N4008520R0093 Amendment 01.pdf

ACQR5808797

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

N40085-20-R-0093- CHARTER BUS SERVICES FOR NAVFAC MID-LANT HAMPTON ROADS, NORTHEAST & SOUTHEAST AREA OF

RESPONSIBILITY (AOR)

This Amendment is issued to incorporate the Basis of Evaluation (ii) - Technical Factor(4) portion for Section M.2- Safety Factor. Additionally, responses to proposal inquiries are hereby incorporated.

All other Terms and Conditions remain the same.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 10

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 04-Dec-2020

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N4008520R0093

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10-Nov-2020

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

04-Dec-2020

CODE

NAVFACSYSCOM 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:

N4008520R0093

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 01

04 December 2020

SOLICITATION N40085-20-R-0093 – CHARTER BUS SERVICES FOR NAVFAC MID-

LANT HAMPTON ROADS, NORTHEAST & SOUTHEAST AREA OF

RESPONSIBILITY (AOR)

Questions & Responses:

Question #1. Does North OR, North East Line 0001, 0002 & 0003 independent of each other?

Answer #1. These numbers; 0001, 0002, 0003 etc., represent the CLINs for this contract, and are identified as: 0001- Base Year, 0002 – Option Year 1 and 0003 – Option Year 3 etc.

Question #2. How many buses are needed? On the spreadsheet the phrase Unit of Issue, IMAP CACs and Estimated Quantity are used but I don’t know if they mean number of buses.

Answer #2. The Government will specify the number of buses required when an order is placed.

The Estimated Quantity represent the estimated number of trips.

Question #3. Can I submit a bid for one or multiple locations?

Answer #3. Pricing is required for all ELINS/locations.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

SECTION M - BASIS FOR AWARD

M.1 BASIS FOR AWARD

a. The Government will select the lowest-price technically acceptable offer at a reasonable cost to the Government.

M.2 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Factor 1 –Technical Approach/Management Factor 2 – Corporate Experience

Factor 3 – Safety Factor 4 – Past Performance

NOTE: 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.

In order to permit efficient competition, the Navy will utilize the following methodology:

Proposals will initially be screened for price and placed in order of price (lowest price to highest price). The Navy will then evaluate the technical factors of the lowest priced proposal. The Navy will make award to the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal. However, if the lowest priced proposal is not found to be technically acceptable, the Navy, at its sole discretion, reserves the right to increase the number of proposals it will review, until the Government identifies a technically acceptable proposal. Accordingly, under this methodology, the technical factors of some proposals may not be evaluated by the Navy. If discussions are deemed necessary by the Contracting Officer, all proposals will be evaluated (both technical and price) for the purpose of establishing a competitive range.

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

b. Non-cost/price proposals will be evaluated to ensure the offeror understands the requirements of the solicitation in accordance with the following descriptions of each evaluation factor

(1) Factor 1, Technical Approach/Management:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The offeror shall submit a narrative response that clearly demonstrates its understanding of and approach to accomplishing the complexity and magnitude of service requirements set forth in the performance objectives and standards of the Performance Work Statement. Each of the topics below must be included in the narrative and tabbed in the non-price/cost proposal and discussed separately.

a. Phase-In Transition Plan. Describe what you will do to “start-up” for performance of this contract. The phase in transition period is 30 days as per F.2 of the RFP.

Include a schedule of key events; personnel actions and responsibilities regarding employees at all levels.

b. Workforce Management.

(1) Describe the lines of management authority, supervision, span of control and accountability, including the relationship between overall management (corporate and on-site), administration, and subcontractors.

(2) Demonstrate your ability to provide and maintain a qualified workforce.

(3) Demonstrate your ability to manage competing priorities at various locations.

(4) Describe the work to be performed as the prime contractor as well as work to be performed by each subcontractor proposed. The work to be self-performed, subcontractors to be utilized and their roles shall be clearly identified. If the prime will self-perform 100% of the work it shall be clearly stated. Additionally, offer must meet requirements of FAR 52.219-14, limitation on subcontracting and submit Attachment J-0200000-12 as part of this factor.

c. Quality Management. Provide a two to five page summary of your “Quality Management System” i.e. the Quality Processes (Practices, Resources and Activities) and minimum controls that will be used to ensure full compliance with all performance objectives and standards as described in (0200000-C) Management and Administration). Include the methodology to be implemented to accomplish the performance requirements and detail how the proposed approach will effectively achieve each performance objective and standard.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: The Technical Approach/Management factor shall be evaluated based upon the following criteria:

a. The proposal demonstrates an acceptable understanding of the performance objectives and standards.

b. The proposal demonstrates a thorough plan for having equipment and personnel in place to commence work on the contract start date.

c. The proposal provides a feasible technical approach with the capability to, at least, meet solicitation performance objectives and standards.

(2) Factor 2, Corporate Experience:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information:

Submit a minimum of one (1) and a maximum of five (5) relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the work requirements specified in the solicitation. The offeror shall be the prime contractor on at least one (1) relevant project. An offeror’s experience as a subcontractor will not be considered. In summary, a relevant project is a project where the offeror served as the prime contractor and the submitted project satisfies Size, Scope and Complexity. Size, Scope, and Complexity are further defined as follows:

Size: Charter Bus service contract with a yearly value of at least $250,000.00 or greater for similar services. Indefinite Quantity/Indefinite Delivery values for non-recurring work will be considered.

Scope: Clearly demonstrate the ability to provide all labor, management, supervision, tools, material, equipment, transportation as necessary to provide Charter Bus services required for NAVFAC MIDLANT’s Hampton Roads AOR, Southeast and Northeast Client Base Locations.

Complexity: Submitted project should clearly demonstrate the ability to provide a transportation program that includes bus(es) of the touring type equal to buses (multiple sizes), used as Commercial Highway Motor Coaches, as defined by the Department of Transportation Federal Motor Carrier Regulations. Provide details or historical data that would support your ability to provide the bus(es) required to meet requirements, to include special events (e.g. VIP visits, emergency evacuations), and surge capacity requirements. Provide documentation that your firm is listed on the Department of Defense (DoD) Approved Carrier List.

The attached Corporate Experience Form (Attachment J-0200000-10) 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 one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages).

Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be ongoing (having been performed for a period of at least one year as of the date of issuance of this solicitation) or completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this solicitation. Projects with completion dates beyond one year shall be clearly defined as multi-year contracts or as base contracts with option years. If the project has option periods, state which contract period is in progress (Base, 1st option, etc.)

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 as it relates to the above defined Size, Scope, and Complexity.

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience shall be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects shall be submitted for each Joint Venture partner. An offeror proposing to perform as Prime Contractor for this solicitation may use experience from projects it performed as part of Joint Venture. If the offeror is a JV, the offeror shall provide the signed U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA)-approved joint Venture Agreement or an SBA-approved Mentor-Protégé Agreement as part of this factor. Failure to submit an SBA-approved Agreement will result in the relationship being considered as Prime/Subcontractor and the prime contractor will not be found Acceptable on the basis of the subcontractor’s experience only. 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 SF33), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract. The meaningful involvement shall be described in detail.

As noted above, to be deemed acceptable under this factor, the offeror must submit at least one relevant project where the offeror served as the prime contractor (similar size, scope, and complexity as the current requirement). An offeror’s experience as a subcontractor 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 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. Any projects submitted in excess of the five for Experience will not be considered.

Factor 3, Safety:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information: The Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate: and Total Case Rate (TCR) for the five (5) previous complete Calendar Years (CY) as well as a safety narrative, as described below. For a partnership or joint venture, the Offeror shall submit separate DART and TCR rates for the five (5) previous complete CY for each contractor who is part of the partnership/joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. Any fatalities experienced within this 5-year timeframe must be explained in detail, to include root cause and corrective actions.

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

Rate. Submit the last five previous complete calendar years’ worth of data. If the Offeror has no DART rate, for any year, the offeror must affirmatively state so and explain why. Should a negative trend occur above Moderate Risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. DART cases include injuries or illnesses resulting in death, days away from work, and/or restricted work or transfer to another job days beyond the day of injury/illness.

b. Calculation of DART rate: Multiply the total number of DART cases by

200,000 and then divide by the number of employee labor hours worked.

𝑫ART 𝑹ATE = Number of DART Incidents x 200,000 Total Number of Employee Labor Hours Worked

(2) OSHA Total Case (TCR) Rate: Submit last five previous complete calendar years’ worth of data. If the Offeror has no TCR rate, for any year, the offeror must affirmatively state so and explain why. Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. TCR cases include injuries or illnesses resulting in death, days away from work, restricted work or transfer to another job days beyond the day of injury/illness, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness.

b. Calculation of TCR rate: Multiply the total number of TCR incidents by 200,000, and then divide by the number of employee labor hours worked.

TCR 𝑹ATE = Number of TCR Incidents x 200,000 Total Number of Employee Labor Hours Worked

(3) Offeror shall submit a separate OSHA 300A form for each of the last five complete calendar years.

(4) Technical Approach for Safety: The offeror must clearly:

a. Describe the Offeror’ s approach to implementing and executing a Safety Management System (SMS) including Management/Leadership involvement, Employee involvement, Hazard prevention, Hazard control, Worksite analysis, and Safety and health training, to include the standard(s) used to benchmark the SMS.

b. Describe the evaluation process used to select potential subcontractors.

c. Describe the processes of how the Offeror will oversee safety compliance of subcontractors at all levels throughout performance of the contract (to include the Offeror’s own in-house workforce).

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one (1) double-sided page.

(5) The Government reserves the right to review other available sources public/Government internal) of information. These may include, but are not limited to, OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Electronic Contract Management System (eCMS), etc.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

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 evaluation will collectively consider the DART rate, TCR, Technical Approach to Safety, and other sources of information available to the Government as part of such collective evaluation. The board will evaluate the DART rates and TCR 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.

(1) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rates. The board will evaluate trends over the last five years considering changes that take it from one risk level (or more) to the next up or down.

a. Missing data without an explanation is a Deficiency.

b. An increasing DART rate trend could be considered a Weakness or Significant Weakness (i.e.

Moderate Risk or better to High Risk or Extremely High Risk ) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate Risk.

c. This chart correlates the DART rate to the level of risk:

Risk DART Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 1.0

Low Risk From 1.0 to 1.99 Moderate Risk From 2.0 to 2.99

High Risk From 3.0 to 4.0 Extremely High Risk Greater than 4.0

(2) OSHA Total Case Rate (TCR) Rate: The board will evaluate trends over the last five years considering changes that take it from one risk level (or more) to the next up or down.

a. Missing data without an explanation is a Deficiency.

b. An increasing TCR rate trend could be considered a Weakness or Significant Weakness (i.e.

Moderate Risk or better to High Risk or Extremely High Risk ) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate Risk.

c. This chart correlates the TCR rate to the level of risk:

Risk TCR Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 2.49 Low Risk From 2.5 to 3.49 Moderate Risk From 3.5 to 4.49 High Risk From 4.5 to 5.99 Extremely High Risk Greater than 6.0

(3) Offeror shall submit a separate OSHA 300A form for each of the last three complete calendar years.

(4) Technical Approach to Safety: The offeror is required to address the following:

a. Describes a viable SMS that addresses elements; such as Management/Leadership involvement, Employee involvement, Hazard prevention, Hazard control, Worksite analysis, and Safety and health training, to include the standard(s) used to benchmark the SMS.

b. Describes a methodical process of evaluating subcontractor’s safety performance in their selection process.

c. Describes a logical management plan to hold themselves and their subcontractors accountable for adhering to the safety requirements of the contract.

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) singlesided pages or one (1) double-sided page. Information on pages beyond this will not be considered.

(5) The Government reserves the right to review other available sources (public/Government internal) of information. These may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Electronic Contract Management System (eCMS), etc.

(c) Factor 4, Past Performance:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Offerors shall clearly demonstrate a history of successful performance within the past five years of the date of issuance of the solicitation. The offeror shall be the prime contractor on a minimum of one (1) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant contracts of similar size, scope and complexity to the RFP as defined in Factor 2, Corporate Experience. The prime contractor will not be found acceptable on the basis of the subcontractor’s past performance. Additionally, the prime contractor’s experience as a subcontractor will not be considered.

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 2, 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 (AttachmentJ-0200000- 11 ), 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, Mrs. Susan Roberts, via email at susan.roberts2@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.

Also include performance recognition documents received within the last five years from the date of issuance of the solicitation such as: awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

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/Entity Identifier 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), 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.”

A copy of the blank Past Performance Questionnaire to be used for requesting client references is included as Attachment J-0200000-11.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: 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”

(a) Price:

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Offerors shall submit one electronic copy that shall include the following:

• Signed Solicitation, Offer and Award Forms (SF 33), including Section B

(CLINs 0001 through 0005), with all amendments acknowledged.

• Exhibits A through E. (Attachment J-0200000-09). Pricing shall be rounded to the nearest cent

• Where Exhibit Line Items contain a quantity of zero, unit pricing must be provided.

• Copy of Representations and Certifications and proof of registration in beta.sam.gov.

• Confirm submission of the most recent Vets 4212 Report.

• Provide name of financial institution, point of contract, telephone number and email address.

Provide a signed statement of release giving the reference permission to release the information to the Navy.

The price proposal shall be submitted separately but at the same time as the non-cost/price proposal. Any non-cost/price information in the price proposal will not be considered. Likewise, any price information in the non-cost/price proposal will not be considered.

(2) 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 Section B of the solicitation). The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in Section M 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:

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

(ii) Comparison of proposed prices with the IGCE.

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

(iv) Comparison of market survey results.”

Proposals will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness as follows:

(1) Completeness. All pricing information required by the solicitation has been provided, all mathematical computations are correct and the pricing application understood, prices are on an “all or none” basis, and failure to submit a price on an item or a number of items may cause this factor and the entire offer to be determined unacceptable.

(2) Reasonableness. Price analysis comparisons indicate the offered price to be fair and reasonable, balanced across option years, and balanced amongst all Non- Recurring Exhibit Line items.

Unreasonable, unbalanced or incomplete pricing may cause a proposal to be determined unacceptable.

(End of Summary of Changes)