SOLICITATION NOTICE
54 -- LIGHT DUTY STEEL POLE STRUCTURES
- Notice Date
- 3/11/2005
- Notice Type
- Solicitation Notice
- Contracting Office
- 12155 W. Alameda Parkway Lakewood, CO 80228-2802
- ZIP Code
- 80228-2802
- Solicitation Number
- DE-RP65-05WG03058
- Response Due
- 4/21/2005
- Archive Date
- 5/21/2005
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- Title: LIGHT DUTY STEEL POLE STRUCTURES Western Area Power Administration requires a Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity Contract for Light Duty Transmission Line Steel Pole Structures (Class 2 Equivalent), for its Corporate Service Office (CSO) located in Lakewood, Colorado; the Rocky Mountain Customer Service Office (RMR) located in Loveland, Colorado; The Upper Great Plains Customer Service Office (UGP) with the office located in Huron, South Dakota; and the Desert Southwest Customer Service Office (DSR) located in Phoenix, Arizona. Delivery of poles may be to the following states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Iowa, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. Contract will be awarded for a five year period. The Government intends to utilize the procedures in Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 12 (Acquisition of Commercial Items) and Part 15 (Contracting by Negotiation) to award using a best value determination procedure. Estimated contract value is between $1,000,000 and $3,000,000. Estimated award date is on or about May 1, 2005. Individual delivery orders will be issued against the contract. The acquisition is a 100% Total Small Business Set-aside. The North American Industrial Classification System Code is 331221 and the size standard is 1000 employees. All responsible small business sources may submit a proposal which shall be considered by the agency. The full solicitation is attached to this announcement. Offerors will be evaluated in accordance with the following process and criteria: (1) AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror???s best terms from a price standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined necessary by the Contracting Officer. (2) BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD (a) Performance Price Trade-Off (PPT): This acquisition will utilize the PPT technique to make a best value award decision. Past Performance is equal to price. Price and past performance may be traded off, one against the other, as addressed in paragraph (ii) below. The application of the PPT technique in contract award and selection and approval process is as follows: (i) All offerors will receive a performance risk assessment rating of High Confidence, Significant Confidence, Confidence, Unknown Confidence, Little Confidence, or No Confidence. (ii) The Government reserves the right to award a contract to other than the lowest evaluated price offeror or to a higher priced offeror with a better performance risk rating. The Contracting Officer shall make an assessment of the price proposed and the performance risk rating assigned to determine the best value for the Government. (b) Past Performance Risk Assessment: (i) Performance risk will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2). Performance risk is assessed based on recency, relevancy and quality of performance. A relevance determination is made based upon whether an offeror???s performance is relevant to this acquisition in terms of work, size and complexity. Past Performance information is not limited to just that of the offeror. It may also include predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirements. In assessing performance risk, the evaluators will employ several approaches including: (a) reviewing the experience listed in the proposal, (b) evaluating the offerors??? success in meeting small business subcontracting goals, (c) seeking additional present and past performance information through the use of simplified questionnaires, and (d) using data independently obtained from other government and commercial sources. (ii) The purpose will be to identify and review the recency, relevancy and quality of the offeror???s work present and past performance, and then make an overall risk assessment of the offeror???s ability to perform this effort. The PPT process will result in an overall risk rating as defined below. This risk assessment represents the evaluation team???s analysis of the probability of an offeror successfully accomplishing the proposed effort based on the it???s demonstrated present and past performance. Rating Definition Exceptional/High Confidence Based on the offeror???s performance record essentially no doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Very Good/Significant Confidence Based on the offeror???s performance record, little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Satisfactory/Confidence Based on the offeror???s performance record, some doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Neutral/Unknown Confidence No performance record identifiable. Marginal/Little Confidence Based on the offeror???s performance record, substantial doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Changes to the offeror???s existing processes may be necessary in order to achieve contract requirements. Unsatisfactory/No Confidence Based on the offeror???s performance record, extreme doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. (c) The following documents will be evaluated for responsiveness, completeness and compliance with requirements of the RFP. Incomplete items may be a basis for rejection. ??? A signed copy of the solicitation contract award document, SF 1449. ??? Completed bid schedule, Section B. ??? Acknowledgment of all amendments, SF 30(s). ??? Completed Representation and Certifications, FAR 52.212-3. ??? Applicable fill in provisions completed ??? Past Performance Questionnaires and applicable attachments, FAR 52.212-2 (d) Pre-Award Survey of Prospective Contractors: If your response to this solicitation is favorably considered, a survey team may contact your facility to determine your ability to perform. Current financial statements and other pertinent data should be available for Government review at that time if not already on file with the office having cognizance over your facility. Examples of these areas that may be investigated and evaluated are listed below: (1) Technical Capability (2) Production Capability (3) Plant Facilities and Equipment (4) Financial Responsibility (5) Purchases and Subcontracting (6) Accounting Systems (7) Quality Assurance (8) Transportation (9) Plant Security (10) Security Clearance (11) Labor Resources (12) Performance Record (13) Ability to Meet Delivery Schedules (14) Other as Appropriate Offerors are advised that accomplishment of this survey is a part of the evaluation process and is not to be construed as an indication that an Offeror will receive or is in the best position to receive the award. PAST PERFORMANCE: Past performance shall provide adequate information describing the offeror???s previous experience in manufacturing and providing light duty steel structures, or work of a similar complexity and magnitude, both commercial and government that are ongoing or were completed in the last three years. The offeror shall also list all contracts having a similar complexity and magnitude (maximum of last ten consecutive contracts) performed within the past three years. If the offeror has not performed ten contracts within the past three years having the same complexity or magnitude as required for this solicitation then please list whatever contracts performed (maximum of ten contracts). In addition, past performance information on contracts not listed by the offeror may be solicited by the Government. If an offeror does not have any past performance information to submit as the entity under which the proposal is being submitted, then the offeror should submit past performance data identified above under which the offeror???s key personnel have worked. The offeror should provide all information regarding the past performance efforts applicable to predecessor companies. If the offeror claims there is no past performance, then that status must be identified to the Contracting Officer no later than the date and time due for past performance proposals from all offerors. (1) Provide a summary of the previous contracts described above. Include information on subcontractors whose effort on this acquisition is projected to be more than 25% of the effort. The summary must include: (a) Name of project (contract number, if applicable) (b) Name and address of customer or government agency (c) Name and telephone number of customer contact or contracting officer (d) Dollar value and period of performance (e) Description of work performed (2) Provide statements, letters, reports, or evaluations from prior customers indicating the level and quality of past performance on the above contracts. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS (1) Initial Evaluation of Proposals - The following steps will occur as part of the initial evaluation: (a) Offer and Other Documents Reviewed: All documents will be evaluated to ensure compliance with the solicitation requirements and the offeror's eligibility for award. Award will only be made to a responsive, responsible firm. Questions relating to eligibility due to partnerships, teaming arrangements, joint ventures, etc., will be referred to the Legal Advisor or Small Business Administration representative as appropriate. (b) Past Performance Initial Assessment: The ten (10) references provided by each offeror will be reviewed to identify those most representative of the requirements. Five (5) additional references will be required for any major subcontractors, partners, or joint venture participants. All references will be assessed as "highly" representative, "moderately" representative or "barely" representative. (c) Pricing Data Calculated: Price proposals will be evaluated to determine the accuracy and reasonableness of the proposed price and the calculated price to the Government. Price proposals will be compared to the Government's cost estimate as one measure of reasonableness. (d) Technical Compliance: Each offer will be reviewed to ensure that all elements of the specifications have been addressed. (e) Initial Recommendation and Decision: The results of the initial evaluation will be recorded and presented to the Contracting Officer for a source selection decision. Offerors not selected will be notified of the reason for their exclusion. .
- Web Link
-
Click here for further details regarding this notice.
(https://e-center.doe.gov/iips/busopor.nsf/UNID/805900044E206C7A85256FC10057B1E6?OpenDocument)
- Record
- SN00766750-W 20050313/050311211702 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |