24R2661 Amendment 0001.pdf

ACQR6041294

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

N4008524R2661 FACILITY INVESTMENT FOR REGIONAL MAINTENANCE OF GREASE TRAP SERVICES FOR THE HAMPTON ROADS AREA

OF RESPONSIBILITY (AOR).

This amendment is issued to provide a revised Section J, J-0200000-11 Corporate Experience Data Sheet and Section M, Basis for Aw ard.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 11

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 24-Oct-2024

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 N4008524R2661

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

09-Oct-2024

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

24-Oct-2024

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:

N4008524R2661

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

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. 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.

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 non-price 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 non-price 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 non-price and price) for the purpose of establishing a competitive range.

4. 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.

M.2 Evaluation Factors:

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

Factor 1 - Technical/Management Approach 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 technical acceptable overall.

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.

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

(a) Price:

(1) Price Submittal Requirements: The offeror shall submit one (1) electronic copy marked original via PIEE to including all the of the solicitation submittal requirements identified below. See Section B.22 of this RFP for more information about submitting proposals via PIEE Solicitations. In addition, non- price/technical information included in the price proposal will not be considered, likewise, price information included in the non-price/technical proposal will not be considered. All required proposal documents shall be submitted in accordance with FAR 15.208.)

- Include a cover page with Solicitation Number, Solicitation Title, Prime Contractor Name, Address, Phone Number, Fax Number, Unique Entity ID, Cage Code and Point of Contact (POC) with their phone number and email address;

- Signed Solicitation, Offer and Award Forms (SF 33), including Section B (CLINs 0001 through 0012), with all amendments acknowledged;

- Attachment J-0200000-09 (Exhibits A through F). Pricing shall only go two decimal places. This includes Offerors ensuring the Excel pricing cells do not include additional, hidden decimal places. The proposal shall include this attachment as a Microsoft Excel File;

If applicable, where Exhibit Line Items/sub Exhibit Line Items contain a quantity of zero or a blank quantity, unit pricing shall be provided in the event future quantities are added;

- The Unique Entity ID and/or CAGE for all the Offeror's team members (e.g. Partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the proposal; and

- Completed Contractor Proposal Certification (See Section L, Paragraph 1)

- 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 K of the RFP is not provided in SAM, include the representation or certification in your price proposal.

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

- VETS-4212 registration. Confirmation of filing of Veterans' Employment and Training (VETS-4212) for the 2023 filing cycle, if the Offeror is required to submit. 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. 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. Provide name of financial institution, point of contact, telephone number, and email address. Provide a signed statement of release giving the reference permission to release the information to the Navy.

2. 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).

3. 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.

4. Description of offeror's facilities and equipment.

5. Other offeror's work presently under contract.

Offerors are not required to submit financial information as detailed in the price submission instructions via PIEE Solicitation Module. Should the Offeror choose not to submit the above detailed Responsibility Determination Information via PIEE Solicitation Module, it shall be submitted via email to the Government's point of contact identified in Factor 4, Past Performance.

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 performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

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

(ii) Comparison of proposed prices with the IGCE.

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

(iv) Comparison of market survey results.

Proposals will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness as follows:

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

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

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

(b) Non-cost/price Factors:

Factor 1, Technical/Management Approach:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The offeror shall submit a narrative response that clearly demonstrates its understanding of and approach to accomplishing the complexity and magnitude of service requirements set forth in the performance objectives and standards of the Performance Work Statement. At a minimum, each of the topics below shall be included in the narrative, tabbed in the non-price/cost proposal, and discussed separately.

a. Phase-In Transition Plan. The phase-in transition period is 30 calendar days, per F.2 of the RFP. Describe what you will do to "start-up" performance in accordance with the contract requirements:

(1) Include a schedule of phase-in key events that starts on the first day of the transition period and goes to the 30th In addition to the key events, your schedule shall address the Section F Deliverables submission requirements.

(2) Provide a phase-in transition plan narrative that includes, but is not limited to:

a. The roles and responsibilities of personnel involved in the phase-in period;

b. Your plan to complete personnel/staffing actions; and

c. Your plan to have on-hand adequate equipment/material to begin services on the start date of the period of performance.

Note: If an offeror is the incumbent, that offeror shall tailor their Phase-in Transition Plan to address how they will successfully continue services while meeting new contract requirements.

b. Workforce Management. For each of the following, clearly:

(1) Describe the relationship between overall management (corporate and on-site), key personnel, administration, and subcontractors. Your description shall include the lines of management authority, supervision, span of control, and accountability. Note: Proposed key personnel shall be compliant with Section C, Annex 0200000, Management and Administration, Spec Item 2.7.1. Key Personnel and its Sub-annexes.

(2) Describe your plan to recruit and maintain a qualified workforce.

(3) Describe your plan to manage competing priorities, including surges, at various locations in this contract.

(4) Describe the work to be performed as the prime contractor (self-performed) as well as work to be performed by each subcontractor proposed. Offerors are advised they will be responsible for being compliant with FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting, during contract performance.

c. Quality Management. Provide a summary of your "Quality Management System" (QMS). Your summary shall be no more than six (6) single-sided pages (or three (3) double-sided pages). Your summary shall address the practices and resources you will use to ensure full compliance with all Performance Objectives and Performance Standards as described in Section C, Annex 0200000 - Management and Administration. Additionally, your summary shall address your plan to audit, surveil, and inspect work performance and your strategy for taking corrective action when necessary.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

a. The Technical/Management Approach factor shall be evaluated based whether the proposal demonstrates an acceptable understanding of the performance objectives and standards of the Performance Work Statement and adequately addresses a phase-in plan, workforce management, and quality management.

Factor 2, Corporate Experience:

The Offeror shall submit the following information.

Submit a minimum of one (1) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant contracts 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 as defined below. Experience of the Offeror or its corporate affiliate(s) as a subcontractor will not be considered. Contracts submitted in excess of the maximum will not be considered.

Additionally, the Government will consider only the first five projects if more than five are submitted.

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

Size: A contract with a yearly value of at least $250,000.00 for recurring services.

Scope: Offeror must have provided labor, supervision, tools, materials, and equipment required to provide grease trap maintenance services as described in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

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

The attached Corporate Experience Data Sheet (Attachment J-0200000-11) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit contract information. 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 may be expanded; however, total length for each Corporate Experience Data Sheet shall not exceed three (3) single-sided pages (or one double-sided page and one (1) single-sided page). Information submitted on pages exceeding the limit will not be considered.

Contracts submitted for the Offeror shall be ongoing (having been performed for a period of at least one year from the date of issuance of this solicitation) or completed within the past five (5) years of the date of issuance of this solicitation. Contracts with periods of performance beyond one year shall be clearly defined as multi-year contracts or as base contracts with option periods. If the contract has option periods, state which contract period is in progress (e.g. base, 1st option, etc.) If the Corporate Experience Data Sheet does not clearly demonstrate that the contract meets the above requirements, the Government may deem the contract Not Relevant.

For all submitted contracts, the description of the contract shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the requirements of this RFP as it relates to Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above, or the Government may consider the contract not relevant. If an Offeror intends to submit recurring work completed/issued off an Indefinite Quantity/Indefinite Delivery (IDIQ) contract as a qualifying contract, the Offeror is limited to submitting the IDIQ contract itself. The Government will not consider or evaluate any task orders whether submitted individually or collectively.

In accordance with 13 CFR 125.2(g), small business Offerors may utilize the prime contractor experience of a small business first-tier subcontractor(s) to demonstrate experience under this evaluation factor if that small business Offeror cannot independently satisfy the experience requirement as defined above. In order to utilize the experience of a small business first-tier subcontractor(s), the offeror must specifically identify the proposed small business first tier contractor(s) in its proposal in accordance with this Factor. The Offeror or, if a small business Offeror, its small business first-tier subcontractor, shall have been the prime contractor on all submitted contracts. The Government notes that 13 CFR 125.2(g) is specific to only small business Offerors and named small business first-tier subcontractors. As such, the small business Offeror is not permitted to use the experience of a large business subcontractor or large business corporate affiliate in place of its own experience if the small business Offeror cannot independently satisfy the experience requirement as defined above.

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant experience should be submitted for contracts completed by the JV entity. If the JV does not have shared experience, contracts may be submitted for each JV member. However, shared JV 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 JV entity, the Offeror must specifically address what portion of the work under the submitted contract 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 contract will not be considered Relevant. Likewise, offerors that are not submitting as a JV may submit a contract where it performed as a JV with another entity, but must clearly demonstrate how it worked on that contract met Size, Scope and Complexity, as defined above. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) contracts combined.

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

Offerors that are not submitting as a JV may submit a contract where it performed as a JV with another entity, but must clearly demonstrate how it works on that contract met Size, Scope and Complexity, as define above.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent /LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF33), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies will have involvement in the performance of the contract in order for the experience information of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies to be considered. The proposal shall state specific commitments of technical resources (e.g., personnel, management, equipment) that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies shall commit to the performance of this contract. In particular, the proposal shall clearly state the specific commitments of resources of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member that will be located at the worksites and company offices in the city/area of the project. The proposal shall also describe specific roles of the affiliate/subsidiary/ parent/LLC/LTD member companies in terms of the work it will either self-perform or manage on behalf of the Offeror in performance of the contract.

Vague commitments to support are likely insufficient; rather, they must demonstrate intent/manner of actual performance on the contract action being solicited.

The Offeror shall submit a signed copy of partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team (e.g., partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.) whose contracts are submitted to demonstrate relevant experience. The Government will not consider any contract submitted for Factor 2 if it was performed by a firm other than the Offeror and there is no supporting partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment.

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 has demonstrated adequate experience by submitting at least one relevant contract of similar Size, Scope and Complexity, as defined above, on which the Offeror or its corporate affiliate was the prime contractor. The at least one relevant contract shall also meet the Solicitation Submittal Requirements of this Factor as defined above.

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

A Deficiency will be assigned to any Offeror that does not meet the minimum requirements of at least one (1) relevant contract as defined above and as such will receive a rating of UNACCEPTABLE. An Offeror with an UNACCEPTABLE rating in any Factor will not be eligible for award.

Factor 3, Safety:

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 and TCR rates 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' 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.

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 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.

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

3. Technical Approach for Safety: The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to six (6) single-sided pages or three (3) double-sided pages and shall 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).

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 evaluation will collectively consider the following:

The Government is seeking to determine that the Offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors.

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 (5) previous complete calendar years, it may result in a Deficiency. For any rate that exceeds the minimum requirements above, the Offeror is required to provide a detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

Missing data without an explanation is considered a Deficiency.

3. Technical Approach to Safety

a. Offeror 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. Offeror describes a methodical process of evaluating 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.

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:

For contracts submitted for Factor 2, Corporate Experience:

a. IF CPARS EVALUATIONS ARE AVAILABLE, THEY SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSAL. The Offeror shall submit all CPARS evaluations available for that contract, not just the most recent.

b. IF THERE ARE NOT CPARS EVALUATIONS, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in this solicitation is provided for the Offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each Factor 2, Corporate Experience, contract. 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 contract(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment J-0200000-13), which will provide contract and client information for the respective contract(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, Asia Bracey, via email at asia.c.bracey.civ@us.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.

AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN CPARS EVALATIONS ARE AVAILABLE.

The Offeror may include performance recognition documents received within the last five (5) years (from the date of issuance of the solicitation) such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to:

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

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

- Past performance information retrieved through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) for the Offeror's team members (e.g., partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the proposal;

- Inquiries of owner representative(s);

- Interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and/or Fee Determining Officials;

- Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS);

- Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS); and

- Any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

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

A copy of the blank Past Performance Questionnaire to be used for requesting client references is included as Attachment J-0200000-13.

IMPORTANT: It is the responsibility of the Offeror to provide accurate points of contact for each identified contract and current telephone numbers and/or email addresses.

The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information.

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

This evaluation focuses on the quality of performance on the relevant contracts submitted under Factor 2, Corporate Experience, and past performance on other contracts currently documented in known sources.

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:

- 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.);

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer's responsibility determination. The assessment of past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror's probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or "neutral") past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability a neutral rating shall be considered "Acceptable."

(End of Summary of Changes)