Amendment_0005.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

SEVEN 175-TON PORTAL CRANES AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS

This amendment is issued for the follow ing reasons: 1) Respond to inquires 24-33; 2) Revise the Liquidated Damages clause; 3) Revise Factor 4, Safety; and 4) Extend the proposal due date.

Pre-proposal inquiries are no longer accepted.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 11

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 24-Jul-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 N6247018R2012

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

24-Apr-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 X is extended, is not extended.

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

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

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

24-Jul-2019

CODE

COMMANDER NAVFAC ATLANTIC

NAVY CRANE CENTER

NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD

BLDG 491

PORTSMOUTH VA 23709-5000

N62470 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N6247018R2012

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMEND. 0005

INQUIRIES 24-33

24) QUESTION: FAR 52.236-27, Site Visit, requires that all attendees of the organized site visit be U.S.

citizens. Does this clause constitute the only citizenship limitation? We assume that non-U.S. citizens will be permitted to access the site during performance of the contract. Please confirm.

RESPONSE: Far 52.236-27 covers the requirements for the pre-proposal site visit only. Site specific requirements for each shipyard can be found in Attachments K, L, M, and N.

25) QUESTION: On May 13, 2019, in Amendment 0002 to the solicitation, the Navy responded to a question regarding whether Canadian companies would be allowed to bid to design and supply the required portal cranes by referring Canadian offerors to DFARS 225.870. Please confirm that, in the event a Canadian firm is the successful offeror, DoD will enter into a prime contract with the Canadian Commercial Corporation as per the requirements of DFARS 225.870. Please confirm.

RESPONSE: In the event a Canadian firm that submitted an offer compliant with the terms of DFARS

225.870 is selected for award of the contract, the US Government will issue an award to Canadian Commercial Corporation in accordance with DFARS 225.870.

26) QUESTION: For a Canadian company, please confirm that, as the Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC) will be the prime contractor if our proposal is selected for award and, per DFARS 225.870-1(a), the Canadian Government will guarantee all CCC contractual commitments, a Canadian offeror is therefore NOT required to submit a bid guarantee via Standard Form 24 as part of its proposal. In addition, please confirm that a Canadian awardee, as subcontractor to CCC, will not be required to provide Performance and Payment Bonds as specified in FAR 52.228-16 as all obligations to the U.S. Government will be guaranteed by the Canadian Government through the CCC.

RESPONSE: A bid bond shall be included with your proposal, in accordance with Section C5 of the solicitation. The requirement for performance and payment bonds does not apply to any potential contract awarded to the Canadian Commercial Corporation, as the Government of Canada guarantees through this entity that the terms and conditions of any potential contract will be fulfilled in accordance with DFARS 225.870.

27) QUESTION: Other than CLIN 0001, we understand that a separate performance/payment bond will be issued for each CLIN 0002 to 0007 and only when the option is exercised and the unit becomes contractual. For more clarity, we understand that 7 separate bonds will be issued if all options are exercised and not a cumulative bonding. Also, please confirm after which period of time or milestone the performance bond/payment bond will be released/void following the commissioning.

RESPONSE: In accordance with FAR 52.228-16(d) of this solicitation, "The Government may require additional performance and payment bond protection if the contract price is increased. The Government may secure the additional protection by directing the Contractor to increase the penal amount of the existing bonds or to obtain additional bonds."

28) QUESTION: Should the transaction/contract be characterized as a sale of tangible personal property (TPP) to federal government or the purchase of contracting services to improve real property? We understand that states of Washington, Virginia and New Hampshire States afford a sales tax exemption on sale of tangible personal property under the policy that it does not charge sales tax to the U.S. Government. However, the classification as Government contracting would results in the application of sales/use tax and therefore run counter to the purpose of the exemption for sale of TPP. In this case, use/sale tax must be added to the purchase price of the equipment at various rates per state.

We understand here that the purpose of the sale from government’s end is not to obtain services related to construction, installation or improvement to real property. However, considering that there is a separation of the installation requirements from the supply of the equipment in the price matrix, it could potentially suggest a distinct and significant activity. Please clarify.

RESPONSE: The nature of this contract is provided in the scope of work. The Government cannot provide Offerors with specific direction as to how this will impact tax liability and/or the applicability of tax credits or exemptions. The awarded contract will not show the completed Price Proposal Form. Only the total price of each CLIN will be listed in Section B of the contract.

29) QUESTION: Liquidated Damages mechanism is difficult to understand considering the maximum LD amount is increasing each time an option will be exercised. Total contract price is unknown and is variable depending the number of options exercised. Please define what is the contract price for the purpose of calculating LDs and in the context that most of the total potential value is related to optional units.

Is the 5% maximum LDs for the first crane is calculated on that first crane contract value only or will the 5% maximum LDs of that single first crane will be calculated on the total contract value and will also increase as optional cranes are exercised? This means that the last crane maximum LDs will be significantly higher than the first crane. Please explain how exactly the Government will apply the 5% maximum LD.

RESPONSE: See FAR 52.211-11 as revised by Amendment 0005.

30) QUESTION: It is required to provide historical small business achievement with each project cited under Corporate Experience Factor. Some of our Corporate Experience projects were executed outside the US so we could not logistically and efficiently use US Small Businesses concerns like SB, VOSB, SDVOSB, HUBZone, SDB and WOSB. Will the Government penalize the Offeror for those projects or will it base its evaluation on the remaining US projects which used US Small Business concerns ?

RESPONSE: Factor 3 states, “Offerors shall provide explanations for contracts or task orders that were performed exclusively overseas or did not include opportunities for subcontracting (100% self-performed).” Please see the Basis of Evaluation, under Factor 3, Small Business Utilization, for how offerors will be evaluated.

31) QUESTION: We know that the Government gives a better evaluation when an Offeror names and provides Teaming Agreement with SB concerns. With such long potential contract duration (close to 10 years), is the Government expecting that the Offeror to specifically name and commit to the named SB concerns or is the Government looking for dollar value commitments without naming SB concern firms. It is difficult to commit for specific SB concerns at this point when we do not even know if those SB firms will still be available or interested or even in business in 7 or 8 years from now.

RESPONSE: Please see the Basis of Evaluation, under Factor 3, Small Business Utilization, for how offerors will be evaluated.

32) QUESTION: It is required to submit for the last 3 years our OSHA records. Can an Offeror not being from the US to submit its country of origin Safety Records?

RESPONSE: Amendment 0005 has revised Factor 4, Safety.

33) QUESTION: Can the Government extend the bid due date for another week until August 7? Transport companies (ground and maritime) are still working on the logistic of the many Navy locations and that takes longer than expected and are asking us for more time.

RESPONSE: See Amendment 0005.

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 31-Jul-2019 02:00 PM to 07-Aug-2019 02:00 PM.

SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

The following have been modified:

52.211-11 LIQUIDATED DAMAGES--SUPPLIES, SERVICES, OR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT (SEP 2000)

(a) If the Contractor fails to deliver the supplies or perform the services within the time specified in this contract, the Contractor shall, in place of actual damages, pay to the Government liquidated damages as identified below for each calendar day of delay:

CLIN 0001 – $32,450

CLIN 0002 – $32,300

CLIN 0003 – $32,300

CLIN 0004 – $32,300

CLIN 0005 – $32,300

CLIN 0006 – $32,300

CLIN 0007 – $32,300

Liquidated damages for a particular CLIN may not exceed 5% of the price for that CLIN.

(b) If the Government terminates this contract in whole or in part under the Default--Fixed-Price Supply and Service clause, the Contractor is liable for liquidated damages accruing until the Government reasonably obtains delivery or performance of similar supplies or services. These liquidated damages are in addition to excess costs of repurchase under the Termination clause.

(c) The Contractor will not be charged with liquidated damages when the delay in delivery or performance is beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Contractor as defined in the Default--Fixed-Price Supply and Service clause in this contract.

(End of clause)

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION FACTORS

M1 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 proposal determined to represent the best value—the proposal most advantageous to the Government, cost/price and other factors considered.

2. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In addition, if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

3. The 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.

4. 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.

5. 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. Proposals may be found to have either a significant weakness or multiple weaknesses that impact either the individual factor rating or the overall rating for the proposal.

M2 EVALUATION FACTORS

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

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience Factor 2 – Past Performance Factor 3 – Small Business Utilization

Factor 4 – Safety

The distinction between corporate experience and past performance is corporate experience pertains to the types of work and volume of work completed by a contractor that are comparable to the types of work covered by this requirement, in terms of size, scope, and complexity. Past performance pertains to both the relevance of recent efforts and how well a contractor has performed on the contracts.

The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is the technical factors (Factors 1, 3, & 4) are of equal importance to each other and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor (Factor 2). 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(s) whose offer conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered.

(a) PRICE: Submit one (1) original price proposal with one (1) CD in Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) format. The price proposal must be separate from the non-price proposal and clearly labeled as price.

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

(i) Completed SF33, Solicitation, Offer and Award (Blocks 12-18), including acknowledgement of ALL amendments in Block 14 (use additional sheets to acknowledge all amendments, if necessary)

(ii) Completed Price Proposal Form (Attachment S)

(iii) A Standard Form 24, Bid Bond in the amount of 20% or $3 million, whichever is less

(iv) Copy of Contractor Representations and Certification from www.sam.gov

(v) VETS-4212 Annual Report

(vi) Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable)

(2) Basis of Evaluation: The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, the Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. 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) NON-COST/PRICE FACTORS: Submit one (1) original non-price proposal with three (3) hard copies and one (1) CD in Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) format addressing the following:

(1) Factor 1, Corporate Experience:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall provide a maximum of five

(5) examples of recent and relevant projects. A project is defined as a complete effort performed under a single task/delivery 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/delivery order as a project.

The Offeror shall clearly demonstrate recent and relevant experience of the firm on projects similar in size, scope and complexity to the requirements described in the Request for Proposals (RFP). Each project must have been completed within the last fifteen (15) years preceding the release date of the solicitation to be considered recent and relevant. Projects which are not yet completed by the release date of the solicitation will not be considered. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as a project involving the design, manufacture, and delivery of either: 1) a crane with a sixty (60) ton or greater main hoist, or 2) a crane with a luffing boom hoist and rotating upper works.

Projects that demonstrate the following may be considered more favorably: 1) involve cranes with a luffing boom hoist and rotating upper works, 2) use of an on-board diesel, 3) site survey/investigation, 4) crane testing, and/or 5) operational training).

It is the Offeror’s responsibility to choose which projects best demonstrate the Offeror’s ability to successfully accomplish the RFP requirements. The write-up for each project shall not exceed three (3) single-sided pages. In addition to the written portion, a general arrangement drawing of the crane shall be included on one (1) additional single-sided page, up to D sheet in size.

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 experience, projects should be submitted for each Joint Venture partner. Projects may be submitted for any joint venture partner; however, offerors who fail to submit experience for each joint venture partner may be considered less favorably. Offerors are still limited to a total of five

(5) projects combined.

If the offeror uses a proposed subcontractor(s) to demonstrate corporate experience, the offeror must do the following: provide a letter of commitment from the subcontractor and the subcontractor’s DUNS number if available; submit at least one (1) contract for the proposed subcontractor(s); and demonstrate how the proposed subcontractor will use that corporate experience in the performance of the contract.

If the offeror uses affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF33) to demonstrate recent, relevant experience the offeror shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies will have meaningful involvement in the performance of this contract. Meaningful involvement is demonstrated when the proposal: 1) clearly states the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member company's specific commitment of technical resources (e.g. personnel, equipment) that will be provided or relied upon for contract performance; and 2) describes specific aspects of the project that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member company will self-perform or manage on behalf of the Offeror in performance of the contract.

Failure to submit letters of intent, teaming agreements (including Joint Venture agreements), demonstration of meaningful involvement, or other evidence of commitment may result in the Government not evaluating the recent, relevant experience of the subcontractor, partner, team, or JV member.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the Offeror’s recent and 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 review only five (5) projects. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) project limit will not be considered.

(2) Factor 2, Past Performance:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Submit a completed CPARS evaluation with the proposal for each project submitted under Factor 1. If there is not a completed CPARS evaluation, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation (Attachment G) is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1 – Corporate Experience. AN OFFEROR SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE.

IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror must complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment G), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Luke Clay, via email at luke.clay@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.

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.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse past performance issues.

Such explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) in total.

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), 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.

The criteria for recent and relevant past performance shall be as defined in Factor 1.

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

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: This evaluation focuses on how well the Offeror performed on the relevant, recent detailed projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience and past performance on other projects currently documented in known sources.

The Government will evaluate 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 on relevant projects 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.); and

(4) 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 the Contractor’s performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the Offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history, or for whom information on past performance is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably in past performance and will receive a Neutral Confidence rating.

(3) Factor 3, Small Business Utilization:

This Factor assesses both the historical achievements in utilizing small business concerns as subcontractors and proposed small business participation and commitment strategy.

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

a. Achievements: All offerors shall provide a narrative (limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one (1) double-sided page) to describe their achievements in supporting the Government’s policy to provide maximum practicable opportunities for small business (SB), veteran-owned small business (VOSB), service-disabled veteran-owned small business (SDVOSB), historically underutilized business zone (HUBZone) small business, small disadvantaged business (SDB), and women-owned small business (WOSB) concerns to participate as subcontractors consistent with efficient contract performance. In support of and in addition to narrative submissions:

(1) Small Business Achievement Record, Attachment H: All offerors (SBs and other than SBs) shall submit small business subcontracting information associated with each project cited under the Corporate Experience Factor whether performed as a prime or subcontractor. This information is required regardless of whether a subcontracting plan was incorporated into the contract award. This information shall be provided in the format provided in Attachment H, Small Business Achievement Record. If projects submitted under Corporate Experience were task orders, the small business participation achievements should be specific to the task order, not the contract. If a project cited under the Corporate Experience Factor was not performed by the offeror as a prime or subcontractor (i.e. the offeror is utilizing experience of subcontractor to fulfill Corporate Experience), Attachment H is not required. The proposal shall include an explanation for any project that does not require Attachment H. Offerors shall provide explanations for contracts or task orders that were performed exclusively overseas or did not include opportunities for subcontracting (100% self-performed).

(2) ISRs or Similar Reports: Offerors representing as other than small businesses shall also provide copies of the most current individual subcontracting reports (ISRs) associated with each project cited under the Corporate Experience Factor if a small business subcontracting plan was required by the contract. If such projects were completed under specific task orders, provide ISRs for the overall contract. For cited projects with state and local government agencies, provide similar subcontracting performance reports if required by the contracts. If the contract did not require an ISR or similar report, the offeror should advise accordingly. When not specifically addressed in the ISR or similar report, offerors shall provide explanations for all instances of failures to meet dollar or percentage goals in individual subcontracting plans. Acknowledging a goal was missed is not the same as providing an explanation for why a goal was missed.

Notes: The Government reserves the right to consider achievements information on other recent, relevant projects from all available sources.

Offerors utilizing achievements information of key subcontractors shall clearly demonstrate how these companies will have meaningful involvement in the management of the subcontracting program for this acquisition. If not, such achievement information will not be considered under this factor. If the offeror is a new joint venture, partnership or other entity consisting of more than one company, provide achievements information for each individual business entity(ies) that will be responsible for managing the subcontracting program and clearly describe those responsibilities.

Failure to provide the narrative summary, Small Business Achievement Records, ISRs or similar reports, or any other requested information must be fully explained; failure to provide an adequate explanation and may negatively impact your evaluation.

b. Small Business Participation and Commitment: A Small Business Participation and Commitment document specifies the offerors level of commitment to small business utilization in performance of this requirement. A Small Business Participation and Commitment Document is required from all offerors,

(1) Small Business Participation and Commitment Document, Attachment I: All offerors shall submit a small business participation and commitment strategy document, utilizing Attachment I., Small Business Participation and Commitment Strategy.

The anticipated prime and first tier overall small business participation rate for this acquisition (i.e. work to be performed by small businesses as the prime and/or subcontractors) is 20% of the contract value. Offerors are encouraged to exceed this percentage and seek meaningful levels of participation in each of the small business socioeconomic programs listed in Attachment I consistent with efficient contract performance.

(2) Narrative: All offerors shall provide a supplemental narrative (limited to three (3) single-sided pages).

The narrative shall explain how proposed participation rates were established (including methodology used to develop the proposed rates).

The narrative shall also identify, in terms of dollar value and percentage of the total acquisition, the extent of work the offeror will self-perform as the prime contractor. If submitting an offer as a joint venture, identify the percentage of work each member will be responsible for and indicate the size status of each member (e.g. small business, woman-owned small business, other than small business).

Offerors shall also describe binding agreements with subcontractors and post award roles for execution.

The small business participation and commitment strategy must be in agreement with any required small business subcontracting plan and will be made a part of the contract upon award.

Note: (1) The small business participation and commitment strategies evaluated under this factor do not replace small business subcontracting plans. Offerors representing as other than small businesses must submit acceptable small business subcontracting plans using the SBSP (Attachment J) in order to be eligible for award (FAR 19.702(a)(1)). See the SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN section of INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS for subcontracting plan submission requirements.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: Offerors will be evaluated on the following:

a. Achievements:

(1) The extent to which the proposals and other performance information (i.e. small business achievement records and ISRs) available to the Government demonstrate a history of successfully supporting Government policies concerning utilization of small business concerns as subcontractors including, when applicable, achievements against established small business subcontracting plan goals.

b. Small Business Participation and Commitment

(1) Quantitative degree to which small business (including small business in all socio-economic categories) will participate in the acquisition relative to the total contract value.

(2) The extent to which small business concerns are specifically identified by name and socio-economic category in the proposal

(3) The levels of small business participation proposed and the degree of commitment to use named sources (formal agreements/letters of intent).

(4) Complexity and variety of the work small businesses are to perform.

(5) Realism and the likelihood of success in achieving the small business objectives of this acquisition.

Forms to be used for offeror submission of Small Business Utilization Factor information are:

Attachment H – Small Business Achievement Record Attachment I – Small Business Participation and Commitment Strategy

(4) Factor 4, Safety:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information: (For a partnership or joint venture, the following shall address each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; only one safety narrative is required.)

(1) Technical Approach for Safety: Describe the offeror’s technical approach to safety for its employees as well as the plan that the Offeror will implement to evaluate and measure safety performance of potential subcontractors, as a part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. Also, describe any innovative methods that the Offeror will employ to ensure and monitor safe work practices at all subcontractor levels. The Safety Narrative shall be limited to three single-sided pages.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation:

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 Government will evaluate the Offeror’s overall safety record, the Offeror’s plan to select and monitor subcontractors, and any innovative safety methods that the Offeror plans to implement for this procurement. The Government’s sources of information for evaluating safety may include, but are not limited to, Government agencies, OSHA, NAVFAC’s Facility Accident and Incident Reporting (FAIR) and Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS) databases, and other related resources. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete safety information regarding these submittal requirements rests with the Offeror. The evaluation will collectively consider the Offeror’s technical approach to safety and other sources of information available to the Government.

(1) Technical Approach to Safety: The Government will also 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. Finally, the evaluation of the Offeror’s safety narrative will consider any innovations proposed to determine the degree to which they may enhance safety on this procurement. Those Offerors whose plan demonstrates a commitment to hire subcontractors with a culture of safety and who propose innovative methods to enhance a safe working environment may be given greater weight in the evaluation.

(End of Summary of Changes)