N4008526R00290007.pdf

R

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offers 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 electronic communication 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 letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication 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 NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

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

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, 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.)

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

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

Created On:

24 Mar 2026, 14:47 PM Greenwich Mean Time

J 1 16

0007 24 Mar 2026 See Continuation Sheet N40085

NAVFACSYSCOM MID-ATLANTIC

9324 VIRGINIA AVENUE, NORFOLK VA 23511-0395

NORFOLK, VA 23511-0395

UNITED STATES

Mary Pool, Email: mary.a.pool3.civ@us.navy.mil Telephone: 7573411650

SCD: PAS:

N4008526R0029

28 Jan 2026

See Section 00 70 00 - Conditions of the Contract

See Schedule

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Block 14 (Description of Amendment/Modification): Project Title: B300 Waterfront Machine Shop Roof & HVAC Repair Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Project Location: Kittery, Maine

The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate the following:

1. Extend the proposal due date from 26 March 2026 to 16 April 2026.

2. Provide revised evaluation criteria. Please refer to Section 00 21 16 Instructions to Proposers: 3 Evaluation Factors for Award, Factor 1 Corporate Experience

The proposal due date is extended from 26 March 2026 to 16 April 2026.

Section 00 00 00 - Procurement and Contracting Requirements

The following changes have been made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Response Due Date 26 Mar 2026 16 Apr 2026

Section 00 21 16 - Instructions to Proposers

Miscellaneous text in this section has been modified to:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. GENERAL

1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT

2. BASIS FOR AWARD

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

4.1 PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE AND SITE VISIT

4.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

4.3 PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPIs)

4.4 CONTRACT OPPORTUNITIES

5. INCORPORATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSALS

6. ATTACHMENTS: LOCATED ON CONTRACT OPPORTUNITIES UNDER ATTACHMENTS

6.1 ATTACHMENT A1 - PNSY B300 Roof and HVAC Repairs - 100% Final - Plans

6.2 ATTACHMENT A2 - PNSY B300 Roof and HVAC Repairs - 100% Final - Specifications

6.3 ATTACHMENT B - PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRY (PPI) LOG

6.4 ATTACHMENT C - PIEE VENDOR ACCESS INSTRUCTIONS

6.5 ATTACHMENT D - PRICE PROPOSAL FORM

N4008526R00290007

6.6 ATTACHMENT E - CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE PROJECT DATA SHEET

6.7 ATTACHMENT F - PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONAIRE (PPQ)

6.8 ATTACHMENT G - HISTORICAL SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION

6.9 ATTACHMENT H - SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION COMMITMENT DOCUMENT (SPCD)

6.10 ATTACHMENT I - SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

6.11 ATTACHMENT J - MAINE REVENUE SERVICES CONTRACTOR'S EXEMPT PURCHASE CERTIFICATE

6.12 ATTACHMENT K - SECNAV 5512

6.13 ATTACHMENT L - DBIDS 5500b

6.14 ATTACHMENT M - Pass Office Virtual Line Guidance

6.15 ATTACHMENT N - PNSY B300 MOD 1 HAZMAT Report

6.16 ATTACHMENT O - PNSY B300 HAZMAT Report_Rev 1

1. GENERAL

1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

This solicitation is being issues as .UNRESTRICTED FOR FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

The NAICS Code for this procurement is 236220 and the Size Standard is $45,000,000.

This acquisition will be advertised utilizing FAR Part 15 - Contracting by Negotiation resulting in a Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) Contract for Construction Services.

In accordance with DFARS 236.204, the estimated magnitude of construction is between $25,000,000 and $100,000,000.

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE CONTRACT

The general intent of this solicitation is to award a Fixed Price Construction Contract for Design-Bid-Build (DBB), B300 Waterfront Machine Shop Roof & HVAC Repair, located at Portsmouth Naval Shipyard (PNSY), Kittery, Maine.

Building 300 is a manufacturing and machining facility. The existing roof system has surpassed its design/service life and has deteriorated to the point where there are significant leaks to the interior. The building interior is exposed to water infiltration due to these roof failures. The HVAC systems were installed during the original construction of the building between 1979 and 1984. No substantial changes have been made to the HVAC system since. The existing HVAC systems have depositions of RCRA 8 metals within them.

The project will remove existing roofing which has exceeded its useful service life and provide for replacement with a new fully adhered 0.080 thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO) roof membrane assembly. The project also provides the removal of all air handling equipment and removal or abandonment-in-place of associated ductwork that conditions the industrial work areas. The project includes measures to contain RCRA 8 dust and abate asbestos containing materials that are known to be present within ductwork. The project provides replacement of the existing steam to hot water plant, the addition of unit heaters to provide heat to the industrial work areas and dedicated outdoor air systems to provide fresh air to the space accompanied by destratification fans for occupant comfort. The project provides removal and replacement of the existing fire alarm and mass notification system and fire sprinkler system serving the industrial work areas. The project includes removal and replacement of the existing 2500 kVA main service transformer feeding Switchgear 4, replacement of the 15 kV service switch, and replacement of the 480V main and feeder switchgear.

Site improvements include utility construction and restoration of disturbed areas resulting from demolition activities. Utilities include electrical and fire safety systems.

2. BASIS FOR AWARD

The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract; to negotiate with Offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the Offeror submitting the proposal determined to represent the best value--the proposal most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

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.

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.

All technical factors, when combined, are of equal importance to the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating; and all technical factors and the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating, when combined, are approximately equal to price.

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, if held. An Unacceptable rating in any of the non-cost/price factors will result in an

Proposals may be found to have either a overall rating of "Unacceptable" for the non-cost/price factors, unless corrected through discussions, if held.

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.

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Factor 1 - Corporate Experience

Factor 2 - Management Approach & Schedule

Factor 3 - Safety

Factor 4 - Past Performance

Factor 5 - Small Business Utilization and Participation

The distinction between Corporate Experience and Past Performance is that Corporate Experience pertains to the volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work described under the definition of recent, relevant projects, in terms of size, scope, and complexity.

Past Performance pertains to both the relevance of recent efforts and how well a contractor has performed on the contracts.

The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is the technical factors (Factors, 1, 2, 3, and 5) are of equal importance to each other and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor (Factor 4).

When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-cost/price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price.

The importance of price will increase if the 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 whose offer conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered.

Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor.

The Offeror shall submit one (1) electronic copy via PIEE, to include the submittal requirements identified below The Price and Non-price proposals .

shall be submitted in separate files and submitted in Portable Document Format (PDF). 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.

Offeror shall provide a cover page with solicitation number, solicitation title, Offeror name, address, phone number, fax number, Unique Entity Identifier (UEI), CAGE code, Federal Tax ID number, Point of Contact (POC), POC phone number, and POC email address with its proposal.

Refer to individual factors for page limitations. Pages that exceed indicated page limitations shall not be evaluated. Information submitted beyond any of the page limits below will not be considered.

Note: If proposing as a Joint-Venture (JV), the Offeror shall submit the POC, UEI, and CAGE Code for each JV partner.

Price Proposal

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

All submissions shall include the following:

1. 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 a cover page with solicitation number, solicitation title, Offeror name, address, phone number, fax number, Unique Identifier Number (UEI), CAGE code, Federal Tax ID number, Point of Contact (POC), POC phone number, and POC email address, with its proposal.

2. Completed Price Proposal Form that includes all CLINs. The Offeror is required to submit a complete Price Proposal Form that includes completion of all contract line items numbers (CLINs). Pricing information is not required to be completed under Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation Contract Form in SF 1442.

3. Bid bond (SF-24). Offeror shall submit a Bid Guarantee in accordance with FAR 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee. A bid bond (SF-24) shall be at least 20 percent of the total proposed price for project but shall not exceed $3M. The bid bond shall be in the name of the Offeror identified on the SF1442.

4. System for Award Management (SAM) registration. Offeror shall provide a copy of Representation and Certifications and proof of registration in System for Award Management (SAM) and 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 00 45 00 of the RFP is not provided in SAM, include the representation or certification in your price proposal. The Contracting Officer and/or Contract Specialist will verify the Offeror's registration in SAM only at time of submission of an offer and at the time of contract award, unless an exemption applies under FAR 4.1102 (a).

5. 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.

6. VETS-4212 registration. Confirmation of filing of Veterans' Employment and Training (VETS) VETS-4212 for the 2024/2025 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.

7. Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Reference FAR 52.219-9 ALT II and DFARS 252.219-7003).

In accordance with FAR 19.7, all other than small businesses shall submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan (SBSP) utilizing the template provided as Attachment I. Acceptability of the SBSP will be considered a responsibility matter. The SBSP will not be evaluated or rated by the SSEB but reviewed by a Small Business Professional/Authorized Representative and the Contracting Officer for acceptability. The SBSP shall be negotiated and/or accepted within the time specified by the Contracting Officer. Failure to negotiate an acceptable subcontracting plan within the time limit prescribed by the Contracting Officer will render the Offeror ineligible for award of the contract. The SBSP will be incorporated into the resulting contract.

NAVFAC's command-wide small business subcontracting targets are shown below. These may be higher or lower than percentages that would represent realistic, challenging, small business subcontracting goals for this acquisition consistent with efficient and effective performance of the contract. These targets are based on a percentage of total planned subcontract dollars. These goals will be incorporated into the solicitation.

Small Business (SB) 40%

Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) 5%

Women Owned Small Business (WOSB) 9%

HubZone SB 3%

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) 5%

The SBSP shall be consistent with the commitments offered in the Small Business Utilization and Participation factor. In accordance with DFARS 215.304(c)(i), when an evaluation assesses the extent that small businesses are specifically identified in proposals, those small businesses considered in the evaluation shall be listed in the SBSP.

Please note that SBSP goals and the participation rates provided in the Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) WILL NOT be the same. The participation rates within the SBPCD are provided as percentages of the total contract value; subcontract plan goals are provided as a percentage of planned subcontracting dollars. While the percentages will differ, the types of products/services identified in the SBSP, should be the same as those products/services identified in the SBPCD. Likewise, the planned small business subcontract dollars in the SBSP will be equal to (or in some cases greater than) the extent of small business participation identified in the SBPCD.

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

9. Financial Statements. 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.

10.Facilities and Equipment. Provide a description of Offeror's facilities and equipment.

11. Other Work. Provide a list of Offeror's other work presently under contract.

(ii) 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 00 10 00 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 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.

Although required to be submitted with Offeror's price proposal, Items 3 through 11 above will not be evaluated as part of the price proposal. This information will be utilized by the Government in the responsibility determination and for considering responsiveness to the solicitation requirements.

Non-Price Factors:

All submissions shall include the following:

Factor 1, Corporate Experience:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

Submit a minimum of two (2) up to a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrate your experience on relevant projects (similar in Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined below).

Experience shall be that of the Offeror performed as the Prime Contractor. Experience of proposed subcontractors will not be considered. Furthermore, experience of the Offeror while working as a subcontractor will not be considered.

For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as:

Size: Projects demonstrating a final construction cost of $15,000,000 or greater that consists of at least one building with a size of 40,000 square feet or greater. Final construction cost is defined as the total price paid by the customer for the construction services, including original contract award amount and any modifications executed during performance.

: Projects demonstrating complete renovation of at least one active production stand alone facility. Additions will not be considered.Scope

Complexity: Offerors are not required to demonstrate all Complexity elements (listed below) in each relevant project submitted, but Offerors shall collectively demonstrate experience with the following elements within the submitted relevant projects, while meeting the above Size and Scope relevancy requirements:

(a) Experience with projects in congested urban or industrial areas with limited construction laydown space and restricted access.

(b) Experience with sequencing and phasing requirements.

(c) Experience with construction in or around occupied industrial facilities.

Notes:

(1) A submitted project may consist of multiple buildings, but at least one building must meet Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above, in order to be deemed Relevant.

(2) A project must meet Size and Scope and at least one element of Complexity in order to be relevant. However, Offerors are required to collectively demonstrate experience with the Complexity elements within the submitted Relevant projects, as detailed above.

(3) While the Government will consider projects involving construction aspects, the project will only be considered relevant if it meets Size, Scope, and Complexity requirements as outlined above.

Projects submitted for the Offeror shall be completed within the past ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this RFP. Projects which are not complete as of the date of issuance of this RFP will be considered "Not Relevant". Additionally, projects completed prior to ten (10) years from the date of issuance of this RFP will be considered "Not Relevant."

For all submitted projects, ensure that the project description clearly addresses how the project meets the required timeframe as well as the above Size, Scope, and Complexity requirements and clearly provides the total construction cost. The absence of any such information or information that does not clearly address any of these requirements may result in the project being considered Not Relevant, which could result in a rating of UNACCEPTABLE for this Factor which renders the proposal ineligible for award.

A project is defined as a construction 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 submission of a multiple award and/or indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contract as a whole will be considered Not Relevant.

The attached Construction Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment E) is and SHALL be used to submit project information.MANDATORY 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 may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed two (2) pages. Information on additional pages outside of the project data sheet and/or beyond the limit will not be considered when reviewing the project.

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 Joint Venture members. Offerors may submit experience where a member of the JV performed as a JV with another entity but must clearly demonstrate how its work on that project met Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above.

If a project was performed by a JV, and not all partners from that JV are on the JV proposed for this contract, the Offeror shall clearly demonstrate what portion of the work was performed by the JV member offering on this contract and shall not include work performed by the JV as a whole. The JV member proposed for this contract shall specifically address field work performed by that JV member including field staffing and direct field work oversight. The JV member proposed for this contract shall also address home office management performed by that JV member including the number /percentage of employees provided for the overall contract by the JV members as well as the overall percentage of work performed by the JV member.

The Offeror shall also submit a SIGNED copy of the Joint Venture agreement indicating the proposed participation of each Joint Venture member.

For 8(a) Mentor-Protege Joint Ventures, the Offeror shall submit the signed and U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) approved Mentor-Protege agreement. For Offerors who are a Joint Venture, an Offeror's proposal may be considered ineligible for award if this information is not provided.

Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

Offerors that are not submitting as a JV may submit a project where it performed as a JV with another entity but must clearly demonstrate how its work on that project met Size, Scope, and Complexity as defined above or the project will be considered Not Relevant.

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 Project Data Sheet shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in order for the experience information of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies to be considered. The Project Data Sheet 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 Project Data Sheet 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 Project Data Sheet 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 basis of evaluation will include the Offeror's demonstrated 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 five (5) projects total. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) for Corporate Experience will not be considered. If the Offeror submits more than five projects, the Government will consider only the first five (5) projects submitted.

An Offeror that does not submit a minimum of two (2) relevant projects as defined above, will be assigned a Deficiency and receive a rating of UNACCEPTABLE. An Offeror with an UNACCEPTABLE rating in any Factor will not be eligible for award.

For proposals submitted by a JV, proposals that do not demonstrate relevant project experience for each JV partner may be considered less favorably.

Offerors that demonstrate all required Complexity elements in a single relevant project may be considered more favorably.

Offerors that demonstrate multiple relevant projects that satisfy the Complexity element pertaining to experience with projects in congested urban or industrial areas with limited construction laydown space and restricted access may be considered more favorably.

Offerors that demonstrate multiple relevant projects that satisfy the Complexity element of experience with sequencing and phasing requirements may be considered more favorably.

Factor 2, Management Approach & Schedule:

Submit the following documentation, as detailed throughout this Factor, in order to describe your approach to managing the project, risk, and ensuring adherence to the project schedule.

1) Management Approach Narrative

2) Critical Path Schedule

See below for details concerning the required content of each item listed above. The Management Approach Narrative shall not exceed ten (10) pages.

There are no page restrictions on the project schedule.

1. Management Approach Narrative

The narrative shall include, but is not limited to:

- Provide a written work plan that addresses major elements of work and project risks. The work plan shall demonstrate understanding of the scope, all phases and major milestones, technical complexities, and construction schedule required to achieve the work as identified in the RFP.

- Identify activities that may affect the project timeline, including other/off site work activities.

- Identify key project risks including their likelihood and consequences, along with mitigation or management strategies to minimize or eliminate impacts to the project cost and schedule.

At a minimum, the written work plan shall address the following technical complexities:

a) Phased construction in an active production facility

b) Removal and abatement of hazardous materials

2. Critical Path Schedule

The project schedule shall illustrate the Offeror's ability to achieve or improve on the contract completion date set out in the RFP. The total duration of the base portion of the contract is 925 calendar days. Identify the overall completion time for this project, in accordance with the RFP, as well as interim completion times and key milestones for sequences as required to complete construction., The schedule shall demonstrate a logical sequence of events to accomplish the work, and contain enough information to identify all the major milestones, as defined in the phasing plans of the RFP.

The schedule should be based on a contract award date of 31 AUGUST 2026. This is for proposal purposes only and not dispositive of an anticipated /planned award date.

If an Offeror proposes a realistic and feasible schedule that is shorter than the required duration and is selected for award, that schedule and duration will be incorporated into the award document and replace the advertised required duration.

A schedule that proposes a contract duration longer than indicated in the RFP will be rated UNACCEPTABLE.

Offeror shall provide a critical path method (CPM) schedule for execution and completion of the work to achieve the required interim and final completion milestones for the project. At a minimum, the CPM schedule shall address the following:

- Identify major activities and milestones

- Identify and provide sequencing (precedence/succession) of critical activities and work within an active production facility

- Demonstrate knowledge of project regulatory constraints

Offerors will be evaluated on the extent to which they demonstrate a clear understanding of the above solicitation submittal requirements for this factor. A management approach narrative work plan and schedule that do not address all items listed above may be rated as UNACCEPTABLE.

1. Management Approach - An Offeror's narrative work plan that clearly addresses major elements of work and project risks and provides a comprehensive contingency plan that addresses mitigation of any identified risks with potential solutions may be considered more favorably than those that do not.

2. Schedule - A project schedule that demonstrates a realistic and feasible contract duration shorter than the required duration indicated in the RFP may be considered more favorably than those that do not.

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 further below. For a partnership, joint venture, the Offeror shall submit separate DART and TCR for the specified five (5) CY for each contractor who is part of the partnership or 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' [CY2025, CY2024, CY2023, CY2022, and CY2021] 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. 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' [CY2025, CY2024, CY2023, CY2022, and CY2021] worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no TCR rate, for any year, the Offeror must affirmatively state so and explain why. Should a negative trend occur above Moderate Risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required, that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

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

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

(3) Technical Approach for 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 the performance of the contract (to include their own in-house workforce).

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) pages.

(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) may 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 Risk.

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) may 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 Risk.

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 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. 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) pages. Information on pages beyond this limit 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:

Recent, relevant projects are determined within the requirements for Factor 1, Corporate Experience.

If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 1. The Offeror shall include all completed CPARS evaluations (interim and final) for a project. 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 submitted 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, 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 F), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. 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, Mary Ann Pool, via email at mary.a.pool3.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.

Offerors are highly encouraged to provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1 - Corporate Experience. Additionally, Offerors are highly encouraged to address any adverse past performance issues. Such explanations shall not exceed four (4) pages in total. Information beyond this page limitation will not be considered.

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 Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) 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.

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. Failure to provide requested data, accessible points of contact, or valid phone numbers could result in a firm being considered less qualified.

The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. The Government's inability to contact any of the Offeror's references or the references' unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government's evaluation of this factor.

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

(i) Basis of Evaluation:

This evaluation focuses on how well the Offeror performed on the projects submitted under Factor 1 - Corporate Experience and past performance on other relevant projects currently documented in known sources.

The Government will consider 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 from any other source) reflect a trend of satisfactory performance considering:

- A pattern of successful completion of tasks;

- A pattern of deliverables that are timely and of good quality;

- A pattern of cooperativeness and teamwork with the Government at all levels (task managers, contracting officers, auditors, etc.); and

- Recency of tasks performed that are identical to, similar to, or related to the task at hand.

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. More relevant past performance will have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance, and will receive a Neutral Confidence rating.

Factor 5, Small Business Utilization and Participation:

It is the policy of the Government to provide maximum practicable opportunities in its acquisitions to Small Business (SB) concerns, including Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB), Historically Underutilized Business Zone Small Business (HUBZone SB), Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB), Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), and other small business concerns. Further, it is the policy of the Government that such concerns will have the maximum practicable opportunity to participate in contract performance consistent with its efficient performance.

This Factor assesses both the historical achievements in utilizing small business concerns and the proposed small business participation commitment for this requirement. The Offeror is required to demonstrate its previous commitment to SBs through its record of past utilization of SBs and the level of commitment to small business if awarded a contract under this solicitation.

1. All Offerors (large AND small businesses) shall use Attachment G (Historical Small Business Utilization) to demonstrate their historical utilization of SBs. Each project submitted under Factor 1, Corporate Experience, shall be included on Attachment G. Failure to include each project submitted under Factor 1, Corporate Experience, on Attachment G, or the failure to fully complete Attachment G for each project may result in a Deficiency. Only complete Attachment G. Information provided in a different format and/or on a form created by the Offeror will not be evaluated. Attachments or addendums to Attachment G will not be evaluated. Offerors are permitted to expand portions of the form, as needed, to provide sufficient response. Instructions regarding how to complete Attachment G are included at the beginning of the attachment.

2. All Offerors (large AND small businesses) shall use Attachment H (Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD)) to submit the following required information for evaluation of this factor:

- To demonstrate commitment to use small business concerns in the performance of this contract, identify by name the subcontractors that will be used to support each small business category, including SDB, WOSB, HUBZone SB, VOSB, and SDVOSBs. Identify the type and complexity of product/service to be subcontracted, and the type of commitment (i.e., teaming agreement, joint venture agreement, mentor protege agreement, letter of commitment, etc.) with each subcontractor.

o If subcontractors are not identified by name, Offerors shall provide a detailed explanation why subcontractors are not identified. If firm written commitments with SBs are not in place, Offerors shall provide an explanation and rationale on the ability to achieve the proposed participation. (See Attachment H, paragraph 5) o If a LB Offeror does not intend to subcontract, provide a detailed explanation why subcontracting would not result in efficient contract performance. SBs intending to 100% self-perform are not required to provide an explanation. (See Attachment H, paragraph 6)

- To demonstrate maximum practicable participation of small businesses, identify (in terms of dollar value and percentage of the ) the Offeror's proposed small business participation.