposals. No further notice will be posted on FedBizOpps. To be considered for award, interested contractors must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database at (https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/) and Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) must be completed at this same website. For technical or contract questions, please contact Karl Lautzenheiser by email to Karl_Lautzenheiser@fws.gov. NOTE: THIS NOTICE WAS NOT POSTED TO FEDBIZOPPS ON THE DATE INDICATED IN THE NOTICE ITSELF (30-MAY-2019); HOWEVER, IT DID APPEAR IN THE FEDBIZOPPS FTP FEED ON THIS DATE. PLEASE CONTACT 877-472-3779 or fbo.support@gsa.gov REGARDING THIS ISSUE.
- Web Link
-
Link To Document
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DOI/FWS/CGSWO/140F0119R0011/listing.html)
- Record
- SN05327135-F 20190601/190530230059 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |