Amendment 7.pdf

ACQR5959851

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

N4008523R2591 Custodial Services at NSA Mechanicsburg, PA

This amendment is issued to revise Section M, provide answ ers to pre-proposal inquiries, and incorporate revised Section J attachments.

The proposal due date of of 7/17/23 is extended to 7/20/23. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 19

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 13-Jul-2023

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 N4008523R2591

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

31-May-2023

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 X is extended, 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

13-Jul-2023

CODE

NAVFACSYSCOM MID-ATLANTIC

CONTRACTING 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:

N4008523R2591

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:

RESPONSES TO PPIS

N4008523R2591 Custodial Services at NSA, Mechanicsburg, PA Amendment 0007- Questions and Answers

Question:

1. Why does the Pricing for Option Year 3 refer to the language below for “exhaust hood and duct cleaning recurring work” PROVIDE PRICES FOR CUSTODIAL AND

EXHAUST HOOD AND DUCT SERVICES - FIRECURRING WORK IN

ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION C, SPEC ITEM 3ELINs D001 through D144

Answer:

There is no cleaning requirement for exhaust hood and associated duct work. Please see the revised attachment J-0200000-08, which is attached separately.

Question:

2. Regarding J -503010-11, Hand sanitizers, confirm we are replacing cartridges not replacing the dispensing units.

Answer:

Cartridges are to be replaced.

Question

3. Are the wages and benefits provided in the WD +CBA the current wages and benefits? Is this CBA still in effect?

Answer:

Yes

Question:

4. Confirm that contractor will be able to have supply deliveries made to the contractor trailer area on base. Confirm we can rent and install a storage container at that location.

Answer:

The awardee can provide their own work trailer, where supplies can be delivered.

Question:

5. Is there a count of the number of showers and shower rooms? It is not listed in 1503010- 12 units and flooring types.

Please refer to the revised attachment J-1503010-12, which is attached separately. Count Approx: 40 shower stalls across the installation in various locations/buildings.

Question

6. Are there any additional security clearances required beyond what is stated in page 12-14, 2.8.3, 2.8.4, and 2.8.7?

No. Areas requiring a clearance, staff will be escorted.

7. In 1503010-C+custodial specs, confirm that 3.1.5 does not refer to snow removal. And that snow removal if required would be billed separately under Non-Reoccurring Line A709 “Inclement Weather Entrance Way Cleaning”.

Answer:

There is no requirement for snow removal on this contract. This ELIN is designed to keep entrance ways to building clear of water, snow or ice that gets tracked in. Snow removal intension is to clear doorways or walkways where snow is potentially tracked into buildings.

Question:

8. For the Non-Reoccurring Pricing Line A706 and A707 Interior and Exterior Window Cleaning. Is this over and above the Window Cleaning 2XYear called for in the spec? Or is this how the 2XY Window Cleaning is billed?

Answer:

Yes, that would be in addition to the regular scheduled window cleaning of the recurring portion of the contract. Additional window cleaning, if needed, will be ordered by Task Order or FedMall.

Question:

9. In J -2000000-8 the total SF in the ELINS Base Period Square Footage does not equal the Total Square Footage in J-1503010. Why is there a difference?

Please see the revised attachments J-0200000-08 and J-1503010-09 attached separately.

10. Has the scope of work changed since the previous contract? If so, please provide any changes in square footage, number of buildings, and frequencies.

Yes. Comparisons are not provided. Offerors are to submit proposals based on the requirements of this RFP, including amendments.

Question:

11. Is there an updated Collective Bargaining Agreement for this contract?

Answer:

Please see the revised CBA attachment WD CBA-2023-247-Amdmt 7, which is attached separately.

12. Is this proposal to be submitted electronically as well as by mail?

Please refer to Section B, B.23 Proposal Delivery: Submitting Your Proposal Proposals should be sent via a commercial carrier, such as Federal Express and shall be addressed to:

NAVFAC MIDLANT

Attn: Phylysha Cherry 9324 Virginia Avenue Building Z-140, Room 216 Norfolk, Virginia 23511

Proposals that are hand carried or mailed via United States Post office will NOT be accepted.

Please also refer to Section L. L.5 Content of Proposal:

Non-cost/price Factors: Offeror shall submit three (3) hard copies and one (1) CDROM

Price: Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Offerors shall submit one (1) hard copy and one (1) CD-ROM

13. Are services required 7 days a week for any other buildings aside from the fitness center?

Answer:

No. Fitness center does not get servicing on the weekends. Only Monday-Friday.

Question:

14. What is the current contract personnel number?

The requested information is unvailable.

15. How many senior employees are at each location and how long they have each been employed?

Please refer to the seniority list, which is attached separately.

16. What is the current estimated supply cost, including paper products and chemicals?

The requested information is unavailable.

Question:

17. Can you give us the current monthly contract amounts for each location?

Answer:

The requested information is unavailable.

18. Can you give us an estimate of the daily population for each facility?

19. Who is the incumbent contractor?

Melgar Facility Maintenance LLC

Question:

20. Since the employees assigned for this project are unionized, please provide us with an updated seniority list.

Please refer to the seniority list, which is attached separately.

Question:

21. Rates of pay provided with the bid documents are for this period until November 2023.

Please provide us with an updated wage rate.

Wage rates provided are current to date until the CBA is revised.

22. Please clarify how the billing process will be made. Will we bill only one entity, the NSA

Mechanicsburg, or will we send separate invoices to various tenants?

Answer:

Normal procedure is to submit one invoice at the end of the month that has all the cost included. Specifics will be provided to the awardee.

23. Please confirm the sq. ft for recurring tab for:

1)BSC on row 51: Options period is "204,510""" and Base Period is ""216,510"".

2) For HQ Clin A029/B029: Option period is """"128,468"""" and Base is """"97,269"""". Also, Clin A032/B032 sq ft for Base is ""31,200"" and Option is ""0"".

Which of the sq ft are correct?

24. a. In the "J-0200000-08+KTR+ELIN+Bid+Sheet_UPDATED"document sq ft differs from the """"Sq ft by Client Master updated"""" file. Please confirm which file sq ft are correct.

b. Also, in ""Sq ft by Client Master updated"" which tab to refer for sq ft: the ""Common Output"" or ""Sq ft by customer"" or ""individual client"" tab; as some of 'the sq ft differs in each tab."""

Answer:

Please see the revised attachments J-0200000-08 and J-1503010-09 attached separately.

Question:

25. In all the Recurring tab the ELINs is mentioned as A001 - A144, although it is till A133 and Non - Recurring tab it is mentioned as A700 - A725, although it is till A730. Please confirm which one is correct.

Please see the revised ELIN attachment J-0200000-08, which is attached separately.

Question:

26. In "J-0200000-08+KTR+ELIN+Bid+Sheet_UPDATED", for Base Recurring tab the clent FLC "bldg #212" on row 162 doesn't match with the "Sq ft by client master file".

27. Please provide fixtures and drinking fountain quantity by Client.

Approximately 250 throughout the installation. Please refer to the revised attachment J- 1503010-12, which is attached separately

28. Please provide the seniority list with number of hours worked.

The information available is provided as attachment Mechanicsburg Seniority-Amdmt 0007, which is attached separately.

29. Is there any subcontractor at the facility? If so please provide us with the names?

No

Question:

30. Are there changes to the Scope of Work in this solicitation in comparison the current contract with the incumbent contractor?

Yes. Comparisons are not provided. Offerors are to submit proposals based on the requirements of this RFP, including amendments.

Question:

31. Please provide the incumbent contract number and period of performance (Base and Option Years). Also, the most recent annual price invoiced and paid for the most recent 12 month contract period.

Answer:

Contract # N4008518D8712 was awarded with a of POP 01 April 2018 through 31 March 2023. The Government is not able to release information in regard to the most recent annual price invoiced and paid for the most recent 12 month contract period.

Question:

32. Offeror shall submit a separate OSHA 300A form.

If submitting as partnership or joint venture, do we need to submit form for both company or only prime?

Answer:

Please refer to revised, Section M- Evaluation Factors for Award, M.2. Evaluation Factors, (3) Factor 3, Safety, incorporated by this amendment.

Questions:

33. For Corporate Experience, if submitting as joint venture, do we need to submit only experiences completed as Joint Venture or we can also submit individual entity experiences?

Please refer to solicitation N4008523R2591, Section M- Evaluation Factors for Award, M.2 Evaluation Factors, (2) Factor 2, Corporate Experience: If the offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. However, shared Joint Venture experience of the Offeror is not required in order to meet the requirements of the Factor. If the Offeror is submitting experience for individual JV partners in which the company was a partner in a different Joint Venture entity, the Offeror must specifically address what portion of the work under the submitted project was performed by the JV partner offering on this contract and demonstrate that the work meets the Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above, or the project will not be considered relevant. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

34. With respect to WD-CBA 2023-247, please provide the complete CBA, which includes terms and conditions that have labor cost implications. Also, please confirm that the Supplemental Agreement effective November 1, 2022 is the latest revision to the CBA.

The information available is provided as attachment WD CBA-2023-247-Amdmt 7, which is attached separately.

35. Please provide the average number of personnel working at NSA Mechanicsburg.

Question:

36. There appear to be discrepancies in square footage between the recurring ELINS, and J- 1503010-09 (Sq. Ft.by Customer, and the Common Output Levels worksheets). In particular, the following:

• ELIN A024 COL3 AM3 lists 216,510 sf. On the Sq. Ft. by Customer, the area is

204,502 sf.

• ELINS A029 to A035 identify Prestige and COL3 Base requirements (total 128,469 sf), whereas the Customer worksheet has only Prestige requirements (total 117,134 sf).

• Building 14 COL is different in the ELINs from the Customer worksheet.

37. Regarding COL 2, please direct me to where the output levels are defined in the solicitation documentation?

COL Level 2 has been removed as an option of service. Any mentions of COL Level 2, has the output level of Prestige service. Please see the revised attachments J-0200000-08 and J-1503010-09 attached separately.

38. Is it possible to obtain a seniority list to accurately account for vacation time owed to each employee?

The information available is provided as attachment Mechanicsburg Seniority-Amdmt 0007, which is attached separately.

39. Regarding the Janitorial Service Matrix & Space Utilization chart document J-1503010- 03, can you define or direct me to a document that defines the lettering in the matrix ?

Please refer to attachment J-1503010-04, COL Level Matrix Data Sheet included in the package for lettering definitions.

Question:

40. Regarding Attachment J-02000000-08 Exhibit Line Item #'s (Recurring Work) Example, The total SQFT for SUP HQ Total 128,469 however in the Sqft by Client master SUP HQ total SQFT is 148,334, Please let me know which building rooms should be removed to match the price sheet doc J020000000-08.

Answer:

Please see the revised attachments J-0200000-08 and J-1503010-09 attached separately.

Question:

41. Please Clarify the meaning of W4(exponent) in the Common output level standards (does it mean four times per week ?) or every four weeks?

Weekly. Please refer to note four (4) in the matrix. This deals with the restocking and cleaning of coffee messes.

42. Please take a look at the attached documents highlighting a discrepancy with the updated sqft on attachment J02000000-08 Exhibit A Line Item Numbers, particularly client NAVSUP WSS total SQFT =306,291 Vs. Attachment J COL Output by client NAVSUP WSS Sqft =268,367 Sqft; this significant amount of space variance will enormously impact contractor pricing.

43. Question:

Please clarify the unit of measure in the non-recurring service no. A716.

Please see the revised attachment J-0200000-08, which is attached separately.

44. Question:

Non-recurring items A717 and A719 and non-recurring items A718 and A720 are identically the same. Is this a mistake or is there something else that we are missing?

Answer:

These are not the same. Please refer attachment J-0200000-08, column c, Short Description:

A717 Interior Trash Disposal (Emptying recyclable waste Containers weekly) A718 Empty recyclable Exterior Trash Cans weekly A719 Interior Trash Disposal (Emptying recyclable waste Containers daily) A720 Empty recyclable Exterior Trash Cans daily

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

BASIS 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 lowest priced, technically acceptable offer.

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 LPTA process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition because the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price.

4. 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.

5. An overall non-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-price factors proposal being rated “UNACCEPTABLE” unless corrected through discussions. An overall non-price factors rating of “UNACCEPTABLE” makes a proposal ineligible for award.

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

M.2 Evaluation Factors:

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

Offeror MUST be evaluated as technically ACCEPTABLE under Factors 1, 2, 3, and 4 in order to be considered technically acceptable overall. Otherwise, the offeror will be ineligible for award.

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.

NOTE: The non-cost/price proposal shall include submittals for each non-cost/price factor as specified below.

(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.

Otherwise, the proposal will be deemed Unacceptable.

a. Phase-In Transition Plan. Clearly 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/staffing, and responsibilities regarding employees at all levels to ensure fully compliant contract performance on the start date of the performance period. The schedule of key events shall include addressing the Section F Deliverables submission requirements.

b. Workforce Managment. The offeror should clearly:

1. Describethe 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. Offerors shall clearly state if it will self-perform 100% of the work as the prime.

Additionally, the offeror must meet requirements of FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting, and submit Attachment 0200000-11 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) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant projects demonstrating prime contractor experience of the Offeror and/or the Offeror’s corporate affiliate(s) that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the work requirements specified in the solicitation. Experience of the Offeror or its corporate affiliate(s) as a subcontractor will not be considered.

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

Size: A custodial service contract with a yearly value of at least $1,300,000.00 for recurring services. Indefinite Quantity / Indefinite Delivery values for infrequent work will not be considered similar in size. If an Offeror intends to submit work completed or issued off an Indefinite Quantity/Indefinite Delivery (IDIQ) contract as a qualifying Project, the Offeror is limited to submitting the IDIQ contract itself. The board will not consider or evaluate any task orders whether submitted individually or collectively.

Scope: Offeror must have provided all labor, management, supervision, tools, materials, equipment to provide Custodial Services such as space cleaning, emptying waste and recycling containers, the cleaning of: windows, including blinds, entrances, interior/exterior glass surfaces, drinking fountains, floor care, sweeping and dust mopping, vacuuming carpets and rugs, cleaning walk-off mats, spray cleaning and buffing, damp mopping, stripping, coating and buffing, carpet and rug deep cleaning, restroom servicing/ cleaning, group shower/locker room cleaning, exercise area and gym servicing, building perimeter services, and other services as defined by the

RFP.

Complexity: Offeror must have been responsible for responding simultaneously to requirements for several customers or installations.

The attached Corporate Experience Form (Attachment J-0200000) 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 nor will the Government consider information submitted via any other medium. Individual blocks on this form nor will the Government 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 five 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.) If the dates of the project or completion date do not clearly demonstrate that the project meets the above requirements, the Government may deem the project not relevant.

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 size, scope, and complexity as defined above, or the Government may deem the project not relevant.

If the offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. However, shared Joint Venture experience of the Offeror is not required in order to meet the requirements of the Factor. If the Offeror is submitting experience for individual JV partners in which the company was a partner in a different Joint Venture entity, the Offeror must specifically address what portion of the work under the submitted project was performed by the JV partner offering on this contract and demonstrate that the work meets the Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above, or the project will not be considered relevant. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

Offerors proposing as a JV shall submit a signed JV agreement. For Mentor-Protégé Joint Ventures, the offeror shall submit the signed and U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) approved Mentor-Protégé agreement.

If an Offeror is utilizing the prime contractor experience of a corporate affiliate(s) (e.g., subsidiaries, sister companies, predecessor companies, and parent companies) the proposal shall include a teaming agreement signed by the Offeror and the corporate affiliate(s) or letter of commitment signed by the corporate affiliate(s) on the corporate affiliate(s’)’s letterhead. In order for the experience to be considered, the Offeror is also required to clearly demonstrate that the corporate affiliate(s) will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract by identifying the personnel or resources from the corporate affiliate(s) that will be dedicated to the contract.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The assessment of the Offeror’s relevant corporate experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP as defined above. The minimum standard for this Factor has been met when the offeror or the Offeror’s small business first-tier subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement has demonstrated adequate experience by submitting at least one relevant project of similar size, scope, and complexity as defined above on which it was the prime contractor.

Projects completed by the offeror, or, if permitted as discussed above, its corporate affiliates (e.g., subsidiaries, sister companies, and parent companies) in any capacity other than as a prime contractor will be considered Not Relevant.

(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 below. For a partnership or joint venture, the Offeror shall submit separate DART rates, TCR, and OSHA 300A 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 withinthis 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’ worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no DART rate, for any year, the offeror must affirmatively state so and explain why.

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) TCR Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ worth of data (not an overall avaerage). If the Offeror has no TCR rate, for any year, the offeror must affirmatively state so and explain why.

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: Submit a narrative that addresses the following:

a. Describe the Offeror’s approach to implementing and executing a Safety Manageme t

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

b. Describe the evaluation process used to sleect potential subcontrators.

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 fight 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 subcontractor. To meet the minimum requirements, the Offeror must demonstrate the following:

1. DART rates at or below 2.99

2. TCR Rates at or below 4.49

NOTE: If the Offeror’s rates exceed the established levels above for any of the five years, it may result in a deficiency unless the Offeror provides a detailed explanation of the incident(s) that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

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

4. Technical Approach to Safety

a. Offeror describes its 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. Offeror describes a methofical process of evaluation subcontractor’s safety performance in their selection process.

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

5. The Goverment reserves the right tio 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 or the Offeror’s small business first-tier subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement 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.

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 (Attachment J-0200000-10), 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, Ms. Phylysha Cherry, via email at phylysha.cherry@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 5 such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

Sources of Past Performance Information for evaluation are as follows:

- Past performance information provided by the offeror, as solicited;

- Past performance information obtained from questionnaires tailored to the circumstances of the acquisition; and

- Past performance information obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; the Defense Contract Management Agency; and interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials.

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 J-0200000-10.

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

-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

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

(a) Price:

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Offeror shall submit one (1) hard copy and one CD-ROM 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-0200000-08) in Excel Format. Pricing shall be rounded to only three decimal places.

• Where Exhibit Line Items contain a quantity of zero, unit pricing must still be provided in the event future quantities may be added (if applicable).

• Contractor Proposal Certification (See Section L, Paragraph 1)

• Current copy of Representations and Certifications and proof of Active status registration in

System of Award management (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.

• Responsibility Determination information (see below).

In the event of a discrepancy between the hard copy and CD-ROM, the CD-ROM electronic copy of proposal will govern. Additionally, the hard copy proposal shall match the electronic version of the proposal.

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.

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 faciltites and equipment.

4. Other offero’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 is the basis of your firm’s responsibility determination should your firm be considered for award.

(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 perfomed 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 Recurring and Non-Recurring Exhibit Line items.

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

(End of Summary of Changes)