N40085-19-R-9014_Amendment_0007.pdf

ACQR5554166

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

DRY DOCK 4 RENOVATION, NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD, PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 17

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 28-Jun-2019

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 N4008519R9014

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

12-Mar-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

28-Jun-2019

CODE

NAVFAC MID ATLANTIC

ACQUISITION CORE

9324 VIRGINIA 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:

N4008519R9014

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 0007

The purpose of this amendment is to provide the following information:

I. Provide PPI responses II. Provide revised phasing plan contained in files (N4008519R90141369059-DWG-DP1-1of3.pdf) and

(N4008519R90141369059-DWG-DP2A-01of23.pdf) III. Provide revised Price Proposal Form IV. Provide revised instructions to Offerors (revisions are made in red) V. A formal Evaluation Notice (EN) is forthcoming to enter into discussions.

VI. The proposal due remains unchanged.

I. Provide Pre-Proposal Inquiry (PPI) Responses

PPI#

Reference Question

Government Response

Page/Dwg

Section Paragraph

Do the existing electrical ducts contain asbestos?

Bid per RFP- Amendment

Drawing S-516 Detail a1 shows the new floor 1'-6" thick. Is this correct?

Bid Per RFP

Will the precast concrete wall panels be designed to carry the concrete loads or will additional bracing be required?

Bid Per RFP

26 Amendment 6 10

Due to the complexity of the project and substantial amount of new information issued in Amendment 6, we request a 30 day extension in proposal due date with a corresponding extension in PPI deadline.

We appreciate your prompt response to this request.

Bid per RFP

How do the bidding contractors account for the ongoing daily lengthy abnormal delays while waiting to be inspected at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard's (NNSY) Controlled Industrial Area (CIA) Inspection Area? For a project of this magnitude, the lengthy daily delays getting through security inspections can be costly. These security delays have been occuring daily for over month now and there is not a foreseeable end to when they will stop.

Bid per RFP

40 1 DP1A/AM-6

Ammendment 6 added Design Package 1A. Is the cost of the work for DP1A to be included in CLIN 001B or will a new

See Amendment 0007

Attachment F - Price Proposal Form be issued in the next Ammendment?

41 1/5

SF1442/

ATTACHMENT

F

PARAGRAPH G

Please confirm price guarantee for CLIN0001 is 120 days as outlined on Solicitation cover page and price guarantee is 160 days for CLIN0002 as outlined on Price Proposal Form

Bid per RFP

46 3 01-32-17.00 20 1.8 can we use microsoft project software for our schedule

Bid per RFP

II. Provide revised Phasing Plan

The following NAVFAC Drawings contained in files (N4008519R90141369059-DWG-DP1-1of3.pdf) and (N4008519R90141369059-DWG-DP2A-01of23.pdf) are hereby removed:

NAVFAC DWG NO. DESIGN PACKAGE TITLE

12778340 Design Package 1 G-101 - General Arrangement Plan 12778531 Design Package 2A G-101 - General Arrangement Plan 12778532 Design Package 2A G-102 - Phasing Plan – 1 of 2 12778533 Design Package 2A G-103 - Phasing Plan – 2 of 2

The following NAVFAC Drawings contained in file (N4008519R9014Amendment_0007_Dwgs) are hereby replaced with:

NAVFAC DWG NO. DESIGN PACKAGE TITLE

12778340 Design Package 1 G-101 - General Arrangement Plan (R1) 12778531 Design Package 2A G-101 - General Arrangement Plan (R1) 12778532 Design Package 2A G-102 - Phasing Plan – 1 of 2 (R1) 12778533 Design Package 2A G-103 - Phasing Plan – 2 of 2 (R1)

**the drawings contain updated phasing notes date 6/27/2019** ***See additional documents for the revised drawings***

III. Provide revised Price Proposal Form

Attachment F- Price Proposal Form is hereby removed (File: N4008519R9014Attachment F-Price Proposal Form.pdf)

Attachment F-Price Proposal Form is hereby revised and replaced with file (N4008519R9014Attachment F- Price Proposal Form_rev-Amendment_0007.pdf) ***See additional documents for the revised Price Proposal Form***

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

1: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1: PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.2: NAVY ELECTRONIC COMMERCE ONLINE (NECO)

2: BASIS OF AWARD

3: EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

4.1: PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE/SITE VISIT INFORMATION

4.2: PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPIs)

4.3: PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS/PROPOSAL DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS

5: ATTACHMENTS

1: GENERAL INFORMATION

DRY DOCK 4 RENOVATION, NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD, PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA

1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.1.1This acquisition is being solicited on an unrestricted basis, with Full and Open Competition.

1.1.2 In Accordance with DFARS 236.204, The Magnitude of Construction for this Project is between $100,000,000 and $250,000,000.

1.1.3 NAICS Code: 237990- Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction. The Small Business Size Standard is $36,500,000.

1.1.4 This solicitation is formatted as a Request for Proposal (RFP) according to FAR Part 15. This method permits evaluation of proposals based on price competition, technical merit and other factors; permits impartial and comprehensive evaluation of offerors' proposals; permits discussions if necessary; and ensures selection of the source whose performance provides the best value to the Government.

1.1.5 The Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals at any time prior to award; to negotiate with any or all offerors; to award the contracts to other than the offeror submitting the lowest total price; to award to other than the offeror submitting the highest technically rated proposal; and to award to the offeror submitting the proposal determined by the Government to be the most advantageous (best value) to the Government. OFFERORS

ARE ADVISED THAT AWARD MAY BE MADE WITHOUT DISCUSSION OR ANY CONTACT

CONCERNING THE PROPOSALS RECEIVED. Therefore, proposals should be submitted initially on the most favorable price and technical terms. Offerors should not assume that they will be contacted or afforded an opportunity to qualify, discuss, or revise their proposals. However, the Government reserves the right to clarify certain aspects of proposals or conduct discussions providing an opportunity for the offeror to revise its proposal.

1.1.6 Contractor Performance Information: Contractor’s performance will be evaluated using the respective contractor performance evaluation report entry system located on the website http://www.cpars.gov/. Prior to commencement of work, the contractor is required to provide the government with the name, phone number and email address of the “Contractor’s Representative” that will be responsible for receipt and review of draft performance evaluations prepared by the government in the appropriated system. It is the contractor’s responsibility to keep this contract information current.

1.2 NAVY ELECTRONIC COMMERCE ONLINE (NECO): All attachments, drawings and specifications will be posted on NECO under the Additional Documents section of this RFP. Amendments will be posted directly to NECO. Additionally, other postings will be made to NECO, such as the Pre-Proposal Inquiries (PPI) log, revised drawings, etc., under the Additional Documents section of the RFP. Postings to the Additional Documents section of NECO, DO NOT generate an automated email to offerors. It is the offeror’s to check the NECO Additional Documents section of the RFP periodically to see if additional postings have been made.

2: BASIS OF AWARD

2.1. 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, cost/price and other factors considered.

2.2. 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.

2.3. 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.

2.4. The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is the technical factors (Factors 1, 2, 3, and 4) are of equal importance to each other and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor (Factor 5). When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price.

2.5. 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.

3: EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience Factor 2 – Management Approach and Schedule Factor 3 – Safety

Factor 4 – Small Business Utilization Factor 5 – Past Performance

The distinction between corporate experience and past performance is corporate experience pertains to the types of work and volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work covered by this requirement, 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.

3.2. The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is the technical factors (Factors 1, 2, 3, and 4) are of equal importance to each other and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor (Factor 5). When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-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-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.

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

Non-price proposals and price proposals will be due on two different dates. When the Solicitation is issued, the Final Plans and Specs for CLIN 0001 and Pre-Final Plans and Specs for CLIN 0002 will be provided and a due date for Non-price proposals will be established. After non-price proposals are received, an Amendment will be issued to provide the Final Plans and Specs for CLIN 0002 and establish a due date for Price proposals. Price proposals will be accepted only from those Offerors that already submitted a Non-Price proposal.

(a) Price:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Price binder: Price shall be submitted on the Price Proposal Form included in the solicitation. The offeror shall submit one (1) original, marked “Original”, and one (1) copy, marked “Copy”, each in a separate three ring binder with the following:

• Cover page with solicitation number, solicitation title, offeror name, address, phone number, fax number, DUNS, CAGE code, Point of Contact (POC), POC phone number, and POC email address;

• Completed SF 1442 signed with all amendments acknowledged;

• Price Proposal Form;

• Copy of Representation and Certifications and proof of registration in System for Award Management

(SAM);

• Confirmation of filing of Veterans’ Employment and Training (VETS) VETS-4212 for the 2017 filing cycle;

• Bid Guarantee in accordance with FAR Clause 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee. Amount shall be at least 20 percent of the proposed price, but shall not exceed $3 million; and

• Responsibility Determination Information (see below).

• Small Business Subcontracting Plan

• In the event of a discrepancy between the original and copies, the original version of the proposal will govern.

• The offeror is required to submit a complete Price Proposal Form that includes completion of all contract line items numbers (CLINs).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PRICE PROPOSAL PACKAGE:

RESPONSIBILTY DETERMINATION INFORMATION – In order to be eligible for award, the offeror must be determined responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9, specifically FAR 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.

Small Business Subcontracting Plan (reference FAR 52.219-9 Alt II and DFARS 252.219-7003).

NAVFAC's command-wide small business subcontracting targets are shown below. These may be higher or lower than percentages that would represent realistic, challenging small business subcontracting goals for this acquisition. Offerors representing as other than small businesses shall establish small business subcontracting plan goals and shall document in their subcontracting plans the basis for all proposed goals.

Plans shall be submitted with initial offers.

SB 45%

SDB 5%

HUBZone SB 3%

WOSB 15%

SDVOSB 5%

Small businesses identified by name shall be listed in small business subcontracting plans submitted pursuant to FAR 52.219-9 in order to facilitate compliance with 252.219-7003(e).

See the Small Business Subcontracting Plan Template (Attachment G) for format.

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 (see attached Price Proposal Form). The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in Section 00600 of 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:

Non-price binder: The offeror shall submit one (1) original, marked “Original”, and four (4) copies, marked “Copy”, each in a separate three ring binder with the following:

Cover page with Solicitation Number, Solicitation Title, Prime Contractor Name, Address, Phone Number, Fax Number, DUNS, CAGE Code, Point of Contact, Phone Number, and Email Address;

8 ½ x 11 paper, 12-point font;

Refer to individual factors for page limitations. Pages that exceed indicated page limitations shall not be evaluated;

Additionally, include an electronic version of the price and non-price proposal on one CD-ROM.

As with the price proposal, in the event of a discrepancy between the original and copies (or CD-ROM), the original version of the proposal will govern. Furthermore, any price information within the technical proposal (non-price proposal) will not be considered. Likewise, any technical/non-price information within the price proposal will not be considered.

Electronic submission of proposals will not be accepted (aside from the requirement to submit one (1) CD- ROM with the price and non-price proposal), with the exception of the Price Proposal Form and Small Business Participation and Commitment Strategy. If an offeror chooses to submit the Price Proposal Form and Small Business Participation and Commitment Strategy via e-mail, then such offeror does not need to include these attachments with the hard copy (or CD-ROM copy) of the full price and non-price proposals to be mailed or hand delivered. Pricing information is not required to be submitted under Section 00010 – Solicitation Contract Form in SF 1442. All required proposal documents shall be submitted in accordance with FAR 15.208.

Factor 1, Corporate Experience:

The offeror shall submit the following information:

Submit a minimum of two (2) and up to a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects for the offeror that best demonstrates experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope and complexity to the RFP. Projects submitted for the offeror shall be completed within the past fifteen (15) years from the date of issuance of this RFP.

For the purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as:

Size: A final construction cost of $15,000,000 or greater.

Scope/Complexity: Each project submitted does not require demonstrated experience with all of the following components, but collectively, the submitted projects must demonstrate experience with all elements:

a) Heavy concrete construction with both cast in place and pre-cast concrete construction, with experience in marine concrete construction and/or graving docks.

b) Heavy industrial utility distribution systems including

c) Civil (potable water, fire protection water, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage systems when located below grade),

d) Mechanical (domestic water, fire protection water, and sanitary sewer systems when located above grade or in utility tunnels; and steam and compressed air systems),

e) Electrical and telecom systems

f) Ship to shore dock connections for all above listed utility systems.

g) Large Cofferdam/Bulkhead construction and dewatering.

h) Caisson construction or fabrication of naval architecture.

i) Installation of industrial pumps and pumping systems.

Offerors that demonstrate the following additional experience may be considered more favorably than those that do not:

a) Projects performed inside a Navy Shipyard Controlled Industrial Area (CIA)

b) Experience with construction dewatering including - use of conventional pump systems and deep well dewatering, and monitoring and managing dewatering impacts through the use of geotechnical instrumentation and survey monitoring.

c) Experience with timely commissioning of complex industrial pumping systems and electrical controls.

Ensure that the project description clearly identifies whether the project is new construction or repair/renovation, addresses how the project meets the scope and complexity requirements as delineated above, and provides the final construction cost. The absence of any such information may result in a rating of UNACCEPTABLE.

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 Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment A) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. 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 two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) 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).

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 affiliates/subsidiaries/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract. Experience of proposed subcontractors will not be considered.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation will include the offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction 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 (5) projects total. Any projects submitted in excess of the five

(5) for Corporate Experience will not be considered. An offeror that does not submit a minimum of two (2) relevant projects as defined above will receive a rating of “Unacceptable” and will not be eligible for award.

Factor 2, Management Approach and Schedule:

Submit a narrative work plan and Critical Path Method (CPM) project schedule to describe your approach to managing the project and ensuring adherence to the project schedule. Both the schedule and narrative must address the execution of the base and all options, as defined in the RFP. The narrative shall not exceed five (5) double-sided (or ten (10) single-sided) 8-1/2" x 11" pages. Provide both the summary level and critical path schedules, documenting any multiple critical paths, in 11" x 17" pages and in an Adobe PDF file, along with the CPM schedule source file. There is no page limit on the summary level, critical path or entire CPM schedule.

The narrative work plan shall address major elements of work and demonstrate understanding of the scope, all phases and major milestones, technical complexities, and construction schedule required to achieve the work as identified in the solicitation. Identify activities that may affect the project timeline, including other/off site work activities. In addition, the plan shall address the following technical complexities:

a) The installation and removal of large cofferdams in proximity to existing infrastructure;

b) Construction of caisson and caisson seat to tight tolerances;

c) Selective demolition and restoration in old marine infrastructure;

d) Pumpwell rehabilitation including piping, large pumps, and associated control systems;

e) Pile installation including micropile systems; and

f) Selective demolition and reconstruction of utility tunnels, and demolition and reconstruction of crane and railroad tracks

The project schedule shall illustrate the offeror’s ability to achieve or improve on the contract completion date set out in the RFP (1034 calendar days, including 15 days for bond approval). Identify the overall completion time for this project, in accordance with the RFP, as well as interim completion times (including each sequence of work as identified in the RFP) and key milestones for sequences as required to complete construction. The schedule shall demonstrate an understanding of the work, a logical sequence of events to accomplish the work, and contain enough information to identify all of the major milestones, as defined in the RFP.

The schedule shall be based on a contract award date of 30 September 2019. This date is for proposal purposes only and is not intended to indicate an anticipated/planned award date.

Offerors will be evaluated on the extent to which they demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirements of the RFP. A narrative work plan that identifies areas of risk in logistics and resource management, and provides a comprehensive contingency plan that addresses mitigation of any identified risks with potential solutions, may be considered more favorably. A schedule that proposes realistic contract duration shorter than the required duration indicated in the RFP may be considered more favorably. A schedule that proposes contract duration longer than indicated in the RFP will be rated UNACCEPTABLE.

NOTE: If a realistic duration shorter than specified in the RFP is proposed, the proposed duration will be incorporated into the resultant contract.

Factor 3, Safety:

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.)

a) Experience Modification Rate (EMR): Include three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data [2016, 2017, and 2018]. 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.

b) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data [2016, 2017, and 2018]. 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 data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

c) Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data [2016, 2017, and 2018]. If an offeror cannot submit TRC rates, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the TRC rate data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

d) Technical Approach for Safety: The technical approach to safety narrative shall be limited to one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages), and must address all items below.

1. The offeror shall 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.

2. The offeror shall fully describe the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and subcontractor performed work.

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

4. The offeror shall describe their 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.

The Government is seeking to determine that the offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s overall safety record, the offeror’s plan to select and monitor subcontractors, and any innovative safety methods that the offeror plans to implement for this procurement. The Government’s sources of information for evaluating safety may include, but are not limited to, OSHA, NAVFAC’s eSAMS database, and other related databases. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete safety information regarding these submittal requirements rests with the offeror. The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

• Experience Modification Rate (EMR)

• OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate

• Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate

• Offeror Technical Approach to Safety

• Other sources of information available to the Government

a) 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.

b) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rates: 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 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.

c) Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates: For the three previous complete calendar years, the offeror will submit their TRC, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If unable to submit TRC rates, affirmatively state so, and an explanation must be provided.

Any extenuating circumstances that affected the TRC rate data and negative trends should be addressed as part of this element. The board will evaluate the 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.

d) 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.

e) 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 4, 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.

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

a) All offerors shall submit a narrative, limited to one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided 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 (Factor 1) in the format provided in Attachment D, 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 (Factor 1), 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 or 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.

THE FOLLOWING ITEMS BELOW SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE PRICE PROPOSAL

SUBMISSION.

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.

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 as follows:

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

Factor 5 – Past Performance:

The offeror shall submit the following information:

IF A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION IS AVAILABLE, IT SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE

PROPOSAL. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1, Corporate Experience. AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT

SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE.

IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment B), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Stephen Astwood, via email at stephen.astwood1@navy.mil prior to proposal closing date.

Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs.

However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

If there is not a completed CCASS or CPARS evaluation, then the offeror must submit Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment B) for each project included in Factor 1 – Corporate Experience. The offeror should provide completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) with 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 should 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, Stephen Astwood at stephen.astwood1@navy.mil.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the offeror.

IMPORTANT: It is the responsibility of the offeror to provide accurate points of contact for each identified contract and current telephone numbers and/or email addresses. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being considered less qualified.

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.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse past performance issues.

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

Performance awards or additional information submitted will not be considered.

This evaluation focuses on how well the offeror performed on the relevant projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience and past performance on other relevant projects currently documented in known sources.

The degree to which past performance evaluations and all other past performance information reviewed by the Government (e.g., PPIRS, Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), performance recognition documents, and information obtained from any other source) reflect a trend of satisfactory performance considering:

• A pattern of successful completion of tasks;

• A pattern of deliverables that are timely and of good quality;

• A pattern of cooperativeness and teamwork with the Government at all levels (task managers, contracting officers, auditors, etc.); and

• Recency of tasks performed that are identical to, similar to, or related to the task at hand.

The Government will consider the currency 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 past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. More relevant past performance will have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance, and will receive an Unknown Confidence rating.

A copy of the blank Past Performance Questionnaire to be used for requesting client references is included as Attachment B.

4: PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

4.1: PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE/ SITE VISIT INFORMATION

The site visit is scheduled on Thursday, 16 May 2019. The Site Visit will commence at 10:45 A.M at the south side of the Dry Dock 4 Caisson, Norfolk Naval Shipyard (NNSY), Portsmouth, Virginia.

Interested attendees that already meet the NNSY badge requirements, and have access to the site can meet directly at the site visit location. Please provide the name and company of the attendee to BOTH Thomas Uliana, Construction Manager, at thomas.uliana@navy.mil and Stephen Astwood, Contract Specialist, via email at stephen.astwood1@navy.mil.

Interested attendees that do not meet the NNSY badge requirements, please follow the instructions below:

SECURITY INFORMATION

Due to increased security at all military installations, all prospective visitors who do not currently have a valid Contractor’s ID (DBIDS Pass) must allow sufficient time to obtain a one-day pass to permit entry to the base.

Prospective visitors planning to attend the site visit who do not have a valid Contractor’s ID to enter Naval Station Norfolk, must submit a completed copy of the Solicitation Attachment I “SECNAV 5512/1 form” and the “NNSY Green Badge Spreadsheet” included with this amendment.