N00024-13-R-4408_Amendment_0003.pdf

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 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

SEE CONTINUATION PAGE.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 12

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 25-Jul-2013

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 N00024-13-R-4408

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

03-Jul-2013

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X 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.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

25-Jul-2013

CODE

NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND (HQ)

1333 ISAAC HULL AVE SE

WASHINGTON NAVY YARD DC 20376-2030

N00024 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N00024-13-R-4408

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0003

Amendment 0003 revises the solicitation as follows:

1. Revised Sections L and M in response to Question 32.

2. Response to offeror inquiry 32:

Question 32: RFP Section L, paragraph 2 “Non Priced Proposal Factor 3” page 82. This paragraph directs submittal of Past Performance questionnaires. Is CPAR data an acceptable substitute for the Past Performance questionnaire?

Government Response: Yes. Offerors may elect not to submit any additional information for Factor 3, Past Performance. Under Section L, Instructions for the Submission of Offerors, Proposal Packages, the submission requirements for Non-price proposals has been revised. Under Section L, Instructions for the Submission of Offerors, Proposal Content, the contents of Factor 3 – Past Performance has been revised. Under Section M, Evaluation Factors, Non-Price Factors, the contents of Factor 3 – Past Performance has been revised.

The proposal due date remains 5 August 2013 at 10:00am, local time.

Offerors shall acknowledge this amendment, and any future amendments, in Block 14 of the SF 33.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This solicitation is a Request for Proposals (RFP) that will result in multiple Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity contract awards for the repair, maintenance and modernization requirements for CG 47 and DDG 51 class ships under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 336611.

ALL INQUIRIES shall be directed to Morgan Reese, Contracting Officer, Traci Pichler, Contract Specialist, and RJ Larkin, Contract Specialist at morgan.reese@navy.mil, traci.pichler@navy.mil and robert.j.larkin@navy.mil. To ensure the Government is able to adequately address and respond to offeror Pre-Proposal Inquiries (PPIs) via amendment, it is requested questions be submitted no later than 15 July 2013 at 11:00am. The Navy reserves the right to not answer any requests received after 15 July 2013. Furthermore, Offerors should note that the proposal due date will not be extended solely on the basis of requests received after 15 July 2013. PPIs should reference a solicitation page and paragraph number and be submitted on the form (Attachment S-1) provided with this solicitation.

2.0 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE SUBMISSION OF OFFERS

Proposal Due Date: Proposals* must be received no later than 05 August 2013 at 1000, local time. Proposals shall be sent to morgan.reese@navy.mil, traci.pichler@navy.mil and robert.j.larkin@navy.mil.

Proposal submission: Proposal submission shall be submitted as follows:

Proposals shall consist of a minimum of two (2) emails.

Price and Non-Price information SHALL be submitted in separate emails.

Zip files shall not be sent.

Ensure email submissions indicate in the subject line the number of emails being sent; for example: 1 of 3 Price Proposal, 2 of 3 Price Proposal, 1 of 1 Non-Price Proposal, etc.

Offerors shall limit individual emails to 5 MB each.

Offerors are responsible for ensuring receipt at destination. The submittal closing time and receipt of proposals shall be established by the time on the receiving computer. The Government will respond with a confirmation email to confirm receipt of email/s and number of attachments.

LATE PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. PARTIAL PROPOSALS OR

ATTACHMENTS SUBMITTED LATE WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.

Offerors are advised to consult FAR 15.208 related to timely receipt of proposals.

*Past Performance questionnaires (Attachment S-2) shall be submitted by clients by 05 August 2013 to morgan.reese@navy.mil, traci.pichler@navy.mil and robert.j.larkin@navy.mil.

Proposal Packages: A complete proposal submission will include the following:

Price Proposal Signed SF 33 with all amendments acknowledged;

Cover Letter to include offeror’s CAGE and DUNS information;

Labor and Material Rates (Attachment S-5); and Small Business Subcontracting Plan per FAR Part 19 (large businesses only).

Non-Price Proposal Completed Pier Facilities Data Sheet (Attachment S-3) & Letter/s or teaming agreement/s confirming pier ownership or committed access Corporate Experience Data Sheets (Attachment S-6) and Narrative (up to 20 total pages).

GENERAL INFORMATION

Estimated Award Date: The Government anticipates making multiple awards in October 2013. The base period will be 12 months from the date of contract award.

Pre-Award Survey: The Government reserves the right to conduct a pre-award survey or to require other evidence of technical, production, managerial, financial, and similar abilities to perform prior to the award of a contract.

Post Award Kick-off (PAK) Meeting: Contractors are required to attend an in-person meeting with all MAC holders shortly after contract awards are made. At a minimum, key personnel in attendance shall include the contractor’s designated point of contact available to the Government (via phone or email) 24/7. The intent of the meeting will be to discuss ordering procedures, general technical issues and any other relevant administrative issues to foster a greater partnership between the Government and MAC holders.

Alteration of Solicitation: Offerors shall respond to the solicitation as posted. Offerors who alter the solicitation (except for completing appropriate “fill-in” blocks and certifications) may be considered non-responsive and thus ineligible for award.

Proposal Information: Offerors shall not presume the Government has knowledge outside of information provided in the proposal. Additionally, offerors are advised that statements such as: “the offeror understands”, “the offeror has a long history of outstanding support”, “standard procedures shall be used”, “well known techniques shall be employed” or any paraphrasing of the solicitation, shall be considered inadequate to demonstrate experience, knowledge of, or compliance with solicitation requirements. Offerors are encouraged to provide specific and concise information to validate all assertions.

Amendments: The Government may revise the solicitation at any time by means of an Amendment. It is an offeror’s responsibility to ensure it is accessing the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) and Navy Electronic Commerce Online (NECO) websites to view potential amendments.

Teaming Arrangements: To be evaluated as a Joint Venture (JV), offerors must provide a notarized agreement (with the price proposal) delineating roles and responsibilities for all proposed work.

PROPOSAL FORMAT

To facilitate efficiency and consistency in proposal evaluation the following guidance is mandatory. Proposals which do not follow this guidance may be rejected as non-responsive and thus ineligible for award.

Offerors are encouraged to use the forms provided with this solicitation. Proposal pages shall be formatted to 8.5 x 11 inch paper with a one-inch margin. The text used shall be Times New Roman with a minimum font of 12.

Page Limits:

The Cover Letter is limited to three (3) pages.

Non-price proposals shall be limited to 20 pages for Factor 2.

There are no other page limitations.

PROPOSAL CONTENT

Price Proposal: The Price Proposal shall not contain non-price factor information. The proposal shall be comprised of the Cover Letter, SF 33, Small Business Sub-contracting plan, any Joint Venture / teaming agreement and trade and material burden rates information.

Offerors shall fully complete attachment S-5 and the Section B Trade and Material Burden Rates table. The Rates provided in attachment S-5 and Section B shall match. If there are any discrepancies, the rates provided in Section B will govern.

The offeror shall complete S-5 and the Section B “Trade and Material Burden Rates” table by providing fully burdened labor rates by labor category and time category (straight-time, overtime, and double time), and Material Burden Rates for both contract periods (base and option) to be considered responsive. The offeror shall specify fixed rates in its offer that include all wages, overhead, general and administrative expenses, FCCOM and profit.

The offeror shall specify fixed material burden rates in its offer that include all applicable material overhead, general and administrative expenses, FCCOM and profit. The offeror shall establish fixed hourly rates using blended rates for each category of labor to be performed by the Offeror, including labor transferred between divisions, subsidiaries, or affiliates of the offeror under a common control, and all subcontractors. The contractor shall submit the fully completed attachment S-5 in Microsoft Excel in the format provided in this solicitation.

Cover Letter: The Cover Letter, which shall not exceed three (3) pages, shall meet all the requirements of the “first page of the proposal” outlined in FAR 52.215-1(c)(2)(i-v). In addition to those requirements, the offeror shall include the following in the cover letter:

CAGE and Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) numbers for the Prime contractor;

Identification of all enclosures included with the proposal;

Name, address and telephone number of the applicable DCAA office; and Notice of any alterations to the solicitation (except for completing appropriate “fill-in” blocks and certifications)

Standard Form 33 (SF 33): As part of the Price proposal package, the offeror shall submit the completed SF 33 with blocks 12 through 18 completed as well as all solicitation sections with applicable fill-ins completed. The representative who signs this form must be authorized to contractually bind the company providing the offer. The Offeror shall complete and provide all appropriate fill-in clauses included in Sections B-J and Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements included in Section K of the solicitation. Submission of a signed offer to the Government constitutes agreement and acceptance of the terms and conditions of the solicitation.

Non-Price Proposal: The Non-Price Proposal shall be comprised of three Factors, Factor 1 - Pier Facilities, Factor 2 -Corporate Experience and Factor 3 - Past Performance as follows:

Factor 1 – Pier Facilities: Offerors shall fill out the Pier Facilities Data Sheet and provide a letter signed by the Principal identifying and confirming that the Offeror owns a pier capable of non-concurrently berthing either a DDG-51 or CG-47 class ship in the San Diego, CA homeport. If the offeror does not own the pier, the Offeror shall provide an official teaming agreement identifying and confirming committed access to a pier capable of non-concurrently berthing either a DDG-51 or CG-47 class ship in the San Diego, CA homeport. The pier shall include, at minimum:

o A minimum water depth of 35’ at mean low water o 4,000 AMPS & 450 Volts Electrical power o 1,250 Gallons/Minute at 125 Pounds/Square Inch Gauge of Saltwater or non-potable water o 16,000 Gallons/Day at 50 Pounds/Square Inch Gauge of Potable water o 1,000 Standard Cubic Feet per Minute at 125 Pounds/Square Inch Gauge of Compressed Air o Six (6) Telephone direct trunk lines connected to the municipal telephone system o Ability to accommodate and dispose of 10,000 gallons/day of effluent and 10,000 gallons/day of waste water o T-1 line capable of delivering Non-secure Internet Protocol Router Network (NIPRNET) and

Secure Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNET) service

There is no page limit associated with this documentation.

Factor 2 - Corporate Experience: The objective of this factor is to gauge the offeror's experience as a Prime contractor or subcontractor with work similar to that expected to be ordered off of the current solicitation. To be rated as Acceptable in the Corporate Experience factor, Offerors shall provide a minimum of two (2) relevant corporate experience events. A relevant corporate experience event is either a single project/contract or a collection of concurrent projects/contracts that together demonstrate relevancy. Offerors who submit more than the minimum relevant corporate experience events may be evaluated more favorably if those projects/contracts demonstrate a reduced risk of unsuccessful performance. The projects/contracts shall have been completed or be substantially complete within the past 3 years utilizing the same or similar personnel, processes and facilities proposed to be used under the MAC-MO contract. Offerors may not exceed 20 pages between the narrative and data sheets.

In determining the relevancy of the data, the Government will give greater consideration to contracts executing the same or similar type and complexity of work required by the solicitation. For purposes of this solicitation, the Government considers an offeror’s Corporate Experience relating to the following types of contract/work to be relevant given the type of effort involved in this solicitation:

Performance of specific corporate experience events that are either individually or collectively similar in scope to a Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) scheduled Selected Restricted Availability (SRA) on a US Navy Combat Vessel similar in complexity to a SRA on a DDG 51 class ship.

Typical SRAs on a DDG 51 class ships have been complex, requiring planning, engineering, quality control, shipboard/off ship production, and component/system testing and trials. DDG 51 SRAs also typically require integration/coordination of multiple work items and trades, and have had a typical duration of approximately 14 weeks to complete a magnitude of approximately 15,000 man-days worth of maintenance, modernization and repair. Relevant corporate experience events shall demonstrate experience in the following areas:

Evidence of experience providing an established management organization geared toward ship repair at all levels of size, value and complexity, with clear lines of authority, delegation of responsibility and mid-level managerial positions. This includes:

Experience managing production, quality assurance, material procurement/control and subcontractor control; and Experience developing and integrating planning, estimating and scheduling functions.

Experience in completing, controlling, integrating, scheduling, and progressing a diverse set of ship repair capabilities, including ship fitting work, sheet metal work, welding, pipefitting, machinist/mechanical work, electrical work, electronics work, and rigging utilizing the Offerors’ own shops and workforce.

Experience providing engineering and design support capabilities with sufficient capability to diagnose and evaluate technical problems and issues and to make competent technical recommendations.

Evidence of experience providing a staffed material purchasing department and experience with Material Procurement and control, including:

Purchasing, monitoring, receiving, inspecting, segregating, issuing, determining nonconformance, and disposing of material;

Providing an inventory system for both Government Furnished Material and

Contractor Furnished Material, including ordering, tagging and warehousing of material; and

Familiarity with the Navy logistics support system.

Evidence of a quality control organization, with experience:

Meeting ISO 9000 series standards;

Performing Non-Destructive Testing; and Providing qualified welding.

Experience managing subcontractors successfully, including successfully selecting, scheduling, managing, monitoring and controlling of subcontractors.

Evidence of experience with providing Safety/Security, including :

Performing Safety Training;

Demonstrating capability to provide first aid/medical services;

Performing fire protection/procedures; and Providing physical yard security.

Evidence of experience with Hazardous Material/Waste Control, including experience meeting the legal requirements for removal, storage and disposal of hazardous waste for both the Offeror and subcontractors. This includes evidence of experience with segregated storage of Hazardous Material, obtaining State/Federal agency issued hazardous waste generator numbers and disposal documentation

Experience coordinating multiple projects/availabilities/contracts simultaneously.

Factor 3 - Past Performance: No additional submittals are required for Past Performance in the Proposal submission**. Offerors may submit awards, letters of recommendation or other documentation related to relevant work completed or substantially complete within the last three years (since July 2010). There is no page limit associated with this documentation. The Government may contact references provided on the Corporate Experience Data Sheets and Past Performance Questionnaires. Thus, offerors shall ensure contact information is complete and accurate.

**To be considered, Past Performance Questionnaires must be received directly from clients. Questionnaires shall be emailed to traci.pichler@navy.mil, robert.j.larkin@navy.mil and morgan.reese@navy.mil no later than 5 August 2013.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION INFORMATION

GENERAL

The Government anticipates award of two (2) or more IDIQ contracts to the offerors whose proposals represent the Best Value to the Government after evaluation in accordance with the evaluation factors below.

BASIS OF AWARD

The Government will make a Best Value source selection using the Best Value Tradeoff approach described in FAR 15.101-1. Awards will be made on the basis of price and non-price factors and may be made to other than the lowest priced offerors or other than the highest technically rated offerors who are deemed responsible in accordance with FAR 9.104-l.

The Government intends to award without discussions but reserves the right to conduct discussions if necessary.

Thus, offerors should submit their proposal with the best terms.

In order to make a Best Value determination, the Government will evaluate the three non-price factors and the price factor. The factors are:

Non- Price Factors Factor 1: Pier Facilities Factor 2: Corporate Experience Factor 3: Past Performance

Price Factor Factor 4: Price Factor

Factor 1 – Pier Facilities, Factor 2 - Corporate Experience and Factor 3- Past Performance are equal in importance to each other. Together, the Non-Price factors are significantly more important than price. However, the importance of Price as an evaluation factor will increase as the difference in the Non-Price proposal ratings decreases.

EVALUATION FACTORS

Non-Price Factors

Factor 1: Pier Facilities

Basis of Evaluation: The objective of this factor is to determine the Offeror's ownership or committed access to a pier capable of non-concurrently berthing either a DDG-51 or CG-47 class ship in the San Diego, CA homeport. To be rated as Acceptable in the Pier Facilities factor, Offerors must provide either a letter signed by the Principal identifying and confirming that the Offeror owns a pier capable of non-concurrently berthing either a DDG-51 or CG-47 class ship in the San Diego, CA homeport or an official teaming agreement identifying and confirming committed access to a pier capable of non-concurrently berthing either a DDG-51 or CG-47 class ship in the San Diego, CA homeport. To be rated as acceptable, the pier shall include:

o A minimum water depth of 35’ at mean low water o 4,000 AMPS & 450 Volts Electrical power o 1,250 Gallons/Minute at 125 Pounds/Square Inch Gauge of Saltwater or non-potable water o 16,000 Gallons/Day at 50 Pounds/Square Inch Gauge of Potable water o 1,000 Standard Cubic Feet per Minute at 125 Pounds/Square Inch Gauge of Compressed Air o Six (6) Telephone direct trunk lines connected to the municipal telephone system o Ability to accommodate and dispose of 10,000 gallons/day of effluent and 10,000 gallons/day of waste water o T-1 line capable of delivering Non-secure Internet Protocol Router Network (NIPRNET) and

Secure Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNET) service

Factor 2: Corporate Experience

Basis of Evaluation: : The objective of this factor is to gauge the offeror's experience as a Prime contractor or subcontractor with work similar to that expected to be ordered off of the current solicitation. To be rated as Acceptable in the Corporate Experience factor, Offerors shall provide a minimum of two (2) relevant corporate experience events. A relevant corporate experience event is either a single project/contract or a collection of concurrent projects/contracts that together demonstrate relevancy. Offerors who submit more than the minimum relevant corporate experience events may be evaluated more favorably if those projects/contracts demonstrate a reduced risk of unsuccessful performance. The projects/contracts shall have been completed or be substantially complete within the past 3 years utilizing the same or similar personnel, processes and facilities proposed to be used under the MAC-MO contract.

In determining the relevancy of the data, the Government will give greater consideration to contracts executing the same or similar type and complexity of work required by the solicitation. For purposes of this solicitation, the Government considers an offeror’s Corporate Experience relating to the following types of contract/work to be relevant given the type of effort involved in this solicitation:

Performance of specific corporate experience events that are either individually or collectively similar in scope to a Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) scheduled Selected Restricted Availability (SRA) on a US Navy Combat Vessel similar in complexity to a SRA on a DDG 51 class ship.

Typical SRAs on a DDG 51 class ships have been complex, requiring planning, engineering, quality control, shipboard/off ship production, and component/system testing and trials. DDG 51 SRAs also typically require integration/coordination of multiple work items and trades, and have had a typical duration of approximately 14 weeks to complete a magnitude of approximately 15,000 man-days worth of maintenance, modernization and repair. Relevant corporate experience events shall demonstrate experience in the following areas:

Evidence of experience providing an established management organization geared toward ship repair at all levels of size, value and complexity, with clear lines of authority, delegation of responsibility and mid-level managerial positions. This includes:

Experience managing production, quality assurance, material procurement/control and subcontractor control; and Experience developing and integrating planning, estimating and scheduling functions.

Experience in completing, controlling, integrating, scheduling, and progressing a diverse set of ship repair capabilities, including ship fitting work, sheet metal work, welding, pipefitting, machinist/mechanical work, electrical work, electronics work, and rigging utilizing the Offerors’ own shops and workforce.

Experience providing engineering and design support capabilities with sufficient capability to diagnose and evaluate technical problems and issues and to make competent technical recommendations.

Evidence of experience providing a staffed material purchasing department and experience with Material Procurement and control, including:

Purchasing, monitoring, receiving, inspecting, segregating, issuing, determining nonconformance, and disposing of material;

Providing an inventory system for both Government Furnished Material and

Contractor Furnished Material, including ordering, tagging and warehousing of material; and

Familiarity with the Navy logistics support system.

Evidence of a quality control organization, with experience:

Meeting ISO 9000 series standards;

Performing Non-Destructive Testing; and Providing qualified welding.

Experience managing subcontractors successfully, including successfully selecting, scheduling, managing, monitoring and controlling of subcontractors.

Evidence of experience with providing Safety/Security, including :

Performing Safety Training;

Demonstrating capability to provide first aid/medical services;

Performing fire protection/procedures; and Providing physical yard security.

Evidence of experience with Hazardous Material/Waste Control, including experience meeting the legal requirements for removal, storage and disposal of hazardous waste for both the Offeror and subcontractors. This includes evidence of experience with segregated storage of Hazardous Material, obtaining State/Federal agency issued hazardous waste generator numbers and disposal documentation.

Experience coordinating multiple projects/availabilities/contracts simultaneously.

Factor 3: Past Performance

(1) Basis of Evaluation: The Government will measure how well an offeror has performed on relevant contracts in the past as an indicator of successful performance on the current requirement. If a firm lacks relevant past performance history, the evaluators will assign a Neutral rating.

The Government will review past performance information from the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Past Performance Questionnaires received as well as past performance information from any other reasonable source. The Government’s evaluation will be focused on the following areas (of equal importance):

Technical - (Quality of Product) Schedule Business Relations and Management Small Business participation and coordination Cost Control

Ratings

The rating of proposals under each factor should reflect the merits of the offeror's response to the solicitation with respect to the factor and be indicative of the significance of a proposal's strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks. The ratings will be based on what is contained or referenced in the proposal, not on information obtained from other sources, with the exception of past performance information. Standards have been established to provide the same set of values for all evaluators. The objectives of using these standards are to promote uniformity in evaluation and to aid in the comparison and understanding of the evaluation results. The standards are set as follows:

Factor 1 – Pier Facilities

1. For Pier Facilities, the adjectival rating reflects the degree to which the information submitted in response to the Factor 1 submittal requirements meets or does not meet the minimum capability requirements through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of a proposal.

a. A combined technical/risk evaluation considering risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings shall be used. The technical risk evaluation shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in the following table. Adjectival ratings and rating descriptions will be used to assign a rating to each technical factor.

Factor 2 – Corporate Experience

1. For Corporate Experience, the adjectival rating reflects the degree to which the information submitted in response to the Factor 2 submittal requirements meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirements through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of a proposal.

a. A combined technical/risk evaluation considering risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings shall be used. The technical risk evaluation shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in the following table. Adjectival ratings and rating descriptions will be used to assign a rating to each technical factor.

Factor 3 – Past Performance

1. The past performance evaluation results in a confidence 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.

2. 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.

Adjectival Ratings for Factor 1 (Pier Facilities) Rating Description Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Adjectival Ratings for Factor 2 (Corporate Experience) Rating Description Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

3. The relevancy ratings in the following table shall be used:

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.

4. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

5. Performance Confidence Assessment. In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each offeror shall be assigned one of the ratings in the table below:

Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Description

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.

Factor 4: Price: The Government will not evaluate price adjectivally or assign strengths or weaknesses to the price proposal. The Government will analyze price proposals in accordance with FAR 15.404, which will include an assessment of the offeror’s total evaluated price and individual trade and material burden rates to ensure offerors have a complete understanding of contract requirements.

Total evaluated price shall be calculated in the following manner:

Multiply each proposed hour type (straight-time, overtime, and double time) trade rate in the trade schedule for both the Base and Option Periods by the number of hours allocated to that trade and hour type to yield the price per trade. The hour allocations are based on the typical number of hours and typical trade and hour type percent composition for an average SRA on a DDG 51 class ship.

Multiply the material burden rate for both the Base Year and Option Year by the dollar value of material expected to be purchased in both the Base Year and Option Year to yield the overhead price for material.

The material dollars are based on the typical amount of material purchased for an average SRA on a DDG 51 class ship.

Add the sum of each price per trade, the expected material price and the overhead price for material.

Offerors are advised that the number of hours and material dollar value for the Material Rate are for evaluation purposes. For each contract period (Base and Option Periods), the numbers are based on historical data and are indicative of the trade and hour type proportions and the dollar value of material typically required for an average SRA on a DDG 51 class ship. However, proposed trade and material burden rates will be the fixed rates for the entire period (base year or option year, as applicable) regardless of how many hours are procured.

Although award will be made based on an offeror’s total price, a price proposal that is unrealistic, unreasonable, or unbalanced may be rejected. In evaluating an offeror’s proposal, the Government may consider information from other sources, such as the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), Southwest Regional Maintenance Center (SWRMC) and other sources, as appropriate.

EVALUATION PROCESS

This source selection will be conducted in accordance with the FAR, DFARS, NMCARS, internal NAVSEA guidance and procedures. These regulations and procedures provide for checks and balance and independent evaluation of proposals to ensure integrity is maintained throughout the process. Offerors are encouraged to consult the regulations and guidance online. The following is a broad overview of the process:

Initial Proposals: The Government will open and distribute the Price and non-Price proposals; ensuring no price information is included in the non-Price proposal. Non-Price and Price proposals will be evaluated independently against the evaluation factors. The Government may elect to make award based on initial proposals. However, the Government reserves the right to enter in to Discussions.

Discussions: If discussions are necessary, all offerors selected to participate in discussions shall be advised of weaknesses, deficiencies, and/or risks and shall be offered a reasonable opportunity to correct or resolve these areas and to submit revised price and/or non-price proposal/s as a result.

Final Proposals: At the conclusion of discussions, the Government will request that offerors submit their final proposals. The Government will then consider any revisions and/or additional data provided as a result of discussions to determine the Best Value proposal to the Government.

Notification: Notification during the source selection process shall be provided in accordance with FAR 15.5.

(End of Summary of Changes)