N4008520R0127 Amendment 0001.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

Multi-Service, Facility Investment, Ground Maintenance, Custodial and Integrated Solid Waste Management Services at the Navy Operational Support Center (NOSC), Green Bay and Milw aukee Wisconsin; Decatur, Peoria and Rock Island Illinois and Other Areas of Responsigility (AOR)

This amendment is issued to incorporate revised Sections L.5 - Content of Proposal, and Section M - Evaluation Factor M.2. (a) Price; Factor 3-Safety and Revised Section J. Attachment J-0200000-07 ELINS. In addition, this amendment provides proposal inquiries and responses related to the proposal.

All other terms and condtions remain the same.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 13

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 05-Nov-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 N4008520R0127

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

08-Oct-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 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

05-Nov-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:

N4008520R0127

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

PROPOSAL INQUIRY

Proposal Inquiry Questions and Answers

1. Will the government be providing any office space in one of the 6 listed facilities for a contractor program management office?

Answer: No office space will be provided for an office at any of the NOSC’s or MFR sites.

2. Section A specifies an electronic submittal and provides email addresses for that process. However, Section L.5 specifies the submission must be submitted in both electronic and CD-ROM Answer: Correction to Section L.5: All submissions shall be submited electronically via the email address provided in Seciton A and L.2.

3. Request clarification with the base year tab for IDIQ (Formula and numbering) Answer: See revised attached ELINS – Amendment 0001

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L.1 CONTRACTOR PROPOSAL CERTIFICATION

Contractor is required to certify in writing on page 1 of the proposal the following:

____________________________________________________warrants that its proposal (Name of Offeror) ______________________________incorporated herein by reference, including, but not limited to, proposed (of date or other Identifier) approaches, staffing, methodology, or work plans, will meet the performance objectives set forth in this contract during the execution thereof. The contractor is not excused from meeting such performance objectives. The contractor understands that it bears all of the cost and performance risk associated with adopting acceptable additional (and/or alternative) means or methods of meeting the performance objective.

L.2 CONTRACTOR PAYMENT SCHEDULE: RESERVED.

L.3 INQUIRES

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

All questions must be submitted at least 10 days before proposals are due. This is the most efficient way to ensure all questions are addressed in a timely manner.

Pre-Proposal Inquires shall be electronically sent to Jurmin Francis-Ross, Contract Specialist, at the following email address:

jurmin.francis-ross@navy.mil

L.4 DISPOSITION OF PROPOSALS

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

L.5 Content of Proposal:

a) The non-cost and the price proposal shall be submitted as separate attachments. The non-cost proposal shall not contain any cost/pricing information. The non-cost proposal presented by the offeror to whom the award is made will be incorporated into the contract at the time of award.

b) The offeror shall submit the following information:

Non-cost/price factors submittal requirements:

Non-Price Factors Factors: Offeror shall submit one electronic copy that shall include the following characteristics:

• 8 ½ x 11 format

• 12-point Arial or Times New Roman font

• 100-page limit (inclusive of all charts, forms and other documentation responsive to the solicitation requirements), pages sequentially numbered.

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

• Include only information in response to Factors 1, 2, 3 and 4 separated by tabs, as applicable.

• Provide Attachment J-0200000-09: Contractor(s) Self-Performance Certification and Notification of Subcontracting in accordance with Factor 1 – Technical Approach/Management

• Provide approved SBA JV Agreement or SBA approved Mentor-Protégé Agreement (if applicable).

• A complete electronic copy of the non-price/cost proposal as a single .pdf file

• The non-price/cost proposal shall include responses to each non-price factor as specified in Section M.

c) Price:

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 0010), with all amendments acknowledged.

• Exhibits A through E (Attachment J-0200000-07). Pricing shall be rounded to the nearest cent.

• Copy of Representations and Certifications and proof of registration in System of Award Management (SAM).

• 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.

NOTE: Offerors are cautioned that “repeating” of the Performance Work Statement Performance Objectives with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform.

Price proposals are not part of the 100-page limitation. Pages exceeding the 100 single-sided page limitation shall not be considered during evaluation of the proposal.

No pricing shall be included in the technical proposal. Any price information in the non-price proposal will not be considered. Likewise, any non-price information in the price proposal will not be considered.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

SECTION M

BASIS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1. 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. The relative importance of non-cost/price factors is that Factors 1, 2 and 3, are of equal importance to each other and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment Factor 4. 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(s) and the associated risk to successful contract performance resulting from the Weakness(s). This assessment must provide the rationale for proceeding to award without discussions.

M.2. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Factor 1– Management Approach Factor 2 – Recent, Relevant Experience of the Firm Factor 3 – Safety Factor 4 – Past Performance on Recent, Relevant Projects

NOTE: The distinction between Recent / Relevant 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 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.

The relative importance of non-cost/price factors is that Factors 1, 2 and 3, are of equal importance to each other and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment Factor 4. 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 Offeror’s 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 whose offer conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered.

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

(a) Price:

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Offerors shall submit one (1) original and one

(1) copy of the price proposal electronically, that shall include the following:

Signed Solicitation, Offer and Award Forms (SF 33), including Section B (CLINs 0001 through 0010), with all amendments acknowledged.

Exhibits A through E (Attachment J-0200000-07) Pricing shall be rounded to the nearest cent.

Copy of Representations and Certifications and proof of registration in System of Award

Management (SAM).

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 technical proposal.

Additionally, the Government will not consider any price information contained in the non-price proposal. Likewise, the Government will not consider any non-price information contained in the price proposal.

(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:

Completeness. All pricing information required by the solicitation has been provided, all mathematic 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.

Reasonableness. Price analysis comparisons indicate the offered price to be fair and reasonable, balanced across option years, and balanced between recurring and non-recurring items.

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

(b) Non-cost/price Factors:

(1) Factor 1 - Management Approach:

(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 technical proposal and d iscussed 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) Demonstrate your ability to provide key personnel in accordance with RFP Section 2.7.1 through 2.7.1.4 and provide a workforce management plan (not to exceed 20 pages) that 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. The narrative shall include, at a minimum, Project Manager, Quality Manager, Site Safety and Health Officer, and on-site supervisor(s) and to whom they will directly report.

(2) Describe the work to be performed as the prime contractor, as well as the work to be performed by each subcontractor proposed. The work to be performed, the subcontractors to be utilized, and their roles, shall be clearly identified. If the prime contractor will self-perform 100% of the work, it shall be clearly stated. Additionally, offeror must meet the requirements of FAR 52.219-14, Limitation on Subcontracting and submit Attachment E ( Contractor’s Self-Performance Certification and Notification of Subcontracting), as part of this Factor.

(3) Demonstrate your ability to provide and maintain a qualified workforce and clearly define the controls and/or processes that are in place to ensure continuity of services.

(4) Demonstrate your ability to manage numerous work requirements simultaneously with a dispersed workforce under competing priorities at multiple locations.

c. Quality Management. Provide a two-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 Management Approach factor shall be evaluated based upon the followi ng 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. In addition, the proposal shall clearly define clearly the controls and/or processes that are in place to ensure continuity of services

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

d. The proposal offers a low to moderate performance risk to the Government.

(2) Factor 2- Recent/Relevant Experience of the Firm:

(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) project. An offeror’s experience as a subcontractor will not be considered.

Size, scope, and complexity further define a relevant project as follows:

Size: A Facility Investment service contract with a yearly value of at least $500,000 or greater for recurring services. Non-Recurring values for infrequent work will not be considered similar in size.

Scope: Demonstrate the ability to provide all labor, management, supervision, tools, materials, equipment to perform Facility Investment Preventative Maintenance (HVAC, Fire Protection PM certifications, Services, Oil Water Separator Maintenance), Custodial Services, Pest Control, Grounds Maintenance and Landscaping, Pavement Clearance, Integrated Solid Waste, and Propane Gas Support and other services as defined by the RFP.

NOTE: Items shown above are not listed in order of importance. Offerors that are able to demonstrate relevant experience in a greater number of these services may be considered more favorably. Experience on the various services may be demonstrated collectively throughout the relevant projects submitted. Offeror may use subcontractor experience to demonstrate experience with a particular service only if that particular subcontractor is proposed to perform work on this requirement. However, the offeror must demonstrate experience as prime contractor on at least one relevant project.

Subcontractor experience will not be substituted for prime contractor experience in any case.

Projects submitted for consideration shall be provided on Attachment J-0200000-10 Recent/Relevant Experience Form with details that include percentage of work completed for both prime and proposed subcontractors.

Complexity: Demonstrate the ability to respond simultaneously to service calls and maintenance requirements for repair, alteration, and minor construction at various locations and buildings throughout the installation and supporting annexes. Demonstrate the ability to manage competing priorities in order to support customer demands.

The attached Recent/Relevant Experience Form (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 double-sided page (or two single-sided pages).

Projects submitted for the offeror shall be ongoing (having been performed for a period of at least one year) or completed within the past 5 years of the date of issuance of the 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 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. For 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.

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. As noted above, to be deemed acceptable under this factor, the offeror must submit at least one (1) relevant project where the offeror served as the prime contractor (similar size, scope, and complexity as the current requirement). The prime contractor will not be found acceptable solely on the basis of its subcontractor’s experience.

(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 first five

(5) submitted for Experience will not be considered.

(3) 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 specified five (5) Calendar Years (CY), as well as a safety narrative, as described further below. For a partnership or joint venture, the Offeror shall submit separate DART rates and TCR for the specified five

(5) 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, 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, 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 three complete calendar years.

(4) Technical Approach for Safety:

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. Negative trends occurring above moderate risk levels require the offeror to provide a detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Missing data without an explanation is considered a deficiency.

b. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low

Risk (LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) would indicate a strength.

c. An increasing DART rate trend could be considered a weakness (i.e. MR or better to High Risk (HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate.

d. 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 (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. Negative trends occurring above moderate risk levels require the offeror to provide a detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Missing data without an explanation is considered a deficiency.

b. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to

Low Risk (LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) would indicate a strength.

c. An increasing TCR rate trend could be considered a weakness (i.e. MR or better to High Risk (HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate.

d. 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) single-sided 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.

(4) 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 up to a maximum of five relevant contracts of similar size, scope and complexity to the RFP as defined in Factor 2, Recent/Relevant Experience. The prime contractor will not be found acceptable solely 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, Recent/ Relevant 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 J-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. Jurmin Francis-Ross, via email at jurmin.francis-ross@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/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.

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 which may consider, but is not limited to:

- 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

(End of Summary of Changes)