N0025319Q0259_YTT-11_ROH_Amendment_0004.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

The purpose of amendment 0004 is to modify past performance language in Clause 52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014). Also note that, contrary to answ ers provided in Amendment 0002, paragraphs 7.6.4.2.2.1.2 and 7.7.10.3 w ill not be priced as options and no new CLINs w ill be built. Offerors must bid based upon available information. The solicitation closing date and time remains unchanged. Proposals are due no later than 1200 Pacific Time, 16 January 2020.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 6

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 13-Jan-2020

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 N0025319Q0259

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

20-Nov-2019

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 1 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

13-Jan-2020

CODE

NAVAL UNDERSEA WARFARE CENTER

ATTN: ANGELA BARLOW

ANGELA.BARLOW@NAVY.MIL

610 DOWELL STREET, BLDG 206

KEYPORT WA 98345

N00253 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N0025319Q0259

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. In order to help the government properly invoke CLINs on the contract, the offeror will provide an estimated delivery date (EDD) of the propeller to be purchased under SOW paragraph 7.7.19. This EDD is not a factor that will be evaluated in selection of a successful offer. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS:

Factor 1. Technical Acceptability:

Sub-factor 1.1. Shipyard Availability: Provide a scheduled start date and completion date to concur with the vessel availability dates identified in the RFP.

Sub-factor 1.2. Facility: The offeror shall provide a narrative detailing the offeror’s capability and infrastructure to dock and undock the YTT. Narratives must be clear, coherent, and prepared in sufficient detail for effective evaluation of the offeror’s proposal against sub-factor 1.2. Any supporting documentation included should clearly substantiate claims and be verifiable.

Please note that offerors are not required to hold a Master Ship Repair Agreement (MSRA) or Agreement for Boat Repair (ABR) to satisfy the requirements of Technical Acceptability sub-factor 1.3.

Sub-factor 1.3. Shipyard Credentials: Offeror shall provide a copy of current MSRA/ABR Certification.

OR

Corporate Experience: Offerors are required to provide a narrative on three (3) of the firm’s recently completed contracts or task orders (not to exceed three years older than date of solicitation) that demonstrate similar work as outlined in Sub-Factor 1.3 of the evaluation section of 52.212-2. Narratives must be clear, coherent, and prepared in sufficient detail for effective evaluation of the offeror’s proposal against Sub-Factor 1.3. Any supporting documentation included should clearly substantiate claims and be verifiable. Offeror’s shall include complete contract numbers, to include specific delivery/task order numbers as applicable, within the narrative to allow for the verification of claims. However, copies of contracts referenced are not required as part of the proposal.

If referencing non-government corporate experience contracts, offeror’s shall include an associated point of contact with the customer company which includes: name, company title, phone number, and email to allow for government verification.

Other Certifications: The offeror shall provide copies of current certifications for all paint inspectors that meet one of the requirements outlined in evaluation sub-factor 1.3 of the evaluation section of 52.212-2.

Quality Management Plan (QMP): A complete and current copy of the offeror’s written Quality Management Plan (QMP) meeting or exceeding the requirements of sub-factor 1.3 of the evaluation section of 52.212-2.

The offer must be determined to be technically acceptable before further consideration will be given.

Factor 2 – Past Performance Acceptability:

Offerors shall demonstrate past performance and the ability to deliver products and services of high quality by completing the attached Past Performance References (Attachment 2 ), for up to three Federal Government contracts for like or similar items under this solicitation. The contracts identified must been performed by the same CAGE Code or provide an explanation why the different CAGE Code is relevant past performance; and if completed, must have been completed within the past three years. If you do not have any Federal Government contracts, then list State, local, or commercial contracts, in that order, to complete your Past Performance References. Offerors shall include an accessible point of contact, including name and telephone number, for each reference provided. Failure to submit the Past Performance References may be considered certification that the contractor has no past performance for like or similar items for the Government to evaluate.

Factor 3 - Price:

Offerors are required to submit prices for all line items with the exception of CLIN 0001, CDRLs.

Optional CLINs 0052 and 0053 are for work over and above that defined in the Statement of Work. These CLINs may be fully funded at time of exercise, however, any work charged to these CLINs must be authorized in advance through Technical Instruction Letters (TILs) in accordance with clause C-242-H003. The Government may issue multiple TILs authorizing work and/or material up to each CLIN's dollar ceiling.

For pricing purposes, Offerors must propose as follows:

- CLIN 0052, option growth work labor. Offerors must propose a fixed unit price for 8 hours of labor based upon a composite rate for shipyard labor. Offerors must also propose an extended price, which is derived by multiplying the unit price by 460 units. Hours will be ordered and invoiced in 8 hour (one unit) increments up to a maximum of 3,680 hours.

- CLIN 0053, option growth work material. The Government has provided a dollar ceiling of $100,000 for over and above material. $100,000 shall be entered as the proposed net amount. Material will be invoiced based upon actual prices.

EVALUATION INFORMATION:

Factor 1 – Technical Acceptability:

Offers must meet or exceed the specifications in the solicitation and any subsequent amendments. The information as specified in the proposal submittal requirements will be evaluated to determine if the proposed supplies meet or exceed the technical requirements as specified in the solicitation document.

Sub-factor 1.1. Shipyard Availability: This sub-factor will be evaluated based on the contractor's ability to meet the schedule stated in the solicitation.

Sub-factor 1.2. Facility: The offeror identifies that the facility to be used has adequate lifting and operational capacity to safely dock the vessel per the characteristics and requirements set forth in the statement of work. An on-site survey conducted by the Government Docking Observer (GDO) may be required to validate the facility’s capability. To avoid excessive cost, schedule or other adverse impacts associated with more remote dry dock locations, the contractor’s facility shall be located within 864 nautical miles of Seattle, WA via navigable waterways.

Please note that offerors are not required to hold a Master Ship Repair Agreement (MSRA) or Agreement for Boat Repair (ABR) to satisfy the requirements of Technical Acceptability sub-factor 1.3.

Sub-factor 1.3. Shipyard Credentials: Offeror submits a current MSRA/ABR certification.

Offerors who submit a current Master Ship Repair Agreement (MSRA) or Agreement for Boat Repair (ABR) will be rated as Acceptable for sub-factor 1.3 and do not need to submit the below information in response to this sub-factor.

OR

Corporate Experience: The offeror demonstrates specific experience providing marine preservation maintenance of the complexity similar to or exceeding the scope identified in the statement of work through a narrative of three (3) contracts within the last three (3) years. Offeror sufficiently demonstrates the necessary management, technical personnel and material resources available to successfully complete the requirements of the statement of work.

Other Certifications: The offeror provides current certificates demonstrating that all personnel who will serve as paint inspectors (either in-house or sub-contracted) are certified in accordance with NAVSEA Basic Paint Inspector (NBPI), NACE International Coatings Inspector or SSPC QP 1 programs, as required for accomplishing the requirements of the statement of work.

Quality Management Plan (QMP): The offeror provides its Quality Management Plan. The plan addresses, at a minimum, control of documents, controls of records, corrective action plan(s), preventative action plan(s), internal audit, and management review.

Once all sub-factors are evaluated, the government shall rate the offeror’s proposal for factor 1 using the table below:

Technical Evaluation Rating Table

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

Factor 2 - Past Performance Acceptability:

Past performance will be evaluated based on the offerors demonstrated ability to satisfy its customers in the past, deliver products and services of high quality, meet delivery schedules, and comply with applicable Federal, State, and local laws and regulations.

The Government may contact some or all of each offeror’s customers to ask whether or not they believe: (1) that the offeror is capable, efficient and effective; (2) that the offeror’s performance conformed to the terms and conditions of its contract; (3) that the offeror was cooperative during performance; (4) that the offeror was committed to customer satisfaction; (5) that the offeror met proposed subcontracting goals, if applicable; and, (6) that the offeror was able to hire and retain qualified personnel necessary for successful completion of customer requirements.

Additionally they may ask if given a chance would they select the same or a different Contractor and/or other questions related to the offeror’s ability in the areas outlined for this Factor.

Offerors are advised that the Government may consider information obtained from sources other than those identified by the offeror, including Federal, State and local Government agencies, better business bureaus, published media and any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, Past Performance

Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS), or other databases;

the Defense Contract Management Agency; and interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials.

The Government will consider the relevance of past performance information obtained in relation to the scope of this procurement. Past performance for projects completed more than 3 years ago will not be considered. Past performance, either positive or negative, which is considered by the Government to be more closely related to the scope of this effort, will be given greater weight in determining offerors’ Past Performance Acceptability/Unacceptability.

If the contractor does not provide past performance information with its offer, the Contracting Officer need not pursue further information if it is clear that the offeror’s price is not competitive.

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 (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral shall be considered “acceptable.”

Past Performance will be assessed according to the following evaluation ratings and criteria format provided in the below Rating Table.

Past Performance Evaluation Rating Table

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 above).

Unacceptable Based on the offeror's performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Factor 3 - Price:

Offerors are required to submit prices for all line items. Failure to submit a price for any line item may result in the offer being rejected as unacceptable. The prices will be compared to the Government Estimate, other offers received and/or other independent price and cost information. The Government will evaluate offers on the basis of lowest price, technically, and past performance acceptability to the Government; that is, selection of the contractor is to be based on the establishment of minimum requirements to be evaluated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis. Proposals are evaluated for acceptability but not ranked using the non-price factors. In order to be considered for award, there must be an “acceptable” rating in every non-price factor. Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) non-price factors included Technical and Past Performance.

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)

(End of Summary of Changes)