AMENDMENT_01.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

DESIGN-BUILD FOR P-257 SHIP REPAIR TRAINING FACILITY, NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD, PORTSMOUTH, VIRGNIA

PROPOSAL DUE DATE OF 5 DECEMBER 2017 @ 2:00PM LOCAL TIME REMAINS UNCHANGED.

The purpose of this amendment is to provide the follow ing information:

(1) Revise Instructions to Offerors

(2) Answ ers to PPI's (1-18) (See Attachment)

(3) Revised Attachment D - Past Performance Questionnaire POC Trevor Dorsey, 757-341-1653 or andrew .dorsey@navy.mil See SF30 Continuation Block.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 14

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 27-Nov-2017

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 N4008518R1107

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

03-Nov-2017

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

27-Nov-2017

CODE

COMMANDING OFFICER

NAVFAC MID-ATLANTIC

9742 MARYLAND AVENUE

NORFOLK VA 23511-3095

N40085 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N4008518R1107

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1.This acquisition will result in the award of a Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) contract for Design Build for P257, .

2. This project is for the design and construction of a 157,271 square ft. academic and applied instruction facility for ship repair training that consists of the following: Provide 4 to 6-story building with a structural steel frame with columns and joists. The building exterior walls will consist of brick veneer cavity wall construction with reinforced concrete masonry unit back-up with a sloped standing-seam metal roof over structural steel framing. Facility will be constructed to meet the acoustical performance criteria design for schools. Additional features include a raised loading dock, mechanical/ electrical equipment rooms, fire protection room, micro-exchange for student support, telecom rooms, passenger elevators, freight elevator, security and fire detection alarms, mass notification systems, and all necessary components for the intruder detection system. Project demolishes multi-story modular building in the Controlled Industrial Area.

B. PRE PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPI)

Offerors who determine that the technical and or contractual requirements of this RFP require clarification(s) in order to permit submittal of a responsive proposal shall submit all questions in writing. Additionally, all inquiries shall be submitted using the Pre-Proposal Inquiries form attached to this solicitation as (Attachment H). All inquiries shall be submitted via email to Trevor Dorsey, Andrew.dorsey@navy.mil no later than 14 calendar days prior to the proposal due date. A response will be published as an amendment to the solicitation.

C. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Proposals may be sent via Federal Express (FedEx), United Postal Service (UPS) or hand-carried to the following address:

ATTN: Trevor Dorsey NAVFAC Midlant, Hampton Roads IPT, ACQ Office 9324 Virginia Avenue, Building Z140 RM 225 Norfolk, VA 23511-3015

Security Information: Offerors who would like to hand deliver their proposal and who do not currently have a valid badge issued by the Department of Defense (DoD) to enter Naval Station Norfolk must do the following:

1. Submit the One Day Pass Request Spreadsheet for Project Proposal Drop-Off (Attachment I): NO LESS THAN 5 BUSINESS DAYS by prior to the proposal due date. The spreadsheet is uploaded under Additional Documents in NECO. The request shall be sent to Trevor Dorsey at andrew.dorsey@navy.mil.

2. Present the following information at the pass office: Two forms of ID (i.e. Valid Driver’s License and (one of the following) US Social Security Card or Birth Certificate), Current Vehicle Registration and/or Rental Car Contract, Current State Safety Inspection, Current Proof of Insurance. Naval Station Norfolk Pass & ID Office is located on Hampton Boulevard across from Gate 5. All potential offerors must adhere to this notice in order to avoid delay in submitting your proposal. The level of security at the Naval Station Norfolk may change at any time. As the level of security heightens, the amount of time required to gain access to the Naval Station also increases.

To verify identity, visitors MUST present a second form of identification at the pass office from the list of A or B mailto:andrew.dorsey@navy.mil

Documents found at http://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/acceptable-documents.

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 offeror submitting the proposal determined to represent the best value—the proposal most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

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. The tradeoff process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition. The Government considers it to be in its best interest to allow consideration of award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror.

4. As stated in the solicitation, Factors 1-3 will be evaluated in Phase I and Factors 4-7 will be evaluated in Phase II. Factor 1 will only be rated Acceptable or Unacceptable. If an Offeror is rated Unacceptable in Factor 1, then they will not be considered for Phase II. In making the best value award decision after Phase II, the government will consider Factors (2,4,5,6, and 7) and price. The relative order of importance of the non-price evaluation factors is technical factors (2,4,5,6, and 7) are of equal importance to each other and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor, (Factor 3).

When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-cost/price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price.

5. Any proposal found to have a deficiency in meeting the stated solicitation requirements or performance objectives will be considered ineligible for award, unless the deficiency is corrected through discussions. Proposals may be found to have either a significant weakness or multiple weaknesses that impact either the individual factor rating or the overall rating for the proposal. The evaluation report must document the evaluation board’s assessment of the identified weakness(es) and the associated risk to successful contract performance resulting from the weakness(es). This assessment must provide the rationale for proceeding to award without discussions.

B. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. The solicitation requires the evaluation of price and the following non-cost/price factors:

Phase I Factor 1 – Technical Approach

Factor 2 – Experience Factor 3 – Past Performance

Phase II Factor 4 – Safety Factor 5 – Technical Solution Factor 6 – Energy and Sustainable Design Factor 7 – Small Business Utilization

The distinction between experience and past performance is that experience pertains to the volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work described under the definition of recent, relevant http://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/acceptable-documents projects, in terms of size, scope, and complexity. Past performance pertains to both the relevance of recent efforts and how well a contractor has performed on the contracts.”

2. As stated in the solicitation, Factors 1-3 will be evaluated in Phase I. Factors 4-7 will be evaluated in Phase II.

Factor 1 will only be rated Acceptable or Unacceptable. If an Offeror is rated Unacceptable in Factor 1, then they will not be considered for Phase II. In making the best value award decision after Phase II, the government will consider Factors 2-7 and price. The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is the technical factors (Factors 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7) are of equal importance to each other and, when combined are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor (Factor 3). When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-cost/price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price.

The importance of price will increase if the Offerors’ non-cost/price proposals are considered essentially equal in terms of overall quality, or if price is so high as to significantly diminish the value of a non-cost/price proposal’s superiority to the Government. Award will be made to the responsible Offeror(s) whose offer conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered.

3. Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor.

(a) Price:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The offeror shall submit (1) original, marked “Original”, and (1) copy, marked “copy”, in a separate three ring binder (1/2 inch. minimum) with the following:

- SF1442, signed with all amendments acknowledged

- Price Proposal Form

- Copy of Representation and Certifications from SAM

- Bid Bond

- VETS-4212

- Include a cover page with Solicitation Number, Solicitation Title, Prime Contractor Name, Address, Phone

Number, Fax Number, DUNS, Cage Code, Point of Contact, and Email Address

- Responsibility Determination Information (see below)

- Small Business Subcontracting Plan

The Offeror is required to submit a complete Price Proposal Form that includes completion of all line items

(CLINS).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PRICE PROPOSAL PACKAGE:

RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION INFORMATION - In order to be eligible for award, the offeror must be determined responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9, specifically 9.104-1, General Standards. In a separate Tab, the offeror shall provide the following information in the price proposal package:

1. One (1) Signed Bank Reference demonstrating adequate financial resources. If offeror’s firm has a line of credit – provide information on how many figures offeror can borrow against the line of credit (i.e. medium 6 figures – exact line of credit is not required).

2. The offeror shall provide the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for the prime contractor, certified by an independent accounting firm, if practicable, or signed by an authorized officer of the organization.

Submit evidence of availability of working/operating capital, which will be used for the performance of the resultant contract. For Joint Venture arrangements, submit the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for each company in the Joint Venture and discuss the financial responsibilities among the companies. The Government may also utilize Dun & Bradstreet reports to evaluate the financial capacity of the offeror.

3. Description of offeror’s facilities and equipment.

4. Other offeror’s work presently under contract.

Although required to be submitted with offeror’s price proposal, this information will not be evaluated as part of the price proposal. This information forms the basis of your firm’s responsibility determination should your firm be considered for award. Proposal packages 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.

(ii). Basis of Evaluation:

The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price consists of the basic requirements and all option items (all CLINs). The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

(a). Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the RFP.

(b). Comparison of proposed prices with the IGCE.

(c). Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

(d). Comparison of market survey results.

(b) Non-price Factors:

Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The offeror shall submit one original, marked “Original”, four copies marked “copy”, each in a separate three-ring binder (1.5 inch. maximum), and one electronic copy on CD with the following characteristics:

- Text pages 8 ½ x 11 format

- Drawings 11x17 inches and folded down to 8-1/2 x 11 inches

- 12 point font, Times New Roman

- One complete electronic copy of the technical proposal factors as a single .pdf searchable file on a CD-

ROM (include with the “Original” technical submission). If there are any conflicts between hard copies and/or electronic copies, the “Original” hard copy will govern.

- Include a cover page with Solicitation Number, Solicitation Title, Prime Contractor Name, Address, Phone Number, Fax Number, DUNS, Cage Code, Point of Contact, Title, phone number, and email address.

Factor 1 – Technical Approach:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The composition and management of the firms proposed as the design-build (DB) team for this contract will be evaluated in this factor.

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Provide a narrative describing the proposed primary construction firms and primary design firms for this contract and the rationale for proposing this arrangement. Provide the role, responsibilities, and contractual relationships between the various firms (see FAR Subpart 9.6). The narrative shall also include a simple organizational chart that clearly identifies the lines of authority between the entities. If the experience of an entity is being claimed in Factor 2, that entity must be named in the above narrative and organizational chart.

The technical approach narrative shall be limited to one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages) including the organizational chart. The information requested in item #2 below is not included in this page limitation.

(2) In addition to the narrative, the Offeror shall submit a signed copy of a joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, approved mentor protégé agreement (MPA), or letter of commitment from each member of the Offeror’s team identified above (e.g., joint venture member, partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.).

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The assessment of the Offeror’s technical approach will be used as a means to evaluate the organizational structure and teaming relationships proposed by the Offeror. This factor will be rated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis. If an Offeror is rated Unacceptable in Factor 1, then they will not be considered for Phase II.

Factor 2 – Experience:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Construction Experience:

Submit a minimum of two (2) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrates your experience on relevant projects (similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP). Offerors shall submit at least one project demonstrating Industrial Facility experience and at least one project demonstrating Academic/Administrative Facility experience as described below. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as follows:

Industrial Facility:

Size: A facility consisting of 40,000 square feet or more.

Scope: New construction of an industrial and/or maintenance facility.

Complexity: Facility contains the following features: high bay and complex mechanical system with dedicated ventilation/exhaust

Academic/Administrative Facility:

Size: A facility consisting of 50,000 square feet or more.

Scope: New construction of an academic, training, and/or administrative facility.

Complexity: Multi-story facility (3 stories or more) that contains significant audio-visual coordination and installation.

Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this

RFP.

A project is defined as a construction project performed under a single task order or contract. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project;

rather Offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project.

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment C) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages).

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP (i.e., unique features, area, construction methods). In addition, the description should also address any sustainable features for the project, including specific descriptions of those features. Provide applicable documentation on projects that were validated and/or certified through U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) or the equivalent organization or process.

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects may be submitted for the Joint Venture members. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture members may be rated lower.

Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

Proposed subcontractor experience will not be considered.

(2) Design Experience

Submit a minimum of two (2) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant design projects for the design team that best demonstrates design experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP.

Offerors shall submit at least one project demonstrating Industrial Facility experience and at least one project demonstrating Academic/Administrative Facility experience as described below. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as follows:

Industrial Facility:

Size: A facility consisting of 40,000 square feet or more.

Scope: New construction of an industrial and/or maintenance facility.

Complexity: Facility contains the following features: high bay and complex mechanical system with dedicated ventilation/exhaust

Academic/Administrative Facility:

Size: A facility consisting of 50,000 square feet or more.

Scope: New construction of an academic, training, and/or administrative facility.

Complexity: Multi-story facility (3 stories or more) that contains significant audio-visual coordination and installation.

Projects submitted shall be completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. For design-build projects, the design portion of the contract shall have been completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

A project is defined as a complete design effort performed under a single task order or contract/subcontract. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project; rather Offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project.

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment C) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages).

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP (i.e., unique features, area, construction methods). In addition, the description should also address any sustainable features for the project, including specific descriptions of those features. Provide applicable documentation on projects that were validated and/or certified through U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) or the equivalent organization or process. In addition, the description should address for facilities in a historic district how the work was completed in accordance with “Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties".

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract.

The Offeror may utilize experience of a design subcontractor to demonstrate design experience under this evaluation factor. The Offer must provide a supporting joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement for the design subcontractor. Offerors proposing multiple design firms should submit relevant project experience for all design firms. Failure to do so may result in a lower rating. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction and design projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the Offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government will only review five projects for construction and five for design. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) for Construction Experience and five (5) for Design Experience will not be considered.

Relevant projects where the Offeror and the proposed design firm(s) have previously worked together may be considered more favorably than those that have not worked together.

Relevant projects that demonstrate design-build experience may be considered more favorably than those that do not have design-build experience.

Relevant projects that demonstrate experience with sustainable features may be considered more favorably than those that do not demonstrate experience with sustainable features.

Relevant projects that demonstrate experience with overhead cranes may be considered more favorably than those that do not have overhead cranes.

Factor 3 – Past Performance:

If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 2 for both construction and design experience. If there is not a completed CPARS evaluation then submit Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment D) for each project included in Factor 2 for both Construction Experience and Design Experience. The Offeror should provide completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) in the proposal. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). The Government may make reasonable attempts to contact the client noted for that project(s) to obtain the PPQ information. However, Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to help ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Trevor Dorsey, email: Andrew.dorsey@navy.mil.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 2 – Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse past performance issues.

Explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) in total.

The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. The Government’s inability to contact any of the Offeror’s references or the references unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this factor.

Performance award or additional information submitted will not be considered.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

This evaluation will consider how well the Offeror’s team performed on relevant projects submitted under Factor 2 – Experience and may also consider past performance on other projects currently documented in known sources.

The Government will consider the recency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the Contractor’s performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the Offeror’s team’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s team’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will receive a NEUTRAL Confidence rating.

Factor 4 – Safety

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information: (For a partnership or joint venture, the following submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. EMR, DART and TRC Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

(1) Experience Modification Rate (EMR): Include three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data.

This rate compares company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums. The offeror may submit an insurance company-provided equivalent rate if no EMR exists. If the offeror has no EMR or premium, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affect the EMR and negative trends should be addressed as part of the factor submission.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data. If an offeror cannot submit an OSHA DART, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART rate data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

(3) OSHA Total Recordable Case Rate: OSHA Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data. If an offeror cannot submit an OSHA TRC rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA TRC rate data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

(4) Technical Approach for Safety: Provide a narrative that addresses the following:

- Describe the plan for safety that will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors.

- Describe the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and subcontractor performed work.

- Describe any innovative methods that will be employed to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and/or all subcontractor levels.

- Describe the methodology to execute an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques and processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps.

Note: The narrative shall be limited to two pages. For a partnership or joint venture, the submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. Safety narratives for joint ventures may be up to four pages in length.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

- Experience Modification Rate (EMR)

- OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) and Total Recordable Case

(TRC) Rates

- Offeror Technical Approach to Safety

- Other sources of information available to the Government

(1) Experience Modification Rate (EMR): For the three previous complete calendar years the offeror will submit

EMR. If no EMR exists, the offeror may submit an insurance company-provided equivalent rate explaining why not. If an insurance company-provided equivalent rate is provided, it will be treated the same as an EMR.

Any extenuating circumstances that affected the EMR and negative trends should be addressed as part of this selection factor. The board will evaluate the EMR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any negative trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data. If an offeror cannot submit an OSHA DART rates, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. For the three previous complete calendar years, the offeror will submit their OSHA DART as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If unable to submit OSHA DART rates, affirmatively state so, and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART rate data and negative trends should be addressed as part of this element. The board will evaluate the OSHA DART rates to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact rates.

(3) OSHA Total Recordable Case (TRC): Submit three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data. If an offeror cannot submit an OSHA TRC rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any For the three previous complete calendar years, the offeror will submit their OSHA TRC as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If unable to submit OSHA TRC rates, affirmatively state so, and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA TRC rate data and negative trends should be addressed as part of this element. The board will evaluate the OSHA TRC rates to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact rates.

(4) Technical Approach to Safety: The offeror will describe their plan to evaluate their safety performance and that of potential subcontractors. Also, describe any innovative methods that the Offeror will employ to ensure and monitor safe work practices at all subcontractor levels. The Safety Narrative shall be limited to two pages. The board will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which subcontractor safety performance will be considered in the selection of all levels of subcontractors on the upcoming project. The board will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which innovations are being proposed that may enhance safety on this procurement and validate the contractor has addressed methodology to be used in the execution of an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques/processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps. Those Offerors whose plan demonstrates a commitment to hire subcontractors with a culture of safety and who propose innovative methods to enhance a safe working environment may be given greater weight in the evaluation.

(5) Other Sources of Information Available to the Government: Other sources for safety may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS) in Enterprise Safety Applications Management System (ESAMS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and other related databases.

Factor 5 – Technical Solution

Provide a narrative describing the technical solution to the project that meets the requirements of the RFP. Include the following:

- Interior circulation/adjacencies

- Exterior façade describing how the proposed construction integrates with the surrounding area and existing base facilities design or architectural theme.

- Site layout including a description of the building orientation, roadways, parking (include ingress and egress), emergency vehicle access, and ATFP standoff distances. Also include in the narrative a description of the general concept proposed to meet low impact development (LID).

Narrative shall not exceed four (4) double-sided pages (or eight (8) single-sided pages). Up to six (6) conceptual drawings shall be provided to supplement the narrative (i.e., floor plan, exterior elevation, and site plan).

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government will evaluate the narrative and conceptual drawings (if included) considering the extent to which the Offeror demonstrates a clear understanding of the architectural and engineering requirements of the project. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's technical solution to determine adherence to the technical requirements of the RFP.

Factor 6 – Energy Design Reduction

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

(1) Energy Efficiency Narrative:

Provide a detailed narrative describing how the proposed solution will meet or exceed baseline ASHRAE 90.1-2013.

The offeror should seek to present a solution that will provide at least a 30% energy reduction below the baseline ASHRAE 90.1, based on life cycle cost effectiveness.

To determine energy reduction, use the ASHRAE 90.1, Appendix G – Building Performance Rating Method, except replace the formula in G1.2 with the following:

Percentage improvement = 100 × ((Baseline building consumption − Receptacle and process loads) − (Proposed building consumption − Receptacle and process loads)) / (Baseline building consumption − Receptacle and process loads)

List assumptions used to obtain the percent energy reduction.

Organize narrative in four parts: 1) Orientation, Configuration, and Shape; 2) Envelope properties (fenestration, solar heat gain coefficients (SHGC), wall and roof insulation values (U-values), window U-values); 3) Mechanical (HVAC, plumbing, and domestic hot water heating systems, including any solar hot water systems); and 4) Electrical Systems (lighting and control systems, including any interior and exterior lighting systems, renewable energy and control systems).

Where 30% reduction is not lifecycle cost effective, provide highest percent energy reduction that is lifecycle cost effective.

Note: Building performance rating and percent energy reduction are calculated in terms of energy rather than energy cost.

Do not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages).

(b) Whole Building Energy Simulation:

The Whole Building Energy Solution requires the use of the following documents included in Part 6 of this RFP:

- Government Baseline Building Performance Rating

- Government Baseline Building Energy Model (input-output) schedules (If the process and receptacle loads are not given in the schedules, assume they are 25% of the total load.)

- Default simulation factors

- Utility Costs (energy rates) for project, based on local unburdened PWD rates

- “Whole Building Energy Simulation” templates

- “Performance Rating Method Compliance Reports”

Use the “Whole Building Energy Simulation” templates to demonstrate the percentage improvement over the “Proposed Building Performance Rating”. Receptacle and process loads are included in the “Whole Building Energy Simulation” as part of the building loads. Submit the Whole Building Energy Simulation in PDF electronic file format.

(b) Basis of Government Evaluation:

1) Energy Efficiency Narrative and Solution: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed energy efficiency narrative and solution.

2) Whole Building Energy Simulation: The Government will evaluate the Whole Building Energy Simulation to determine the validity of the design assumptions, thoroughness and accuracy of the Whole Building Energy Simulation, and the percent improvement of energy consumption reduction below the Government’s “Baseline Building Performance Rating”.

Factor 7 – Small Business Utilization:

This Factor assesses both the historical achievements in utilizing small business concerns as subcontractors and proposed small business participation and commitment strategies.

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

1. Achievements: Submit a narrative and supporting information, as follows:

a) All offerors shall provide a narrative (limited to two pages) to describe their achievements in supporting the Government’s policy to provide maximum practicable opportunities for small business (SB), veteran-owned small business (VOSB), service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB), historically underutilized business zone (HUBZone) small business, small disadvantaged business (SDB), and women-owned small business (WOSB) concerns to participate as subcontractors consistent with efficient contract performance.

b) All offerors shall submit small business subcontracting information associated with each project cited under the Corporate Experience Factor in the format provided in Attachment C, Small Business Subcontracting Record.

c) Offerors representing as other than small businesses shall also provide copies of the most current individual subcontracting reports (ISRs) associated with each project cited under the Corporate Experience Factor if a small business subcontracting plan was required by the contract. If such projects were completed under specific task orders, provide ISRs for the overall contract. For cited projects with state and local government agencies, provide similar subcontracting performance reports if required by the contracts. When not specifically addressed in the ISR or similar report, offerors shall provide explanations for all instances of failures to meet dollar or percentage goals in individual subcontracting plans.

Notes:

The Government reserves the right to consider achievements information on other recent, relevant projects from all available sources.

Offerors utilizing achievements information of team members or key subcontractors shall clearly demonstrate how these companies will have meaningful involvement in the management of the subcontracting program for this acquisition. If not, such achievement information will not be considered under this factor. If the offeror is a new joint venture, partnership or other entity consisting of more than one company, provide achievements information for each individual business entity(ies) that will be responsible for managing the subcontracting program and clearly describe those responsibilities.

Failure to provide ISRs or any other requested information must be fully explained and may negatively impact your evaluation.

2. Small Business Participation and Commitment: All offerors shall submit a small business participation and commitment strategy including all data elements shown in Attachment E, Small Business Participation and Commitment Strategy.

a. Identify in terms of dollar value and percentage of the total acquisition the extent of work the offeror will self-perform as the prime contractor. If submitting an offer as a joint venture, identify the percentage of work each member will be responsible for and indicate the size status of each member (e.g. small business, woman-owned small business, other than small business).

b. Include supplemental narratives (limited to five pages) to address other elements of the offeror’s strategy such as binding agreements covering post award roles for execution of the contract and specific initiatives and tools that will be employed under the contract to enhance small businesses opportunities to both participate in this acquisition and build capabilities to support future NAVFAC acquisitions.

c. The anticipated prime and first tier overall small business participation rate for this acquisition (i.e. work to be performed by small businesses as the prime and/or subcontractors) is 20% of the contract value.

Offerors are encouraged to exceed this percentage and seek meaningful levels of participation in each of the small business socioeconomic programs listed in Attachment E consistent with efficient contract performance. Offerors shall explain in their participation and commitment strategies how proposed participation rates were established. The small business participation and commitment strategy must be in agreement with any required small business subcontracting plan and will be made a part of the contract upon award.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

Offerors will be evaluated on the extent to which their proposals and other performance information available to the Government demonstrate a history of successfully supporting Government policies concerning utilization of small business concerns as subcontractors including, when applicable, achievements against established small business subcontracting plan goals. Offerors will also be evaluated on the levels of small business participation proposed and the degree of commitment to use named sources. The anticipated benefits of proposed initiatives and tools to enhance small business participation and capabilities will be considered. The Government will assess proposal realism and the likelihood of success in achieving the small business objectives of this acquisition.

Forms to be used for offeror submission of Small Business Utilization Factor information are:

Attachment E – Small Business Subcontracting Record Attachment F – Small Business Participation and Commitment Strategy

(End of Summary of Changes)