Amendment 0002.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to update the proposal delivery information, provide contact information for the pass request, and provide PPI responses.

See SF30 Block 14 continuation page.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 14

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 09-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 N4008521R1215

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

02-Dec-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

09-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:

N4008521R1215

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE (SF 30)

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0002

The purpose of this amendement is to:

1. Update the proposal delivery information. See updated 5.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

INSTRUCTIONS..

2. The following site visit information is hereby incorporated:

A site visit is scheduled for Wednesday, December 16, 2020. Participants shall meet at the MCAS New River Visitors Center no later than 9:00 AM Local Time. All participants shall submit a list of attendees to Lauren Loconto via email at lauren.loconto@navy.mil, 910-451-2582 no later than close of business on Friday, December 11, 2020. Participants without current DBIDS access to MCAS New River will require sponsorship. Participants shall submit the current version of the SECNAV form 5512/1 (version expiring January 31, 2021, one per attendee), a scanned copy of the photo identification(s) that will be presented at the Visitors Center, and scanned copies of the vehicle registration(s) and insurance(s). Participants requiring sponsorship but planning to use rental vehicles shall submit participant names exactly as they appear on the identification to be presented at the Visitors Center and will need to present the photo identification(s), SECNAV form 5512/1, and rental agreement at the Visitors Center on the date of the site visit. The sponsor information for the SECNAV form 5512/1 is Lauren F.

Loconto, Supervisory Contract Specialist. Participants should be aware that wait times at the Visitor’s Center vary, but can be as long as one hour. The site visit will begin promptly at 9:00AM without delay. Information regarding the Visitors Center, can be found at https://www.newriver.marines.mil/Welcome‐Aboard/Pass‐Registration/.

3. Provide responses to PPI’s.

SECTION 00 21 16 - INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. GENERAL

1.1 NOTICE TO OFFERORS

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.3 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT

2. GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE SEED PROJECT

3. BASIS FOR AWARD

4. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

5. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

5.1 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE AND SITE VISIT

5.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

5.4 BETA.SAM.GOV

5.5 INCORPORATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSALS

6. ATTACHMENTS

1. GENERAL

1.1 NOTICE TO OFFERORS

1.1.1 THIS SOLICITATION IS BEING ISSUED AS A ONE HUNDRED (100) PERCENT SET-ASIDE FOR SMALL BUSINESS. THE NAICS CODE FOR THIS PROCUREMENT IS 236220 AND THE SIZE STANDARD

IS $39.5M.

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.2.1 This solicitation is formatted as a Request for Proposal (RFP) in accordance with the requirements designated by sections of the FAR 15.203. 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. This acquisition will be solicited as a competitively negotiated procurement.

1.2.2 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.

1.3 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT

1.3.1. This acquisition will result in the award of up to six (6) Design-Bid-Build, Indefinite-Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Construction Contracts (MACC), unless the Contracting Officer determines it is in the Government’s best interest to exceed this number, for the Marine Corps Installation East Area of Responsibility for new construction, renovations, alterations, and repairs for general construction projects.

1.3.2. The resulting contracts will provide for new construction, demolition, repair, alteration, and renovation of buildings, systems and infrastructure, primarily located at Marine Corps Installations East (MCI East). The proposed seed project for this solicitation is titled Interior/Exterior Repairs, Bldg. AS124, Marine Corps Air Station New River, and the estimated construction cost for this project is $1,000,000 to $5,000,000. Task orders under the MACC will be design-bid-build. Work will be primarily performed at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune (including the New River Air Station and other related facilities) and Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point. However, it may also be performed at other military and government installations/sites under the Marine Corps Installation East Area of Responsibility.

1.3.3 The seed project will have a contract completion date of 450 days after contract award. The period of performance for this MACC will be a base year and four (4) one-year option periods for a total performance period of five years, or an aggregate maximum value of $249,000,000 for all combined contracts, whichever comes first.

Projects for the MACC have an estimated construction cost between $150,000.00 and $10,000,000.00; however, smaller and larger dollar value projects may be considered at the discretion of the Contracting Officer. The Government guarantees an award amount of $5,000.00 to each successful offeror over the full term of the contract, including option years.

1.3.4 After award of the initial contracts and “seed” project, the successful IDIQ contractors will compete for task orders based on best value, using the tradeoff process or lowest price technically acceptable (to include lowest price). Only the successful IDIQ contractors will compete for task orders. Should an IDIQ contractor with a guaranteed minimum be unable to competitively secure a task order to meet the $5,000 minimum guarantee, the Government reserves the right to negotiate a task order directly with that contractor.

1.3.5 The intent of this contract is that all IDIQ Contractors participate in pre-proposal conferences and site-visits and submit proposals on each task order. Contract awardees will be expected to submit a proposal for all Task Order Requests for Proposal (RFP) received from the Government. However, in the event a MACC awardee is unable to submit a proposal on a particular RFP, the contractor is required to notify, in writing, the Contracting Officer who issued the RFP and the ACO for the basic contract within five (5) working days from receipt of the RFP. A MACC awardee can only elect to withdraw from submitting a proposal on three (3) task order RFPs during the course of each year of the contract (base plus four options). Additional withdrawal requests, in excess of three per contract year, may result in the Government choosing not to exercise remaining option terms.

1.3.6 Each task order will contain project specific evaluation factors that will vary depending on the unique requirements for each task order. Additionally, each task order will cite a specific completion date and associated liquidated damages.

1.3.7 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 e-mail address of the “Contractor’s Representative” that will be responsible for receipt and review of draft performance evaluations prepared by the government in the appropriate system. It is the contractor’s responsibility to keep this contact information current.

2. GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE SEED PROJECT

2.1 The initial project to be awarded as the first task order along with the basic contract will be Interior/Exterior Repairs, Bldg. AS124, Marine Corps Air Station New River, NC. This project will include new finishes, roof and wall panels, roofing, plumbing, HVAC, electrical, doors, windows, masonry work, painting, and incidental related work.

* Solicitation Section 01 00 00 will include the General Requirements for the seed project.

2.2 Pursuant to FAR 52.232-18, Availability of Funds, the Government's obligation under this solicitation, or any task order or contract that might result from the solicitation is entirely subject to, and contingent upon, the availability of appropriated funds. Should the Government be unable to award the seed project, the Government guarantees an award in the amount of $5,000.00 to each successful offeror upon award of the Multiple Award Construction Contracts. This minimum guarantee is over the full term of the contract, including option years. No legal liability on the part of the Government shall arise until funds are made available to the Contracting Officer and a task order or contract is awarded by the Contracting Officer. Any offeror proposing on this solicitation does so at its own cost and with the full knowledge that a task order for the seed project, might not result from this solicitation.

3. 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 contracts; to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contracts to the offerors submitting the proposals determined to represent the best value—the proposals 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 order of importance of the non-price evaluation factors is that the technical factors (Factors 1 through 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-price evaluation factors) are of approximately equal importance 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.

4. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience Factor 2 – Management Approach Factor 3 – Safety Factor 4 – 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.

2. The relative order of importance of the non-price evaluation factors is that the technical factors (Factors 1 through 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-price evaluation factors) are of approximately equal importance to price.

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

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

(a) Price

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Provide one (1) marked original, one (1) marked copy and one (1) electronic copy (CD format) of the solicitation submittal requirements identified below. The electronic copy does not have to include the price for the seed project;

however, the price for the seed project must be included in the original and hard copies. In case of variation, the original hard copy proposal takes precedence over electronic or copies.

(i) Executed SF1442. Offeror shall insert its company name and address in Block #14, telephone number in Block #15, acknowledge all amendments in Block #19 (if applicable), name and title of person authorized to sign in Block #20A, signature in Block #20B, and offer date in Block #20C of the SF1442. In addition, Offeror shall provide its DUNS Number, CAGE code, and Federal Tax ID number with its proposal.

(ii) Completed Proposed Price for the Seed Project.

(iii) Bid bond (SF-24). Offeror shall submit a bid bond (SF-24) in the amount of 20% of total project bid price for the seed project or $3,000,000, whichever amount is less. The bid bond shall be in the name of the offeror identified on the SF1442. In addition, the offeror shall provide a letter from its bonding company confirming that it has a single award bonding capacity of at least $5,000,000 and the ability to bond multiple projects.

(iv) SAM registration. Offeror shall ensure current registration on the SAM Website, www.sam.gov, including Annual Representations and Certifications are complete and updated for this procurement. If a Representation or Certification required by Section 00600 of the RFP is not provided in SAM, include the representation or certification in your price proposal.

(v) FAPIIS Certification. Offeror shall ensure Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) Certification as required by FAR 52.209-7, Information Regarding Responsibility Matters.

(vi) VETS-4212 registration. Offeror shall ensure a current VETS-4212 report has been submitted to the Department of Labor (DOL) website, http://www.dol.gov/vets/vets4212.htm, if the Offeror is required to submit.

An email confirmation of submission can be requested and received by the Offeror from the DOL website and submitted in the price proposal. If the Offeror is not required to submit a report to VETS-4212, include a brief statement and justification explaining why the Offeror is not required to submit a report. Visit the VETS-4212 website for details concerning if your company is required to submit a VETS-4212 report and to request an email confirmation of submission.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PRICE PROPOSAL PACKAGE:

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

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

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

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

3. Description of offeror’s facilities and equipment.

4. Other offeror’s work presently under contract.

Although required to be submitted with offeror’s price proposal, this information will not be evaluated as part of the price proposal. This information forms the basis of your firm’s responsibility determination should your firm be considered for award. Proposal packages from unsuccessful offerors will not be returned to the offeror, but shall be destroyed by the Contracting Officer. No certificate of destruction will be issued.

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

(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.

(b) Non-cost/price Factors:

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

• Text pages 8 ½ x 11 format

• Drawings 11x17 inches and folded down to 8 ½ x 11 inches

• 12-point font, Times New Roman

• One complete electronic copy of the technical proposal factors as a single .pdf searchable file on a CD-ROM (include with the “Original” technical submission). If there are any conflicts between hard copies and/or electronic copies, the “Original” hard copy will govern.

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

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

Submit a minimum of three (3) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrates your experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the projects proposed for this MACC. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as:

Size: A final construction cost of $1,000,000 or greater. At least one (1) project must have a final construction cost of $5,000,000 or greater.

Scope/Complexity: Individual projects shall demonstrate experience with at least one of the following:

• New building construction of a building(s).

• Interior/exterior alteration or renovation of a building(s) that include repairs to multiple building systems and infrastructures.

Note: Projects submitted that only include horizontal, civil site work, single-system work, or demolition will not be considered relevant.

In addition to meeting the above Size and Scope/Complexity requirements, Offerors shall have acted as the prime contractor on all submitted projects. Offeror’s experience performing as subcontractor will not be considered, nor will experience of companies proposed to work as subcontractors on the awarded contract.

Projects submitted for the Offeror must have been completed within the previous five (5) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

A project is defined as a complete 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 one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages). Information beyond this page limit will not be considered.

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, self-performance). If the information provided does not clearly demonstrate how the project meets the above requirements, the project will be deemed not relevant.

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 JV members. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all JV members may be rated lower. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined. For a JV, the offeror shall submit the signed JV agreement. For 8(a) Mentor-Protégé Joint Ventures, the offeror shall submit the signed U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) approved Mentor-Protégé agreement.

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

Experience of proposed subcontractors will not be considered for corporate experience. Likewise, the 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 construction 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 the first five projects. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) will not be considered.

Relevant projects that demonstrate the ability to perform multiple projects simultaneously may be considered more favorably than those who do not have experience performing multiple simultaneous projects.

Offerors who submit relevant projects that demonstrate experience self-performing relevant features of work may receive a higher rating than those who do not demonstrate self-performance.

Offerors whose relevant projects demonstrate a range/variety of new construction, repair, alteration, and renovation of buildings, systems and infrastructure may be considered more favorably.

Factor 2 – Management Approach:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Offeror shall submit a detailed Management Approach describing how the offeror intends to successfully complete the work awarded under this MACC. The narrative plan, at a minimum, shall address the following:

• Describe the company’s labor force, including skill levels; equipment (rented or owned);

• Describe the types of work to be self-performed and the types of work to be subcontracted;

• Provide a general summary of the proposed quality management system and the minimum quality controls to be used to ensure compliance during contract performance;

• Provide historical information on the company’s primary area of trade expertise.

The management approach narrative shall be limited to two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages).

Pages beyond the limit will not be considered.

The assessment of the Offeror’s management approach will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP and determine if the Offeror has the necessary technical capability to perform the subject requirements. This factor will be rated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis.

Offerors that are rated Unacceptable will be found ineligible for award.

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.

NOTE: DART and TCR shall not be submitted for subcontractors

1. DART Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ [CY2019, CY2018, CY2017, CY2016, and CY2015] worth of data (not an overall average). 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.

2. TCR Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ [CY2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, and 2015] worth of data (not an overall average). 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.

3. Technical Approach to Safety: Submit a narrative that addresses the following:

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.

4. 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.

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. DART 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 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. 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. The Technical Approach to Safety Narrative. To determine the degree to which the Offeror:

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.

4. 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.

Factor 4 - Past Performance:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: 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 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, Emily Walton, via email at emily.walton@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.

Performance award or additional information submitted will not be considered.

Offerors are highly encouraged to address problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience. Offerors are also highly encouraged to address any adverse past performance issues. Explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) in total.

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), 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 B.

(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:

- 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

5. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

5.1 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE AND SITE VISIT

See Section 01 00 00 – General Requirements Requirements – General Requirements, Site Visit for all information regarding the seed project site visit.

5.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

In response to this request for proposal, the complete proposal shall include both the Price Proposal and the Non- Cost/Price Factors Proposal, submitted in accordance with the above Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor and as follows:

5.2.1 Price Proposal and Non-Cost/Price Factors Proposal - The Price Proposal and the Non-Cost/Price Factors Proposal shall be submitted in separate 3-ring binders. All pages shall be numbered and binders shall be appropriately tabbed, conforming to the proposal submittal requirements’ structure for each evaluation factor. Price and Non-Cost/Price Factors proposals must be submitted in sealed envelopes or boxes. Any pricing information included in the Non-Cost/Price Factors proposal will not be considered. Similarly, any Non-Cost/Price information included in the Price Proposal will not be considered. Proposal shall be labeled “PRICE PROPOSAL OR NON-

COST/PRICE FACTORS PROPOSAL FOR RFP N4008521R1215, GENERAL MACC FOR THE MCI EAST

AOR, ATTN: JOHN BISHOP; DO NOT OPEN IN MAIL ROOM”.

5.2.2 The offeror’s proposal must include all data and information required and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The offeror shall be compliant with the requirements as stated herein, for non-conformance may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

5.2.3 All proposals shall be provided via electronic submission to:

John Bishop, Contract Specialist, at john.p.bishop1@navy.mil via DOD Safe https://safe.apps.mil/

Hard copy proposal may be sent via express mail carriers to the following address:

Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Mid-Atlantic

ACQ21

9324 Virginia Avenue Building Z-140, Room 225 Norfolk, Virginia 23511 Attn: John Bishop

Hard copy proposals shall be received no later than two (2) business days after the electronic proposal due date.

Contractors shall send their Electronic Proposal submission to John Bishop at john.p.bishop1@navy.mil through the DOD Safe Site (safe.apps.mil). Further guidance is provided below for submission of hard copy submissions.

The contractor shall send the contract specialist, John Bishop, the contractor’s email address who will be receiving the Drop-Off invitation to upload proposals to the DOD Safe Site no later than 4 January 2021 by 1400, unless that date and time are changed via Solicitation Amendment.

The Contract Specialist, John Bishop, will “Request a Drop-Off” through DoD SAFE utilizing the provided offeror’s point of contact email address. The recipient will receive an automated email containing the information for the request and instructions for uploading. If you do not receive an email containing drop off instructions , please contact the Contract Specialist, John Bishop. Only the identified POCs will be able to drop-off proposals or proposal revisions in DOD SAFE. Failure to provide accurate POC information will preclude the offeror from using DoD SAFE. Note: up to two email addresses shall be provided per Offeror. If an Offeror requires separate DoD SAFE drop off instructions for the purpose of submitting financial information in accordance with the Price submission instructions, a maximum of two additional email addresses may be provided per Offeror.

To submit the proposal, the offeror will utilize the link provided in the automated email to take you to DoD SAFE at https://safe.apps.mil. The system will allow for inclusion of a short note to the Recipient and then the offeror will click to add files or drag and drop them. Click “Drop-Off Files” to send the files to the recipient. You should receive a notification on the site “Drop-Off Completed” “Your files have been sent successfully.” Please keep this for your records. The file(s) are uploaded and an email will be sent to the recipient notifying them of the “drop-off”.

[Additional details can be viewed in the DoD SAFE User Guide available at https://safe.apps.mil]. Note that the submission of any proposal must be completed no later than the due date and time, unless the date and time are changed via Solicitation Amendment, using the link sent by the contract specialist.

The DoD SAFE system will record the date and time of package submittal. The date and time of package submittal recorded in DoD SAFE shall govern the timeliness of any proposal submission.

Offerors shall allow adequate time to upload files which may be slower for non-DoD users and to avoid other technical difficulties that may be encountered. Offerors are also responsible for submitting files in the format specified and consistent with requirements stated elsewhere in this solicitation. Files that cannot be opened, or are otherwise missing the required content are the responsibility of offerors. The maximum file size of a package is 8 GB. Up to 25 packages may be uploaded per link.

It is the sole responsibility of the Offeror to obtain the RFP files, along with any amendments, from Opportunities (www.beta.sam.gov).

5.2.4 Hand Carried Proposals

All proposals shall be mailed, hand carried proposals will not be accepted.

5.2.5 PROPOSALS SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO THIS REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL MUST BE RECEIVED NO LATER THAN THE DATE AND TIME SPECIFIED IN BLOCK 13A OF THE SF1442. Proposals not received by the time and date specified shall be treated in accordance with FAR 52.215-1 “Instruction to Offerors - Competitive Acquisitions” and may be rejected.

5.3 PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPIS)

All inquiries must be submitted in writing and received by the Contract Specialist fourteen calendar days prior to the solicitation closing date in order to permit adequate time to reply to the inquiry. There is no guarantee that PPI’s submitted after the cut-off date will be answered before the solicitation closes. Submit all questions to john.p.bishop1@navy.mil. Use of the PPI Log template is required. The PPI Log Template (Attachment C) can be found on the Beta.SAM.gov website under the Additional Documents section.

5.4 BETA.SAM.GOV

Amendments will be posted directly to Beta.SAM.gov. The drawings and specifications will be posted on Beta SAM under the Attachments section of this RFP. Additionally, other postings will be made to Beta SAM, such as the pre-proposal inquires (PPI) log, revised drawings, etc. It is recommended contractors check Beta SAM periodically to see if additional postings have been made. It is the contractor’s responsibility to check Beta SAM for all postings.

5.5 INCORPORATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

The Contractor’s technical proposal, including revisions and amendments, made prior to contract award and a copy of which is in the possession of both parties, will be incorporated into this contract upon award by reference with the same force and effect as if set forth in full text. All contractor personnel shall meet or exceed the qualification standards, experience levels and trade background set forth in the technical proposal. In the event of an inconsistency between the provisions of this contract and the technical proposal, the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: (i) the contract (excluding the technical proposal), and then (ii) the technical proposal.

6. ATTACHMENTS

Attachment A – Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet Attachment B – Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment C – PPI Log Template

(End of Summary of Changes)

SOLICITATION NO. N40085‐21‐R‐1215

PROJECT TITLE/LOCATION: MCI East AOR MACC

PREAWARD INQUIRY FORM (TEMPLATE)

Page Section Para.

7 12/4/2020 pg 59 of 59

01 00

4 Due to the holidays and activity of shipping companies, could there be an option for an emailed proposal and the hard copy to be sent out after.

See Amendment 0002 2

31 12/8/2020 11 (i) Factor 3 ‐ Safety does not require the submission of an EMR.

Is this an oversight for the EMR requirement.

No, this is correct. 2

32 12/8/2020 11 (i) Factor 3 indicate that the Total Case Rate (TCR) is required to be submitted. In the past this has been called the Total

Recordable Rate (TRC). Are these one and the same?

Correct. 2

35 12/6/2020 The RFP requires that proposal be delivered either by mail or express mail carrier. Can the RFP be revised to permit hand delivery?

See Amendment 0002 2

42 12/9/2020 RFP

pp. 14‐

15 of

5.2

Propos al

Submis sion

Instruct ions 5.2 Proposal

Submission

Instructions

Will the government allow offerors to submit proposals via email, with hard copies to follow via mail within 24‐48 hours?

This would allow the Navy to receive the electronic and hard copies it seeks; but in light of COVID restrictions as well as preparation of proposals over the holiday season, this would also afford offerors a simplified submission process and more time to prepare and submit proposals.

See Amendment 0002 2

44 12/9/2020 15 5.2.3 Due to on‐going concerns with Covid lockowns and work from home mandates and the proximity to new years day, would an online submission be considered for this proposal?

See Amendment 0002 2

REFERENCE

Question No. QUESTION GOVERNMENT RESPONSEDate Received

Posted on

Amend No.

July 2011