N44255-15-R-0026_Ammendment_0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Amendment 0001 is issued to:

Answ er PPI questions.

See SF30 continuation page for further details.

The proposal due date of 02 May 2016 is unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 13

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 21-Apr-2016

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 N44255-15-R-0026

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

01-Apr-2016

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

21-Apr-2016

CODE

NAVFAC NORTHWEST

1101 TAUTOG CIRCLE

SILVERDALE WA 98315-1101

N44255 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N44255-15-R-0026

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

The following have been added by full text:

SF 30 CONTINUTATION PAGE

SF-30 Contunation page

Amendment 0001 is issued to:

1. Revise Section M Basis for award, B. Evaluation Factors for award, 2 Basis for Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor, b. Technical Factors, 1. Definitions, viii. OFFERORS TEAM.

2. Revise section M Basis for award, B. Evaluation Factors for award, 2 Basis for Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor, b. Technical Factors, 3. TAB2-Factor 2. Experience, i. Solicitation Submittal Requirements, Project Types: Wetland Boundary Establishment.

3. Revise Section J, Attachment list.

4. Answer PPIs. See N44255-15-R-0026 PPI Log, Attachment J.2 Pre Proposal Inquiry Log.

Changes to N44255-15-R-0026 are highlighted in yellow

SECTION SECTION J - DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The following have been modified:

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Attachment J.1 Wage Determinations Attachment J.2 Pre Proposal Inquiry Log Attachment J.B-1 SLIN Table Attachment J.C-1 Summary of Services Attachment J.C-2 Work to be performed Attachment J.F-1 Deliverables table Attachment J.G-1 Proposal Template Attachment J.L-1 Pre Proposal Inquiries Attachment J.M-1 Relevant Contract Experience Data Sheet Attachment J.M-2 Past Performance Questionnaire

SECTION SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

BASIS FOR AWARD

A. 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. 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.

B. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Factor 1 – Corporate Approach Factor 2 – Experience Factor 3 – Past Performance Factor 4 – Safety

The distinction between experience and past performance is 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 1: A narrative, limited to one (1) double-sided page on 8-1/2” by 11” paper (or two (2) single-sided pages), shall be submitted under Factor 2, Experience, as further discussed below:

“Offeror” refers to the entity submitting the proposal, as determined by the name, address, DUNS number, and Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code that appears in Block 14 of the SF 1442 for construction solicitations or Block 15 of the SF 33 for service solicitations. If the offeror's proposal presents the experience, past performance, or safety data of any entity with a DUNS number or CAGE code that differs from that in the SF 1442 OR SF 33, the information will not be considered unless the offeror establishes a basis for imputing the other entity's data to the offeror. The Government will not assume or independently investigate the existence and nature of a relationship between the offeror and any other entity that has a different DUNS number and CAGE code. The offeror must clearly explain why another entity's experience, past performance, or safety record is relevant to or indicative of the offeror's ability to perform this contract. A mere statement describing a corporate affiliation is insufficient; the offeror must also establish how the connection or nexus between it and the other entity relates to the offeror's qualifications. The explanation will be limited to one (1) double-sided page on 8 1/2” by 11” paper (or two

(2) single-sided pages), and must be included under Factor 2, Experience. An offeror's failure to adequately justify a basis for crediting it with another entity's experience, past performance, or safety data could result in a deficiency, thereby making the offeror ineligible for award without discussions.

Note 2: While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate, and complete technical approach, experience, past performance, technical solution, and safety information rests with the offeror.

Note 3: The price proposal shall be submitted separate from the non-price proposal and safety factor 4. See the solicitation, Section L, Instructions to Offerors, Paragraph 2, for additional instructions, format, and submission quantities required for the proposal.

Note 4: The page limitation for each factor is provided in the submission requirements for each factor found later in this section. Page limitations will be strictly enforced. Any pages submitted in excess of the page limitations will not be reviewed and any data or material they contain will not be considered. Specific submission items which are excluded from the page count are listed in each factor later in this section.

Note 5: Projects submitted for Factor 2, Experience, shall be the same projects submitted for Factor 3, Past Performance.

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

(a) Price:

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror’s price proposal shall be provided separate from all other factor proposals. See Section L for additional instructions, formats, and submission quantities required for the proposal.

(a) TAB 1 – Cover Letter.

(i) The offeror shall submit a cover letter. The cover letter shall:

1) Be signed by an official of the offeror who has the authority to approve the positions and information in the cover letter.

2) Include the solicitation number.

3) Include the offeror’s name and address, which shall be identical to the name provided on page 1 of the Standard Form 33 (SF33), facsimile number, primary point of contact email address, the Dun and Bradstreet (DUNS) number, CAGE code, and the Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN).

4) Include a list of who is authorized to negotiate on behalf of the offeror, to include their names, title/position, telephone number, email address, and their physical address if different from the offeror’s address provided on page 1 of the

SF33.

5) Include a list of who is authorized to sign the contract (SF33) on behalf of the offeror, to include their names, title/position, telephone number, email address and physical address if different than the offeror’s address provided on page 1 of the SF33

6) Include a statement that the offeror agrees with all the terms, conditions, and provisions included in the RFP and agreement to furnish any items ordered at the price offered for each item.

(ii) Page Limitation: The Cover Letter shall not exceed one double-side page (two single-sided pages).

(b) TAB 2 – Standard Form 33 (SF33), Solicitation Offer and Award; and Standard Form 30 (SF30), Amendment of Solicitation/Modification of Contract: The offeror shall complete and submit the following:

(i) SF33, page 1 only, blocks 12 through 18.

1) The offeror shall indicate in block 12 that their offer is valid for a minimum of

160 days.

2) In block 14, the offeror shall acknowledge all RFP amendments by listing those amendments,

3) In block 15A, the offeror shall provide a full physical address to include offeror’s name, street address, city, state, and 9-digit zip code. In the CODE block, the offeror shall provide their CAGE code.

4) In block 15B, the offeror shall provide the offeror’s primary phone number.

5) In block 15C, the offer shall identify if the remittance address is different from the address in Block 15A.

(c) TAB 3 – Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors: The offeror shall complete all the representations, certifications, and other statements (REPS & CERTS) required in this RFP. The offeror shall submit a printed copy of all the completed REPS & CERTS required by this RFP.

(d) TAB 4 – VETS 4212 Report Confirmation of Filing:

(i) Offers shall submit a copy of their email confirmation of receipt notification from their most recent VETS 4212 reporting cycle. The US Department of Labor VETS 4212 website at http://www.dol.gov/vets/vets4212.htm#confirm states, “Upon the successful submission of a VETS-4212 report(s), federal contractors will receive an email confirmation of receipt notification for their records. These confirmation notifications should be used as verification of submission by Federal Contracting Officers when obligating funds to an awarded contract.”

(ii) If the confirmation submitted is for a firm that is not identical to the offeror to include the address, CAGE, and DUNS, the offeror shall provide an explanation (one single-sided page maximum) why the confirmation offered is not identical to the offeror and why that confirmation applies to the offeror.

(iii) If the offeror was not required to submit a VETS 4212 report during the most recent cycle, the offeror shall provide an explanation (one single-sided page maximum) which explains why the offeror was not required to file.

(e) TAB 5 – Joint Venture or Other Partner Arrangement Under FAR 9.6:

(i) Firms who are forming a Joint Venture or other partnership arrangement under FAR

9.6 in order to propose on this RFP shall provide the names, addresses, CAGE codes and DUNS for each partner in the arrangement with a brief discussion of the nature of the arrangement.

Page Limitation: The discussion shall be limited to one double-sided page (or two single-sided pages).

(ii) The offeror shall provide a copy of the joint venture or other partnership agreement.

The joint venture or other partnership agreement is not included in the page count in item (i) above.

1) Certain types of joint venture agreements require SBA approval. The offeror is responsible for coordinating with SBA that their agreement meets the SBA requirements for approval.

2) The type of joint venture/partnership arrangement and aspects of the agreement may result in an offeror being ineligible to represent itself as certain categories of small business within the REPS and CERTS. The agreement can also result in the loss of status as a small business. It is the responsibility of the offeror to create a partnership and written agreement that does not invalidate the REPS & CERTS or make the offeror ineligible for award.

(f) TAB 6 – Pricing Information:

(i) The offeror shall complete and submit SF33 Section B - Supplies or Services and

Prices, CLIN 0001, by entering the total proposed price.

1) The total price for CLIN 0001 shall match the total price from attachment J.B-1.

2) Prices provided shall be fully loaded and no other allocations, fees, overheads, G&A, insurance, taxes, profits or any other markups shall be applied when an option is exercised or a Task Order for pre-priced work is issued. See Section G for additional information.

3) Prices shall be in accordance with subparagraph (b) of the Fair Labor Standards and Service Contract Act – Price Adjustment Clause, FAR 52.222-43. Offerors shall not include escalation of wage and fringe benefit rates for Service Contract Act (SCA) covered employees in the option periods of performance. Wage and fringe benefit rates used for the base period shall be used in pricing labor costs for all periods of performance in the option years. In accordance with the referenced clauses, the contractor may be entitled to an adjustment in contract price only when a new Collective Bargaining Agreement or SCA wage determination is modified into the contract and it affects wages and fringe benefits of covered employees. In accordance with FAR 52.222-43, Offerors may NOT increase labor costs for SCA covered employees in SLINs for Option Years One through Four.

(ii) The offeror shall complete and submit attachment J.B-1, Supplemental Pricing Workbook for the base year and all option years.

1) The total price from attachment J.B-1 shall match the total price entered for CLIN 0001 of SF33 Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices.

2) The offeror shall provide a price for each Sub-Line Item Number (SLIN).

3) If the offeror does not provide a price for any SLIN, the offeror shall clearly indicate the offeror intends to provide the SLIN at no charge to the Government.

(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.

(b) Technical Factors: The Offeror’s technical proposal shall be separate from the price proposal;

additionally the Offeror’s Safety Factor 4 proposal shall be separate from both price and factors 1, 2, and 3. See Solicitation Section L for additional instructions, formats, and submission quantities required for the proposal.

(1) Definitions:

(i) JOINT VENTURE (JV) – A contractual, legally binding agreement joining two or more parties for the purpose of executing a particular business undertaking. The joint venture firm has its own CAGE code and DUNS number. All parties agree to share in the profits and losses of the enterprise. This does not include other arrangements such as “teaming agreement” or “strategic alliance,” which are not recognized as bona fide joint ventures for the purposes of this solicitation.

(ii) MENTOR PROTÉGÉ – A contractual, legally binding agreement joining two firms in an SBA approved written agreement outlining the protégé’s needs and describing the assistance the mentor has committed to providing.

(iii) PRIME CONTRACTOR EXPERIENCE – Measures the degree to which an offeror has completed projects relevant to the subject RFP as the prime contractor.

(iv) PROJECT – A single function contract or task order under an indefinite quantity or on-call contract. Multiple contracts may not be combined and submitted as one project.

a. Projects may include work with federal, state, or local governments, as well as private industry. Firms are responsible for providing project description and applicable experience in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of project relevancy.

(v) RELEVANT PROJECTS – A completed project of similar size (dollar value), scope (type of work), and complexity (degree of difficulty and technology) as the work identified as recurring in the solicitation.

(vi) FIVE-YEAR PERIOD: The prescribed timeframe for this solicitation that refers to the period of time for which projects may be submitted for experience or past performance.

The five-year period is calculated by counting back five years from the initial solicitation issuance date.

(vii) OFFERORS TEAM- Refers to the offeror (see definition in Note 1), and the offeror’s outside wetland professional(s) or formally trained delineator(s) or in-house wetland professional(s) or formally trained delineator(s) only; does not include other subcontractors or consultants.

(viii) TEAM ARRANGEMENT: Refers to the roles, responsibilities, and contractual relationships between the Offeror (see definition in Note 1) and the Offeror’s team (see definition) as further defined by FAR Subpart 9.6. This does not include other arrangements such as “teaming agreement” or “strategic alliance,” which are not recognized as bona fide teaming arrangements for the purposes of this solicitation

(2) TAB 1 - Factor 1, Corporate Approach:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Provide a narrative addressing the following:

(1) Organizational chart that includes position, titles, and years of experience for employees and subcontractors. Also, identify the primary point of contact managing fieldwork.

(2) Provide credentials for wetland professionals or formally trained wetland delineators who work for your firm. Include name, education, type of degree or pertinent course work, and pertinent training (by title, year, vendor, and wetland experience by year and location.) Subcontractor experience that your firm has previously used is acceptable for wetland professionals.

(3) Specify what types of natural resource agencies your firm has worked with (ex. U.S.

Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, US Army Corp of Engineers, private timber company.)

Offeror’s failing to address required narrative items may be rated unacceptable.

Page Limitation: The Corporate Approach narrative shall be limited to two double-sided pages (or four single-sided pages).

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: The assessment of the Offeror’s Corporate Approach will be used as a means to evaluate the effectiveness and viability of the Offeror’s approach in managing the contract.

(3) TAB 2 – Factor 2, Experience:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Offeror shall Submit up to five example projects completed by the Offeror or Offeror’s team that best demonstrates your experience on relevant projects (All parties joined by a Partnership, Mentor Protégé, or joint ventures shall submit at least one project from each partner). The Offeror shall complete and submit Attachment J.M-1, Relevant Contract Experience Data Sheet, for each example project. Relevant projects are those that are similar in size, scope, and complexity. For purposes of this evaluation, similar in size, scope, and complexity is further defined as:

Size: Similar in size are projects between $1,000 and $5,000,000.

Two projects must be greater than $100,000.

Scope: Similar in scope are projects involving the following: Hydrologic monitoring, Salinity monitoring, Photographic documentation, Topographic surveys, Hazard tree assessments, stream surveys, Eelgrass surveys, Wetland delineation/ determination, Vegetation Surveys, Treatment Assessments, Planting, Tree selection and marking, Thinning, Chipping, Pruning, Release from vegetation competition, Invasive Species Management, Erosion control, Boundary marking, Estuary enhancement, or Report preparation.

Project Types:

Wetland Boundary Establishment- Describe wetland boundary establishment work performed by your firm, estimated acreage of wetland boundaries established and a description of methodology. Subcontractor experience will be accepted.

At least one project submitted must have involved Wetland Determination and Boundary Establishment completed in the Pacific Northwest. Project may include multiple scope areas.

Use of Heavy Equipment- Describe how your firms qualified equipment operators have used heavy equipment to achieve natural resource objectives in a natural setting(e.g.

restoring habitat or re-creating natural conditions that are preferably associated with water such as; streams, wetlands, rivers, beaches, estuaries, etc.), include the type of heavy equipment used. Provided project must be those designed to protect, conserve, or enhance natural resources, not projects that are designed to ameliorate the effects of construction. Consequently, do not include urban or suburban landscaping projects, projects involving construction of buildings, low impact development projects, roads, parking lots, residences, or projects related to storm water management (e.g.

retention/detention ponds, bioswales, etc.) Describe the steps your firm took to improve project effectiveness. Subcontractor experience will NOT be accepted.

At least one project submitted must have involved using heavy equipment to achieve natural resource objectives in a natural setting. Project may include multiple scope areas.

Production Forestry Planting Activities- Provide a project in a natural setting (landscape projects are not acceptable) that demonstrates production planting of a minimum five thousand trees and in the same or separate project exhibit your firms ability to plant on a slope of 30% or greater and your firms experience (using at least two of the four) hoedad, auger, dibble, or machine planting. Subcontractor experience will NOT be accepted.

At least one project submitted must have involved Production Forestry Planting in a natural setting. Project may include multiple scope areas.

Field Data Collection, Analysis, and Reporting- Describe how your firm has analyzed field data collected and then prepared a field data related report. The period for data collection must be greater than two weeks; however, the length of time does not have to be contiguous. The project(s) must demonstrate experience in two or more of the following (the two required items do not have to be in the same project):

-Vegetation Inventory

- Down woody debris

- Snags

- Regeneration (Seedling Survival)

- Fuel loading

- Plant associations

- Invasive plant species -Threatened and endangered plant species -Timber inventory or cruise -Salinity -Stream data -Piezometer and hydrological data Subcontractor experience will NOT be accepted.

At least one project submitted must have involved Field Data Collection. Project may include multiple scope areas.

Complexity: Similar in complexity is considered as:

A single project that encompasses two or more of the above project types, or

Multiple projects conducted during the same timeframe, or

A project with operational obstructions such as working in congested industrial areas, in highly populated areas, in extraordinary weather constraints, or with changing site restrictions.

Offerors failing to provide relevant projects within the specified five-year period demonstrating experience in the above may be rated unacceptable.

Page Limitation: The Offeror shall complete and submit Attachment J.M-1, Relevant Contract Experience Data Sheet, for each example project. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each Relevant Contract Experience Data Sheet shall not exceed one double-sided page (or two single-sided pages).

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror and Offerors team demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant projects defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the Offeror and Offeror’s team relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government will only review five projects. Any projects submitted in excess of the five will not be considered

(4) TAB 3 - Factor 3, Past Performance:

Size: Similar in size are projects between $1,000 and $5,000,000.

Two projects must be greater than $100,000.

Scope: Similar in scope are projects involving the following: Hydrologic monitoring, Salinity monitoring, Photographic documentation, Topographic surveys, Hazard tree assessments, stream surveys, Eelgrass surveys, Wetland delineation/ determination, Vegetation Surveys, Treatment Assessments, Planting, Tree selection and marking, Thinning, Chipping, Pruning, Release from vegetation competition, Invasive Species Management, Erosion control, Boundary marking, Estuary enhancement, or Report preparation.

Complexity: Similar in complexity is considered as:

A single project that encompasses two or more of the project types listed in Factor two, or

Multiple projects conducted during the same timeframe, or

A project with operational obstructions such as working in congested industrial areas, in highly populated areas, in extraordinary weather constraints, or with changing site restrictions.

Note 1: The definitions included in Factor 2 – Experience, apply for Factor 3 – Past Performance.

Note 2: 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.

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

(1) The offeror shall submit all completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPAR) available for each of the projects submitted for Factor 2, organized in the same project order as submitted in Factor 2.

(2) If a completed CPAR evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal.

If a completed CPAR is not available for any one of the projects submitted in Factor 2, the offeror shall submit a completed Attachment J.M-3, Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). The offer shall complete blocks 1 through 4 of the PPQ, send the PPQ to the project client, request the client complete the client section of the PPQ, and request the client return the completed PPQ to the offeror before the proposal due date. The offer shall:

a. NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPAR IS AVAILABLE.

b. Not complete any of the client’s section of the PPQ or modify any of the client’s evaluation.

c. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact on all PPQ’s.

d. Follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of PPQ.

e. If the client requests, the PPQ may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Nicole Riffe, via email at nicole.riffe@navy.mil prior to proposal closing date.

f. If the client does not return the PPQ prior to the proposal due date, complete blocks 1 through 5, which will provide client information for the respective projects and submit with your proposal.

g. Not incorporate by reference 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.

(3) The offeror shall submit a two-page discussion regarding any negative past performance with respect to the five sample projects.

a. The discussion shall address at a minimum the offer’s investigation of the events which resulted in the negative past performance and actions taken by the offeror to prevent reoccurrence.

b. Do not submit a discussion if there is not any negative past performance.

c. Also, include performance recognition documents received within the last five years such as awards, award fee determinations, customer letters of commendation, and any other forms of performance recognition.

d. In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

e. 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.

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

(1) A pattern of successful completion of tasks;

(2) A pattern of deliverables that are timely and of good quality;

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

(4) Recency of tasks performed that are identical to, similar to, or related to the task at hand; and

(5) A respect for stewardship of Government funds

Offerors failing to provide relevant projects within the specified five-year period demonstrating experience in the above may be rated unacceptable.

(c) Safety Factor

(1) TAB 1 - Factor 4, Safety:

(i) Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information: (For a partnership or joint venture, the following submittal requirements are required for each Contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. TRC and DART Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

(1) OSHA Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate:

For the five [2011,2012,2013,2014,2015] previous complete calendar years, submit your OSHA Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If you cannot submit an OSHA TRC Rate, affirmatively state so, and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA TRC Rate data should be addressed as part of this element. OSHA TRC rates above 4.0, in any of the previous five years, will be considered UNACCEPTABLE, unless an adequate explanation is provided to address the extenuating circumstances that affected the rate.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate:

For the five [2011,2012,2013,2014,2015] previous complete calendar years, submit your OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If you cannot submit an OSHA DART Rate, affirmatively state so, and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART Rate data should be addressed as part of this element. OSHA DART rates above 2.0, in any of the previous five years, will be considered UNACCEPTABLE, unless an adequate explanation is provided to address the extenuating circumstances that affected the rate.

(3) Technical Approach for Safety:

Describe the plan that the Offeror will implement to qualify, evaluate, select and oversee its potential subcontractors. The Safety narrative shall be limited to one page. Offerors must submit both (1) a plan to include the safety performance of subcontractors in the selection process for all levels of subcontractors and (2) a plan to monitor the safety of those subcontractors during contract performance, highlighting what specific management practices will be in place for providing deliberate safety program management and mishap prevention support to those sub-contractors whose TRC is greater than 4.0 and whose DART rate is greater than 2.0.

Offerors who fail to submit either of these will be rated UNACCEPTABLE.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government is seeking to determine whether the Offeror has an acceptable safety record. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s overall safety record as evidenced by the TRC and DART rates, if the Offeror’s plan includes safety in the evaluation and selection of subcontractors, and if the narrative includes a plan to monitor the safety performance of subcontractors during performance. The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

- OSHA Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate

- OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate

- Offeror Technical Approach to Safety

(1) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate:

The Government will evaluate the OSHA TRC Rate to determine if the Offeror’s OSHA TRC rate is above 4.0 and extenuating circumstances that impact the rates.

OSHA TRC rates above 4.0, in any of the previous five years, will be considered UNACCEPTABLE, unless an adequate explanation is provided to address the extenuating circumstances that affected the rate.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate:

The Government will evaluate the OSHA DART Rate to determine if the Offeror’s OSHA DART rate is above 2.0 and extenuating circumstances that impact the rates.

OSHA DART rates above 2.0, in any of the previous five years, will be considered UNACCEPTABLE, unless an adequate explanation is provided to address the extenuating circumstances that affected the rate.

(3) Technical Approach to Safety:

The Government will evaluate the narrative to determine if subcontractor safety performance will be considered in the qualification, evaluation, selection, of all levels of subcontractors on the upcoming project, and both the plan to monitor the safety of those subcontractors during contract performance, highlighting what specific management practices will be in place for providing deliberate safety program management and mishap prevention support to those sub-contractors whose TRC is greater than 4.0 and whose DART rate is greater than 2.0. Offerors who fail to address either of these items (i.e. whether the safety performance of subcontractors will be evaluated in the selection process for all levels of subcontractors and whether the safety of those subcontractors will be monitored during contract performance) will be rated UNACCEPTABLE.

(End of Summary of Changes)