Amendment__02_N4425519R7004_Wood_Recycling.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to provide Clarif ications on Attachment naming

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 9

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 09-Sep-2019

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 N4425519R7004

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

15-Aug-2019

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

09-Sep-2019

CODE

NAVFAC NORTHWEST

PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. BANGOR

T-075 SKATE STREET

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:

N4425519R7004

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

ATTACHMENTS AND EXHIBITS

Attachment 1: CLIN UNIT PRICING WORKSHEET Attachment 2: PRE_PROPOSAL INQUIRY (PPI) FORMS

Exhibit A: CORPORATE EXPERIENCE PROJECT DATA SHEET Exhibit B: LICENSING AND PERMITS Exhibit C: ORGANIC SORTING PROCEDURE FORM Exhibit C-1: VAC TRUCK DEBRIS PROCEDURE Exhibit D: DISTANCE FROM SOURCE TO PROCESSING FACILITY Exhibit E: PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE Exhibit F: WAGE DETERMINATION

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 1999)

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

See Evaluation Commercial Item

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)

EVALAUTION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS

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

3. The Lowest price technically acceptable 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 “UNACCEPTABLE” rating in any subfactor results in the factor being rated “UNACCEPTABLE” and 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.

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience Subfactor 1.1 - Licensing and Permits

Factor 2 – Technical Approach Subfactor 2.1 - Distance

Factor 3 – Past Performance

Factor 4 – Safety

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

(a) Price:

Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The price proposal shall include the following, separately tabbed:

Standard Form 1449 (Solicitation, Offer, and Award) – Blocks 12, 17, 30 Standard Form 1449 (Solicitation, Offer, and Award) Contract Line Item Numbers (CLIN) 0001, Option CLIN(s) 0002, 0003, 0004, 0005, and 0006 Attachment 1 (Contract Line Item Pricing Unit Pricing form)

(2) Basis of Evaluation: The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price consists of the basic requirements and all option CLINS (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.

(b) Technical Factors:

Page restrictions (limitations) are set for each factor. Any proposal which exceeds the page restrictions for one or more factors, the additional pages will NOT be considered or evaluated.

The distinction between corporate experience and past performance is that corporate experience pertains to the types of work and volume of work completed by a contractor that is comparable to the types of work covered by this requirement of recent efforts. Past Performance pertains to how well a contractor has performed on the contracts.

Factor 1 - Corporate Experience:

Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

PAGE RESTRICTIONS: Each Project Data Sheet shall not be longer than two pages in length single-spaced.

Use Exhibit “A” (Corporate Experience Project Data Sheet form) to submit a maximum of four relevant, recent, and complete/substantially completed projects for evaluation. Firms are responsible for providing project description and applicable experience in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of project relevancy

Relevant projects include recycling and composting services similar in scope and size as identified in the solicitation. Size shall be at least $150,000. Recent is any contract completed on or after 30 June 2015. Substantially completed shall be at least 3/4ths of the length or amount of the total project.

NEXUS: Any project submitted which was NOT performed by the offeror shall have a nexus statement included.

The offeror is the entity submitting the proposal by the exact CAGE and DUNS. The following examples apply. A sister company with a different CAGE and DUNS requires a NEXUS. A different location of the same company, which has a different CAGE and DUNS. A subsidiary company which has a different CAGE and DUNS. The NEXUS statement must clearly explain why the success of the other entity can be expected from the offeror.

Examples include the same management team will move over to this contract, the same technical approaches will be used, the same quality assurance plan will be used, the same safety plan will be used, etc.

A project submitted where the offeror was a subcontractor will be given less weight since the offeror did not have the responsibility for contract oversight and administration with the client.

Projects/Contracts 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.

Failure to include a current point of contact and contract number may negatively impact a firm’s rating.

IMPORTANT: Projects submitted under Factor 1 shall be the same as those projects submitted for Factor 3; any project submitted under Factor 1 that has not been submitted under Factor 3 will not be evaluated under Factor 1 and puts the Offeror at risk of receiving a lower rating for Factor 1.

Basis of Evaluation:

This factor considers the extent of the Offeror’s corporate experience with relevant contracts. Firms unable to demonstrate successful performance of relevant projects may be considered ineligible for award.

SubFactor 1.1 – Licenses and Permits:

Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

PAGE RESTRICTIONS: No more than two pages single-spaced on Exhibit B (Licensing and Permits). There is no page limitation on the photocopies of the Licenses and Permits.

The offeror shall submit Exhibit B (Licensing and Permits form).

The offeror shall submit photocopies of all required licenses and permits which must reflect the offeror’s name. If not, the offeror must explain how it is able to operate under the license and permits, such as a statement the license and permits are in the parent company’s name and that the offeror is authorized to operate under the license and permit.

- Washington State Business License

- Department of Ecology Storm Water Permit

- Air Pollution Control Authority Permit

- County Health Department Solid Waste Handling Permit

- County Health Department Contaminated Materials Permit

- County Health Department Composting Permits for Types I, II, and III Material

The offeror shall submit a list of any infractions issued by any licensing or regulatory authorities, e.g., Federal, State, country and local Governments within the past Four years. The offeror shall explain what steps were taken to prevent recurrence and how successful was the effort. Offerors with no infractions shall submit a statement that it has no infractions.

Failure to submit the required licenses and permits will make the Offeror ineligible for award.

Basis of evaluation:

The Offeror must have all required licenses and permits and demonstrate that it has authority to operate under the ones submitted. The Government may independently verify with the issuing agency that the submitted licenses and permits are valid.

The Offeror may have up to four infractions over the past four years and must demonstrate it has the ability to take successful corrective actions

Factor 2 – Technical Approach

Solicitation Submittal Requirements: N4425519R7004 Exhibit CN4425519R7004 Exhibit CN4425519R7004 Exhibit Cof two pages single-spaced.

The Offeror shall submit written documentation for Organic Sorting, and VAC Truck Debris Procedures(s)

Organic Sorting Procedure(s).

The Offeror shall submit Exhibit C (Organic Sorting Procedure form)

The offeror will describe its organic sorting procedure.

VAC Truck Debris Procedure(s)

The offeror shall submit Exhibit C-1 (VAC Truck Debris Procedure form).

The offeror will describe its VAC truck procedure for screening, sorting and disposal/composting of VAC Truck debris

Basis of evaluation:

The Offeror demonstrates:

Organic Sorting Procedure(s).

The offeror can screen and sort mixed loads of Navy material (fire-retardant treated wood; non-fire-retardant treated wood; metal-contaminated wood; sawdust; shredded paper; and composting material). If the procedure proposed is unsafe, in violation of regulatory compliance, or presents high risk that it will be unsuccessful, the offeror will be ineligible for award unless corrected through discussions. The Government intends to award without discussions, but reserves the right to enter discussions if required.

VAC Truck Debris Procedure(s)

If the procedure proposed is unsafe, in violation of regulatory compliance, or presents high risk that it will be unsuccessful, the offeror will be ineligible for award unless corrected through discussions. The Government intends to award without discussions, but reserves the right to enter discussions if required

SubFactor 2.1 – Distance from source to processing facility

Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

PAGE RESTRICTION: Not to exceed one page single-spaced.

The Offerors shall submit Exhibit E (Distance from Source to Drop Site)

The Offeror shall identify the physical location (address) of the drop site. The Government will transport all materials from the source site (NBK Bangor, and/or NBK Bremerton) in Government vehicles up to 50 road miles (one way/non ferry ride. If the Offeror’s facility is greater than 50 miles from the source site and further transportation is contemplated, then the Offeror must explain (not to exceed 1 page single-spaced) the location of the receipt point, method of transfer from Government vehicle to Offeror’s vehicle and final processing facility location. Under no circumstances will the Government Vehicle travel more than 50 road miles from physical source site.

For the purposes of determining the physical source site for travel, the source site shall be either NBK- Bangor, T075 Skate Street, Silverdale, WA 98315 and/or NBK-Bremerton, 1400 Farragut Avenue, Building 850, Bremerton, WA 98314, whichever is closer to the offeror’s drop site

The offeror may propose to pick up the recyclable material, but if so, the Government also generates recyclable materials at other locations such as the Navy Hospital and Keyport, Kitsap WA.

IMPORTANT: The Washington State Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC) regulate the transportation of various types of waste streams. If the offerors drop site is a waypoint for further transportation, or the offeror proposes to pick up the recyclables at the origination point, the offeror must confirm with the UTC that it is not in violation of any UTC regulations. Any proposal which includes contractor transportation shall include a statement that the offeror has confirmed with the UTC that it is authorized to transport the recyclables.

Basis of Evaluation

Any proposal, which would require the Government to transport the recyclables more than 50 miles, will be ineligible for award. Any proposal for a drop site where the contractor will transfer the recyclables for further transportation must demonstrate that the transfer will be safe, in compliance with regulatory requirements, and does not contain high risk that it will be unsuccessful. Any proposal, which would have the offeror transporting the recyclables via its own vehicles, must be in compliance with UTC regulations to be eligible for award.

Factor 3 – Past Performance

Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

PAGE RESTRICTIONS: If submitting a CPARS evaluation, do not add any additional information to the appraisal, but there is no page limitation. If submitting a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) form, submit it as provided by the client without editing or adding comments to the form, but there is no page limitation. The explanation of negative past performance, if any, shall not exceed two pages single spaced, Times New Roman font, one inch margins, no smaller font size than 10.

If any of the four projects submitted have one or more Contractor Performance Assessment Report(s) (CPAR(s)), only the CPAR(s) for that project shall be submitted. If there are not any CPAR(s), the offeror shall submit Exhibit F (PPQ)).for that project.

Instructions for completing Exhibit F (PPQ). The offeror shall complete blocks 1 through 4. The offeror shall send the PPQ to the client. If the offeror was the prime contractor, the client is the customer who received the service. If the offeror was a subcontractor the client is the higher tiered contractor for whom the offeror performed work. The client shall complete blocks 7 through the end of the form. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ before the proposal due date, and if the offeror does not have a back-up project to submit, the offeror shall submit the PPQ completed through block 6. The Government may contact the client directly to obtain the performance data.

If any past performance is negative, the contractor shall submit a separate narrative explaining what was/is being done to prevent recurrence and the results of that effort.

IMPORTANT NOTIFICATION:

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

Basis of Evaluation

The degree to which past performance evaluations and all other past performance information reviewed by the Government

- 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

- An ability to recover from negative past performance if there was any, Factor 4 – Safety.

Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit a narrative that fully describes the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and sub-contractor performed work and the Offeror’s method for qualifying, evaluating, selecting all tiers of sub-contractors.

The narrative shall include:

(1) Experience Modification Rate (EMR): Include five previous complete calendar years’ worth of data. This rate compares company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums. The Offeror may submit an insurance company-provided equivalent rate if no EMR exists. If the Offeror has no EMR or premium, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affect the EMR and negative trends shall be addressed as part of the factor submission.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) And Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates (as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration); Submit five previous complete calendar years’ worth of data. If an Offeror cannot submit an OSHA DART and TRC rates, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART, and TRC rate data negatively shall be addressed as part of this factor submission.

(3) Technical Approach for Safety: Describe the plan for safety that will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. The Offeror shall submit a narrative that fully describes the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and sub-contractor performed work. The Offeror will describe any innovative methods that will be employed to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and all subcontractor levels. Additionally, the contractor will describe their methodology to execute an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques and processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps. The technical approach to safety narrative shall be limited to one double-sided page (or two single-sided pages.)

Note: For a partnership or joint venture, the EMR, DART, and TRC submittal requirements are required for each Offeror who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one technical approach for safety narrative is required. Safety narratives for joint ventures may be up to two double-sided pages (or four single-sided pages.)

Basis of Evaluation

The safety factor evaluation will collectively consider the following three-submittal requirements and other sources of information available to the Government:

(1) EMR - The board will evaluate the EMR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating for the five previous complete calendar years (these ratings will not be averaged). If no EMR exists, the board will evaluate the Offeror’s insurance company-provided equivalent rate, or the Offeror’s explanation addressing the lack of rates. If an insurance company-provided equivalent rate is provided, it will be treated the same as an EMR.

Any extenuating circumstances that affected the EMR and negative trends shall be addressed as part of this selection factor.

(2) OSHA DART and TRC rates – The board will evaluate the OSHA DART and TRC rates to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any trends and extenuating circumstances that impact rates for the five previous complete calendar years (these ratings will not be averaged). If the Offeror is unable to submit OSHA DART and TRC rates, the board will evaluate the Offeror’s explanation addressing the lack of rates. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART and TRC rate data and negative trends shall be addressed as part of this element.

(3) Technical Approach to Safety: The board will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which subcontractor safety performance will be considered in the selection of all levels of subcontractors on the upcoming project. The board will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which innovations are being proposed that may enhance safety on this procurement and validate the contractor has addressed methodology to be used in the execution of an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques/processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps.

(4) Other sources of information available to the Government – Other sources for safety may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS) in Enterprise Safety Applications Management System (ESAMS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and other related databases.

(End of Summary of Changes)