N40080-13-R-1608_0010.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 reason for this Amendment is to:

1. Revise Solicitation Section J 0200000-11 (ELINS)

2. Revise Solicitation Section L; Extend the proposal due date from October 18, 2013 to October 22, 2013.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 11

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 15-Oct-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 N40080-13-R-1608

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

09-Aug-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 X 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 2 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

15-Oct-2013

CODE

NAVAL FACILITIES ENG COMMAND

1314 HARWOOD ST

WASHINGTON DC 20374

N40080 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N40080-13-R-1608

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

L1. PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS:

a. General.

1. The proposal submitted in response to this solicitation shall be clear, concise, and shall contain sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposals should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather should demonstrate convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the RFP. Nonconformance with the solicitation requirements, specified organization and content may result in elimination or misevaluation of the proposal. All claimed technical capabilities to meet the requirements shall be realistic and are subject to verification by the Government. Offerors should assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the offeror’s business and that the Government will base its evaluation on the information contained in the offeror’s proposals.

2. Team Arrangements: FAR 9.6 defines contractor team arrangements. Team arrangements mean: (1) two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor or (2) a potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractor under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.

3. All offerors proposing a partnership, joint venture, other teaming arrangement, or resource of a parent company/subsidiary/affiliate shall submit the following information in the front of the technical and price proposals:

• Provide a listing of the team members’ corporate name (no abbreviations), address, point of contact, phone number, DUNS Number, and CAGE Code.

(1) The proposal submitted in response to this solicitation shall be clear, concise, and shall contain sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposals should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather should demonstrate convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the RFP. Nonconformance with the solicitation requirements, specified organization and content may result in elimination or misevaluation of the proposal. All claimed technical capabilities to meet the requirements shall be realistic and are subject to verification by the Government. Offerors should assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the offeror’s business and that the Government will base its evaluation on the information contained in the offeror’s proposals.

(2) Team Arrangements: FAR 9.6 defines contractor team arrangements. Team arrangements mean: (1) two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor or (2) a potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractor under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.

(3) All offerors proposing a partnership, joint venture, other teaming arrangement, or resource of a parent company/subsidiary/affiliate shall submit the following information in the front of the technical and price proposals:

a) Provide a listing of the team members’ corporate name (no abbreviations), address, point of contact, phone number, DUNS Number, and CAGE code.

b) Submit a letter of commitment from the team members. The commitment letter shall clearly identify the expected relationship, role, and responsibility of the team member.

b. Proposal Organization and Number of Copies.

1. Volume 1: Technical Proposal - submit one (1) original and four (4) copies in 8-1/2 x 11 format, font size 10. Proposals shall be submitted in three ring binders and tabbed appropriately by major evaluation factor . In addition, submit two (2) complete copies of the technical proposal on CDs. The document should be Adobe Acrobat files (pdf format). No pen and ink changes are allowed. Page limit is one hundred twenty five

(125) pages (front and back) total for Volume 1: Technical Proposal. Submission over this page limit will NOT be evaluated. The Government will accept 125 sheets of paper either single or double sided

2. Volume 2: Price Proposal - Submit one (1) original of the price proposal in a three ring binder. Submit on one (1) CD, a complete copy of the price proposal. Documents should be in Microsoft Word or Excel. Please do not submit Adobe Acrobat files. Price Proposal shall include breakdown of labor category, labor rate, labor hours, material, overhead, profit, and any other indirect cost.

3. Staples or other binding shall not be used. Elaborate brochures or documentation, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

4. The proposal shall be written to the greatest extent possible on a stand-alone basis so that its content may be evaluated with a minimum of cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. Hyperlinking of cross-references is permissible. Information required for proposal evaluation, but not provided in its designated volume or cross-referenced, is assumed omitted from the proposal.

L2. NOTICE TO OFFERORS:

a. Proposal Organization and Number of Copies.

Your acquisition points of contact for this project are Contract Specialist Marcus Sims at 202- 685-8262, or email marcus.sims@navy.mil and Contracting Officer James Waite at 202-685- 3141, or email james.h.waite@navy.mil.

The proposals and all copies shall be MAILED or hand-carried to the address and POC shown below:

NAVFAC Washington Attn: Marcus Sims 1314 Harwood Street SE, Bldg 212, First Floor Mail Room Washington Navy Yard Washington, DC 20374

Proposals must be received no later than 22 October 2013, 2:00 P.M local time (EST).

If hand-delivering, please deliver to the first floor mailroom of BLDG 212 at the Washington

Navy Yard. Visitors will first need to obtain a visitor’s pass at the Visitor Office by entering the O St, SE and 11th St, SE gate.

Facsimile copies and email copies will NOT be accepted.

Please allow SUFFICIENT TIME for your proposal to be received prior to the proposed closing time.

Technical and Price proposals shall be submitted in sealed envelopes/boxes marked in the bottom right corner “Solicitation N40080-13-R-1608, DO NOT OPEN IN MAILROOM.”

**All proposals must be received prior to the due date and time. Any proposals submitted after the time set for receipt will be stamped with the date and hour of receipt and held unopened until after award. The file shall be documented in accordance with FAR 14.304-4.

L3. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) INFORMATION/CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS:

All questions from offerors concerning any aspect of this request for proposal (RFP) must be submitted in writing. Prospective offerors are requested to submit written questions specifying the section paragraph of the specification for which clarification is desired. All inquiries will be answered in writing. Telephone questions will not be entertained. Offerors are specifically cautioned that verbal discussions and replies to question shall not have the effect of changing the provisions of the written RFP.

Prospective offerors are required to review the entire solicitation package before submitting questions. Requests for Information (RFI’s) during the proposal preparation period shall be submitted by email to marcus.sims@navy.mil and james.h.waite@navy.mil. RFI’s must be submitted in a WORD document and submitted by the Prime Contractor only. Subcontractors with questions must submit them through the Prime Contractor.

THE RFI CUT-OFF DATE IS COB 3 September 2013.

L4. DISPOSITION OF PROPOSALS

Proposals from unsuccessful offerors will not be returned to the offeror, but shall be destroyed by the Contracting Officer. No certificate of destruction will be issued.

L5. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE AND SITE VISIT:

Invitation is hereby extended to all prospective proposers to attend a pre-proposal conference and site visit for this project. The pre-proposal conference has been scheduled for Monday 26 August 2013. The pre-proposal conference will begin at 9:00 AM EST. The site visit will follow the pre-proposal conference.

INFORMATION REQUIRED:

Date and time:

Monday 26 August 2013 at 09:00 AM EST.

Security Requirments:

Although WHCA and HMX1 are both located on JBAB, it is the responsibility for each bidder to gain access to each site. Below are the directions on how to receive access to each site.

JBAB:

Bidders must submit a request for access of JBAB. The information shall be sent via email to carl.buono@navy.mil Each person must have a full name, Date of Birth and Social Security Number. Drives must have current and valid insurance, registration, and driver’s license.

Request must be submitted 48 hours before the date of requested access. In this case, request must be submitted by close of business on August 22, 2013.

WHCA:

Bidders must submit the following information to carl.buono@navy.mil no later than close of business on August 22, 2013.

1. Title:

2. Last Name:

3. First Name:

4. Middle Initial:

5. Suffix:

6. Citizenship:

7. SSN:

8. Company Name:

9. Job Position:

HMX1:

Bidders must submit the following information to carl.buono@navy.mil no later than close of business on August 22, 2013.

If the individuals listed have not ever had any type of security clearance, they must provide proof of citizenship (copy of birth certificate or passport)

For information on gaining access to HMX1, please see the upload PDF “Visit Request Form OPNAV 5521-27.pdf”.

Bidders are to have all three requests submitted to Carl Buono via email at carl.buono@navy.mil no later than close of business August 22, 2013.

Meeting location: TBA

Transportation: Government transportation will not be provided.

Offerors must submit the following information for each visitor, NO LATER THAN COB, 22 August 2013 to Carl Buono at carl.buono@navy.mil

Full name Company name

Important Information:

Only two (2) people per offeror will be permitted to attend.

Cameras, cell phones, laptops, and any other type of communication device may not be permitted at some secure areas or sites on the site visits.

Please note that questions resulting from the pre-proposal conference and site visits must be submitted to marcus.sims@navy.mil and james.h.waite@navy.mil.

Bring copies of maps provided in the solicitation.Visitors may be required to present documentation evidencing personal identification and firm affiliation.

L6. FINANCIAL INFORMATION:

Although Financial Information will not be considered under the Technical Evaluation Factors, it shall be considered part of the responsibility determination. The following information shall be submitted separately with the offeror’s proposal:

a. Furnish financial statements from the Offeror and Subcontractor(s) for the last two (2) years.

Financial statements must include the accountant’s letter, balance sheet, income statement, statement of retained earnings, statement of cash flow, Profit/Loss Statement and accompanying footnotes to the statements.

b. Furnish a detail projected, monthly cash flow analysis for this contract only for the first year of performance.

L7. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS:

a. BASIS FOR AWARD

1. The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract; to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the offerors submitting the lowest priced, technically acceptable offer.

2. As stated in the solicitation, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In addition, if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.”

3. Per NFAS 15.101-2, the number of proposals to be evaluated for technical acceptability may be limited to the five lowest priced offers at the discretion of the contracting officer. If the number of proposals to be evaluated is limited, technical proposals shall be provided to the evaluator(s) without any identification of prices or rank order of prices. If no proposals are found to be technically acceptable within the first group of proposals, then the process described will be conducted again as many times as necessary, until such time as the Government identifies a technically acceptable proposal.

4. The LPTA process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition because the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price.

5. An overall non-price factors rating must be at least “ACCEPTABLE” in order to be eligible for award. An “UNACCEPTABLE” rating in any factor results in the overall non-price factors proposal being rated “UNACCEPTABLE” unless corrected through discussions. An overall non-price factors rating of “UNACCEPTABLE” makes a proposal ineligible for award.

b. SAFETY EVALUATION

1. Per NFAS 15.304(d), solicitations utilizing source selection procedures for procurements within the 50 United States and the District of Columbia shall contain a standard “Safety” technical evaluation factor. This factor shall be included as a stand-alone evaluation factor and not as a sub-factor or an element of the Past Performance evaluation factor. This action will result in the selection of contractors that have consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and the ability to properly manage and implement safety procedures for themselves and all tiers of subcontractors under their purview.

2. The safety evaluation has three elements: Experience Modification Rate (EMR), Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA) Days Away from Work, Job Restriction, or Transfer (DART), and Technical Approach to Safety.

3. The three elements of safety, as listed above, are not sub-factors. The evaluators should collectively consider all elements of safety when assigning an overall adjectival rating for this factor. The SSEB will need to make a qualitative determination of the rating for this factor, taking into account the risk ratings for EMR and DART and the subjective evaluation of the narrative.

4. Evaluators will not average the rating from the three years for the EMR and the DART.

5. The following should be utilized by evaluators as a general guideline to evaluate the EMR and DART rates:

Risk EMR Very Low Risk Less than 0.6 Low Risk From 0.6 to less than 0.8 Moderate Risk From 0.8 to 1.0 High Risk Greater than1.0 to 1.1 Extremely High Risk Greater than 1.1

Risk DART Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 1.0 Low Risk From 1.0 to 1.99 Moderate Risk From 2.0 to 2.99 High Risk From 3.0 to 4.0 Extremely High Risk Greater than 4.0

c. ADJECTIVAL RATINGS/DESCRIPTIONS

Each offeror’s technical factors and past performance will be evaluated separately. Upon the conclusion of the evaluation of the technical factors, and past performance, an overall non-price factors rating of Acceptable (A) or Unacceptable (U) will be assigned to each offeror’s non-price factors proposal.

1. The following adjectival ratings and rating descriptions will be used to assign a rating to each technical factor. Use upper case letter ratings for major technical factor ratings. The addition of plus (+) or minus (-) to an adjective rating is not allowed.

Table A-1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable (A) Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

The weaknesses and/or deficiencies (as defined below) of each proposal for each non-price evaluation factor which influenced the assigned adjectival rating shall be identified.

Definitions

Weakness A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness

A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiency A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

2. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Past Performance shall be evaluated when using the LPTA process, unless waived by the PCO in accordance with FAR 15.101-2(b). Past performance will be rated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis using the ratings in the following table:

Table A-2. Past Performance Evaluation Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable (A) 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 (U) 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.”

a) Aspects of Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation results is an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum past performance solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertain to the products and/or services outlined in the solicitation requirements. There are two aspects of the past performance evaluation.

(1) The first is to evaluate whether the offeror’s present/past performance is relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. The criteria to establish what is relevant are unique to each LPTA source selection. For this solicitation, recent relevant project is defined as follows:

Experience of the team with respect to the proposed responsibility regarding facility support services of similar size, scope, and complexity to this requirement performed within the last five years preceding the release date of the solicitation.

(2) 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.

b) SSEB members will review past performance information to determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to the performance confidence assessment.

(End of Summary of Changes)

The following items are applicable to this modification:

The reason for this Amendment is to:

1. Revise Solicitation Section J 0200000-11 (ELINS)

2. Revise Solicitation Section L; Extend the proposal due date from October 18, 2013 to October 22, 2013.

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

L8. NOTICE TO OFFERORS:

b. Proposal Organization and Number of Copies.

Your acquisition points of contact for this project are Contract Specialist Marcus Sims at 202-685-8262, or email marcus.sims@navy.mil and Contracting Officer James Waite at 202-685-3141, or email james.h.waite@navy.mil.

The proposals and all copies shall be MAILED or hand-carried to the address and POC shown below:

NAVFAC Washington Attn: Marcus Sims 1314 Harwood Street SE, Bldg 212, First Floor Mail Room Washington Navy Yard Washington, DC 20374

Proposals must be received no later than 22 October 2013, 2:00 P.M local time (EST).

(End of Summary of Changes)