Amendment 0003.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

Tw o (2) 120 Ton OET Cranes, EHW-1, Kings Bay, GA.

Amendment 0003 is issued for the follow ing:

1) Respond to PPI #20-37

2) Revise Specification No. 1614003

3) Revise Section A - Solicitation/Contract Form

4) Revise Section F - Deliveries or Performance

5) Revise Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

6) Revise Section M - Evaluation Factors for Aw ard

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 15

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 10-Apr-2020

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 N6247020R1001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

20-Feb-2020

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 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

10-Apr-2020

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:

N6247020R1001

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:

AMENDMENT 0003

1) Respond to PPI #20-37

PPI# Page# Reference Question Response

Does the government have dwg files of the building and can those be made available?

See Amendment 0002.

21 36 2.3.4.4

Insulated hook factor of safety. H.J. HIRTZER, INC. does not have a 120T unit with a factor of safety more than 4:1. No other manufacturer has one that we can find. Is a factor of safety of 4:1 acceptable?

See Amendment 0002.

22 29 2.3.1.3

We have a manufacture who can make the girders without a mechanical or field splice. Is a field spice allowed if it’s more economical? Is a mechanical splice allowed?

The specification is revised via this Amendment (Amendment 0003).

RFP

Install of large equipment shouldn’t have to be only a crane. Will equivalent sized equipment satisfy this requirement if a specialized rigging company is used for the install and a past experience example with similar sized equipment and rigging challenges is presented?

Please propose per the solicitation.

520 amp conductor bar doesn’t seem to be enough upon first review of the requirements.

Who's responsibility is it to change this if 520 amps is not the correct size?

It is the government's responsibility to provide adequate conductor bar.

Why are they doubling the size of the aux hook capacity?

Crane requirements are based on known future needs.

Do you have any dwg files of the building for layout and rigging purposes?

See Amendment 0002.

27 2.3.3.17 For the 40 ft. candle requirement for the flood lights. Is that to assume that the overhead lights are always on?

Assume the overhead lights are always off as in a worst-case scenario.

28 48 2.3.3 What grade of stainless do you want on the control enclosures? 304 or 316?

See Amendment 0002.

Do you have any additional floor loading information on the wharf available?

See Amendment 0002.

What is the total distributed weight we can put on the missile erection loading pads? Do you have drawing S26?

See Amendment 0002.

In 2.3.3.9.1.1 it talks about individual joysticks for the Main and Aux hoist. Then in 2.3.3.9.1.3a

– it requires a selector switch for the Main and Aux hoist controls. The selector switch implies that the Main and Aux are thru a single joystick.

The main and the auxiliary hoists are individual joysticks. The selector switch only allows one hoist joystick to operate at a time, precluding the event of inadvertent contact with a joystick resulting in unintended movement of the hoist not currently selected. No changes to the specification are required.

Same as above except for radio The main and the auxiliary hoists are individual joysticks. The selector switch only allows one hoist joystick to operate at a time, precluding the event of inadvertent contact with a joystick resulting in unintended movement of the hoist not currently selected. No changes to the specification are required.

Do I need to add PRIMARY & REDUNDANT control capability to the radio transmitter?

The primary and redundant controls are operated from the same joystick, but are electrically selected from selector switches mounted on the control panel for each function. A PRIMARY/REDUNDANT selector switch shall not be provided on the radio transmitter.

Can I get a better definition of what is meant by an ENGINEERING WORKSTATION? I think they are just looking for a place to plug in one of the two rugged laptops that they were asking for.

That was the approach I took anyway. If you have some insight, I’d be grateful.

The specification is revised via this Amendment (Amendment 0003).

The spec calls out a minimum of Class D performance of the crane motions. At maximum hook speed (12FPM) it will take almost 10 minutes to travel the entire 115’ from top to bottom. My guess is the hook speed will be considerably less which could potentially push us into a Class E or Class F territory on the main hoist. Should the main hoist be sized for Class E or F? The remaining motions seem fine at Class D.

The specification is revised via this Amendment (Amendment 0003).

There is no technical plan in the evaluation area.

How can the government determine who has the best plan for fabrication, shipping and installation. There is a big different between a 120ft girder and these girders for shipping and install.

Please propose per the solicitation.

37 29 2.3.1.3

This Section states……. "Field (on-site) splices are prohibited". Please confirm that Factory Field Bolted Splices are acceptable.

2.3.1.3 Bridge Girders

Bridge girders shall be box section type. Splices in the bridge girders shall be kept to a minimum and splices in locations of high stress shall be avoided. Splices shall be made with complete joint penetration welds. Field (on-site) splices are prohibited. Bridge girders shall be designed to be end notched to fit over the end truck. Girders shall be reinforced at the notches with vertical diaphragms and horizontal stiffeners. Bottom flanges shall be tapered towards the notches.

The specification is revised via this Amendment (Amendment 0003).

2) Revise Specification No. 1614003

The following items are applicable to this change:

1.3.1 Design Requirements

Modified the last sentence of the first paragraph.

From:

The cranes shall comply with all applicable requirements (“shall” statements) and recommendations (“should” statements) of CMAA No. 70 for class D service (minimum) and ASME B30.2 (all “should” statements shall be considered “shall” statements).

To:

The cranes shall comply with all applicable requirements (“shall” statements) and recommendations (“should” statements) of CMAA No. 70 for a minimum class D service unless otherwise specified herein, and ASME B30.2 (all “should” statements shall be considered “shall” statements).

1.4 Submittals

Modified the second sentence of the first paragraph.

From:

Large electronic files (e.g. 5MB) shall be submitted via ARL Safe-Support (https://safe-support@arl.army.mil).

To:

Large electronic files (maximum size of 8 GB) shall be submitted via DoD SAFE (https://safe.apps.mil/).

SD-07 Certificates Modified section SD-07 Certificates to include SD-07.11 Software and Services for provision of a certificate to aid in the activities validation of control system equipment.

SD-07.11 Software and Services The Contractor shall provide a certificate stating that all software and services not required for operation and/or maintenance of the product has been removed. If removal is not technically feasible, then disable software not required for the operation and/or maintenance of the product. Configure the product to allow the ability to re-enable ports and/or services if they are disabled by software. The removal of software or services shall not impede the primary function of the product. If software that is not required cannot be removed or disabled, document a specific explanation and provide risk mitigating recommendations and/or specific technical justification. The software/service to be removed and/or disabled shall include, but not be limited to:

a. Cameras

b. Games

c. Device drivers for product components not procured/delivered

d. Messaging services (e.g., email, instant messenger, peer-to-peer file sharing)

e. Source code

f. Software compilers in user workstations and servers

g. Software compilers for programming languages that are not used in the control system

h. Unused networking and communications protocols

i. Unused administrative utilities, diagnostics, network management, and system management functions

j. Backups of files, databases, and programs used only during system development

k. All unused data and configuration files

l. Remove and/or disable, through software, physical disconnection, or engineered barriers, all services and/or ports in the procured product not required for normal operation, emergency operations, or troubleshooting. This shall include communication ports and physical input/output ports (e.g., USB docking ports, video ports, and serial ports).

1.3.5 Modified the third sentence of Section 1.3.5 to provide the option of through-roof or inside building crane installation.

From:

Installation of the new cranes shall be performed inside the building as there will be no provision for through-roof access.

To:

Installation of the new cranes can be performed either inside the building or via Government provided through-roof access.

1.8 Modified the fourth sentence of Section 1.8 to provide additional mobilization information.

From:

The Contracting Officer will coordinate with the supported command and determine a final mobilization date.

To:

The Contracting Officer will coordinate with the supported command and determine a final mobilization date, however, this date will not be earlier than 1 March 2022.

2.3.1.3 Bridge Girders

Add:

Bolted splice is prohibited.

2.3.2 Mechanical Design

Add:

For the purpose of this specification, the 120-ton capacity (main) hoist shall be designed for a minimum CMAA No.

70 class E service.

2.3.2.4 Load Blocks

Modified the requirements for safety factor of the radio frequency insulating links.

From:

- The insulated link shall be designed for a minimum safety factor of five times the rated hook load.

To:

- The insulated link for the aux. hoist shall have a minimum safety factor of five times the 30- ton rated hook load, and the insulated link for the main hoist shall have a minimum safety factor of four times the 120-ton rated hook load.

2.3.3 Electrical Design

Added the fourth to last sentence of the last paragraph of Section 2.3.3 requiring all lights be LED and shipboard rated.

Added:

All lights installed on the crane shall be LED type, rated as UL 1598/a shipboard lights and mounted such that a galvanic cell is not created.

2.3.3.20

Deleted the first sentence of the first paragraph, the entire third paragraph, and modified the second sentence of

2.3.3.20 Control System and Network to remove requirements for an engineering workstation.

Deleted:

A desktop or rack mounted engineering workstation shall be located in the control module.

The onboard desktop or rack mounted engineering workstation shall be equipped with a 101 key wired USB keyboard having a minimum 64 character standard ASCII character set based on ANSI INCITS 154, and 2-button wired USB optical scroll mouse.

Modified:

From:

In addition to the onboard engineering workstation, two rugged laptop type workstations (computers) complete with all compatible software (including software licenses) and all necessary cables and special connectors to allow crane software to be troubleshot, checked, reloaded, and upgraded, and for the data recorder to be accessed and information retrieved, shall also be provided.

To:

Two rugged laptop type workstations (computers) complete with all compatible software (including software licenses) and all necessary cables and special connectors to allow crane software to be troubleshot, checked, reloaded, and upgraded, and for the data recorder to be accessed and information retrieved, shall also be provided. A dedicated station shall be provided on the crane for connection of the rugged laptop workstations to the drives/data recorders. The dedicated location can be stowable or fixed in nature.

3) Revise Section A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM (see changes below).

4) Revise Section F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE (see changes below).

5) Revise Section L - PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS (see changes below)

6) Revise Section M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD (see changes below)

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 22-Apr-2020 02:00 PM to 06-May-2020 05:00 PM.

The depository location has changed from Bldg. 491, Portsmouth, VA to electronic email.

The number of offeror copies required has decreased by 2 from 2 to 0.

SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

The following have been modified:

F1 TIME OF DELIVERY

The contract completion date for CLINs 0001, 0002, and 0003 shall be 30 September 2022.

F2 CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE

Contractor’s performance will be evaluated using the respective contractor performance evaluation report entry system located on the website http://www.cpars.gov/. Prior to commencement of work the contractor is required to provide the government with the name, phone number and email address of the “Contractor’s Representative” that will be responsible for receipt and review of draft performance evaluations prepared by the government in the appropriate system. It is the contractor’s responsibility to keep this contact information current.

F3 PLACE OF DELIVERY: DESTINATION

The contractor shall deliver the equipment F.O.B. to the destination.

F. O. B. means free on board at destination; i.e., the seller or consignor delivers the goods on seller’s or consignor’s conveyance at destination. The cost of shipping and risk of loss are borne by the seller or consignor.Offloading, post-delivery testing and other post-delivery services are included in this delivery. Refer to FAR clause 52.247-34, F.o.b. Destination, incorporated herein by reference.

F4 DEFENSE PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATION SYSTEM

For more information regarding the Defense Priorities and Allocation System please visit:

https://www.dcma.mil/DPAS/

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

L1 INQUIRIES OR QUESTIONS

Inquiries and questions on this Request for Proposals shall be submitted in writing electronically to the Contracting Officer, Lisa Sumpter at lisa.sumpter@navy.mil and Mikel Outen at mikel.outen@navy.mil. See solicitation Section J, Attachment D, for the pre-proposal inquiry form.

All inquiries or questions must state the solicitation number and clearly state the question and solicitation/spec reference.

The deadline for submitting pre-proposal inquiries is 14 calendar days prior to proposal due date.

L2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

1. Time and Date for Receipt of Proposals

A. Technical and price proposals shall be submitted no later than the date and time provided in Block 9 of the Standard Form 33 “Solicitation, Offer, and Award.” Proposals not received on or before the hour and date set forth will be handled in accordance with FAR provision 52.215-1 “Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition.”

B. Proposals shall be submitted to the following address:

If sent by mail or private courier:

Director, Navy Crane Center Attention: Ms. Mikel Outen Naval Facilities Engineering Command Building 491 Portsmouth, Virginia 23709-1044

You are required to submit both price and non-price final proposal revision in electronic format. The Contract Specialist will send you a “Request for Drop-off” from the DoD SAFE application. Please send an email to mikel.outen@navy.mil and lisa.sumpter@navy.mil and advise of the email address that will be used. Following receipt of the email address, a request for drop off will be sent, and the Government will confirm that it has been received. Please submit your full proposal via the DoD SAFE application. The DoD SAFE application has a 25 file limit for upload and 8GB file size limit. Please plan accordingly. No hard copy submissions will be accepted.

2. Proposal Format

Offerors must submit required information for non-price (technical and past performance) and price proposals as follows:

The Non-Price (technical and past performance) and Price Proposals shall be submitted in separate binders, tabbed appropriately, and must include a cover page with the name of the prime contractor, addresses, phone and fax numbers, e-mail addresses, solicitation number, DUNS number, and point of contact. Should there be a discrepancy between paper and electronic information provided, the paper copies shall govern. Offerors are requested to number the pages consecutively for each factor.

Each volume of the proposal shall be submitted in accordance with the solicitation submittal requirements presented under Price and Non-Price Factors. Proposals are to be neat, legible and orderly. Content is more important than quantity. A concise and comprehensive proposal is desired. Organization, clarity, accuracy of information, relevance, and completeness are of prime importance. Statements such as “will comply”, or “noted and understood”, without supporting narrative to define compliance are not acceptable. Cursory responses or responses which merely reiterate or reformulate solicitation language will not be considered as satisfying the requirement of the RFP or as demonstrating the ability to perform. Elaborate brochures or other presentations beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal are not desired. Elaborate artwork and expensive visual or other presentation aids are not necessary.

Do not include exceptions or conditions to the terms and conditions of the solicitation in either the non-price or price proposal. Should the offeror include any standard commercial or company terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation the offeror may be determined “unacceptable” and thus ineligible for award. Should the offeror have any questions related to specific terms and conditions of the solicitation, these should be resolved prior to submission of offers, via the pre-proposal inquiry process.

Details concerning how the proposal will be evaluated are covered in Section M of the RFP.

3. Joint Venture and Team Arrangements—FAR Subpart 9.6 defines contractor team arrangements. Contractor team arrangements mean (1) two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor; or (2) a potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractor under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.

All offerors proposing team members, a joint venture, key “team” subcontractor(s) (a key “team” subcontractor is defined as a subcontractor who in a “team” approach will perform significant/critical aspects of work under the proposed contract on a consistent basis, or on a consistent overflow basis), other subcontractors, and/or other entities (subsidiary/affiliate/parent/LLC/LTD member companies whose names are not exactly as stated on the SF33) upon whose resources the offeror relies on in response to a factor or subfactor requirement of this proposal, experience provided under Factor 1 (Corporate Experience), shall submit the following information in the front of both the technical and price proposals:

1. Provide a listing of the team members’ corporate name (no abbreviations), address, point of contact, phone number, DUNS Number, and CAGE Code. Provide this information in technical and price proposal.

2. Submit a copy of the joint venture agreement, other teaming arrangement agreement, or signed binding letter of commitment from each team member. For subcontractors, the offeror shall also provide an explanation of the meaningful involvement that the subcontractor will have in performance of this contract.

All joint ventures, teaming agreements, and letters of commitment shall: (1) clearly identify the expected relationship, role and responsibility between the firms or of the subcontractor or other entity (type and proportion of work to be performed); and (2) shall be signed by the appropriate individual(s) of each firm.

Copies of joint venture agreements, teaming agreements, and letters of commitment shall not be applied against the overall 75 page limit under the technical proposal.

52.236-27 SITE VISIT (CONSTRUCTION) (FEB 1995)

(a) The clauses at 52.236-2, Differing Site Conditions, and 52.236-3, Site Investigations and Conditions Affecting the Work, will be included in any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation. Accordingly, offerors or quoters are urged and expected to inspect the site where the work will be performed.

(b) Site visit will be held 10 March 2020 at Strategic Weapons Facility, Atlantic, Kings Bay, GA. Badged attendees will be escorted from Pass & ID at 8:30a.m. EST. The site visit will include a one-hour pre-proposal conference and a follow-on walk through of EHW-1. Attendees are required to provide visit requests per Section H of Attachment A and forward to Mikel Outen at mikel.outen@navy.mil no later than 28 February 2020.

(End of provision)

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 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

1. Proposals shall be delivered to the following address sent via DOD Safe to Ms. Mikel Outen (mikel.outen@navy.mil) with cc: to Ms. Lisa Sumpter (lisa.sumpter@navy.mil), in accordance with the date and time set for receipt of proposals.

DIRECTOR, NAVY CRANE CENTER

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND

BUILDING 491, PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA 23709-1044

Each offeror will be required to submit its proposal in two readily severable parts as follows:

PART 1 – Price PART 2 – Non-Price

Each part must be fastened or bound together.

M3 EVALUATION FACTORS

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

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

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

3. The relative order of importance of the non-price evaluation factors is the technical factors (Factors 1 and 3) 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-price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price.

The importance of price will increase if the Offerors’ non-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-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.

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

(a) PRICE:

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Submit one original price proposal and one copy of the price proposal on CD. The document should be in Adobe Acrobat files (.pdf format). The price proposal must be separate from the non-cost/price proposal and clearly labeled as price. The price proposal shall include the following:

(i) Completed SF33, Solicitation, Offer and Award (Blocks 12-18)

(ii) Completed Price Proposal Form (Attachment F)

(iii) A Standard Form 24, Bid Bond

(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 (see Section B of the solicitation). 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-PRICE FACTORS: Submit one (1) original non-price proposal with two (2) 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 ten (10) 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, delivery and installation of either: 1) a crane with a sixty (60) ton or greater main hoist, or 2) a top running double girder crane of 120 foot span or greater.

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 E) 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 E), 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, Mikel Outen, via email at mikel.outen@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 E.

(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, Safety:

(i) Solicitation 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. EMR, DART and TRC Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

(1) Experience Modification Rate (EMR): Submit the three most recent 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 should be addressed as part of the factor submission.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate: Submit the three most recent complete calendar years’ worth of data. If an offeror cannot submit an OSHA DART, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

(3) OSHA Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rate: Submit the three most recent complete calendar years’ worth of data.

If an offeror cannot submit an OSHA TRC rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA TRC rate data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

(4) 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 subcontractor performed work. The offeror will describe any innovative methods that will be employed to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and/or all subcontractor levels. Additionally, the contactor 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 two (2) single-sided pages.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

-Experience Modification Rate (EMR) -OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) -OSHA Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates -Offeror Technical Approach to Safety -Other sources of information available to the Government

The board will evaluate the EMR, DART and TRC Rates to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any negative trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

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 task orders under the contract, the degree to which innovations are being proposed that may enhance safety on this procurement, and to 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. 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.

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. The Board may consider information from other sources of information available to the Government in evaluation of the EMR, DART, and TRC Rates and the narrative.

(End of Summary of Changes)

WO #1614003 Amendment 00003 Page 1 of 72

WO #1614003

NAVFAC

TWO 120/30 TON OVERHEAD ELECTRIC TRAVELING CRANES

at

STRATEGIC WEAPONS FACILITY ATLANTIC, KINGS BAY, GA

PREPARED BY:

Navy Crane Center Bldg. 491, Norfolk Naval Shipyard Portsmouth, Virginia 23709-5000

WO #1614003 Amendment 00003 Page 2 of 72

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART 1.0 GENERAL

1.1 REFERENCES

1.2 UNIT PRICES

1.3 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

1.4 SUBMITTALS

1.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE

1.6 DELIVERY, STORAGE, AND HANDLING

1.7 PROJECT/SITE CONDITIONS

1.8 SEQUENCING AND SCHEDULING

1.9 CONTRACTOR REQUESTED ENGINEERING CHANGES

1.10 WARRANTY

1.11 MAINTENANCE

PART 2.0 PRODUCTS

2.1 MATERIALS

2.2 MANUFACTURED UNITS

2.3 EQUIPMENT

2.3.1 Structural Design

2.3.2 Mechanical Design

2.3.3 Electrical Design

2.4 COMPONENTS

2.5 ACCESSORIES

2.6 MIXES

2.7 FABRICATION

2.8 TESTS, INSPECTIONS, AND VERIFICATIONS

PART 3.0 EXECUTION

3.1 EXAMINATION

3.2 PREPARATION

3.3 ERECTION

3.4 INSTALLATION

3.5 APPLICATION

3.6 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL

3.7 ADJUSTING AND CLEANING

3.8 DEMONSTRATION

3.9 PROTECTION

3.10 SCHEDULES

WO #1614003 Amendment 00003 Page 3 of 72

PART 1.0 GENERAL

1.1 REFERENCES

The following documents, of the issue in effect on date of invitation for bids or request for proposal, form a part of this specification to the extent specified herein. In case of difference between the following documents and this specification, this specification shall govern to the extent of such difference. If standards other than those listed below are used, proof of equivalence shall be provided. NEMA, OSHA, ASME, AWS, AISC, and NFPA rules shall govern.

AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE (ANSI)

A14.3 - Fixed Ladders – Safety Requirements ANSI/IEC 60529 –Degrees of Protection Provided by Enclosures (IP20)

AMERICAN GEAR MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION (ANSI/AGMA)

2001 - Fundamental Rating Factors and Calculation Methods for Involute Spur and Helical Gear Teeth 2015 - Accuracy Classification System 6013 - Standard for Industrial Enclosed Gear Drives 6034 - Practice for Enclosed Cylindrical Worm Gear Speed Reducers and Gear

Motors 6035 - Design, Rating and Application of Industrial Globoidal Worm gearing

ASSOCIATION FOR IRON & STEEL TECHNOLOGY (AIST)

TR-06 - Specification for Electric Overhead Traveling Cranes for Steel Mill

Service TR-13 - Guide for the Design and Construction of Mill Buildings

AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION (AISC)

360 - Specification for Structural Steel Buildings 303 - Code of Standard Practice for Steel Buildings and Bridges

AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS INTERNATIONAL

(ASME)

B1.1 - Unified Inch Screw Thread B4.1 - Positional Fits and Tolerance for Cylindrical Parts B17.1 - Keys and Keyseats B18.8.2 - Taper Pins, Dowel Pins, Straight Pins, Grooved Pins, and Spring Pins

(Inch Series) B30.2 - Overhead and Gantry Cranes (Top Running Bridge, Single or Multiple

Girder, Top Running Trolley Hoist) B30.10 - Hooks

AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS (ASCE/SEI)

7 - Minimum Design Load for Buildings and Other Structures

WO #1614003 Amendment 00003 Page 4 of 72

AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS (ASTM)

A27 - Mild to Medium Strength Carbon Steel Castings for General Application A36 - Structural Steel A148 - High Strength Steel Castings for Structural Purposes A194 - Standard Specification for Carbon and Alloy Steel Nuts for Bolts for

High Pressure and High Temperature Service A242 - Standard Specification for High-Strength Low-Alloy Structural Steel A275 - Magnetic Particle Exam of Steel Forgings A307 - Standard Specification for Carbon Steel Bolts and Studs, 60 000 psi

Tensile Strength A325 - Standard Specification for Structural Bolts, Steel, Heat Treated, 120/105 ksi Minimum Tensile Strength A388 - Standard Practice for Ultrasonic Examination of Steel Forgings A434 - Standard Specification for Steel Bars, Alloy, Hot-Wrought or Cold-Finished, Quenched and Tempered A490 - Standard Specification for Heat-Treated Steel Structural Bolts, 150 ksi

Minimum Tensile Strength A504 - Wrought Carbon Steel Wheels A521 - Standard Specification for Steel, Closed Impression Die Forgings for

General Industrial Use A536 - Standard Specification for Ductile Iron Castings A563 - Standard Specification for Carbon and Alloy Steel Nuts A572 - Standard Specification for High-Strength Low-Alloy Columbium-

Vanadium Structural Steel A588 - Standard Specification for High-Strength Low-Alloy Structural Steel, up to 50 ksi [345 MPa] Minimum Yield Point, with Atmospheric Corrosion Resistance

A992 - Standard Specification for Steel for Structural Shapes for Use in Building Framing

A1023/A - Standard Specification for Stranded Carbon Steel Wire Ropes for General Purposes

B26 - Aluminum Alloy Sand Castings B108 - Specification for Aluminum Alloy Permanent Mold Castings E543 - Standard Specification for agencies performing Nondestructive Testing F436 - Standard Specification for Hardened Steel Washers F593 - Stainless Steel Bolts, Hex Cap Screws, and Studs F594 - Stainless Steel Nuts

AMERICAN WELDING SOCIETY (AWS)

D1.1 - Structural Welding Code Steel D14.1 - Welding of Industrial and Mill Cranes and other Material Handling

Equipment

CRANE MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC (CMAA)

WO #1614003 Amendment 00003 Page 5 of 72

No. 70 - Specification for Top Running Bridge & Gantry Type Multiple Girder Electric Overhead Traveling Cranes

DEFENSE FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATIONS (DFAR)

DFARS 252.211-7003 Item Identification and Valuation

FEDERAL ACQUISTION REGULATIONS (FAR)

FAR Part 2 Definition of Words and Terms

FEDERAL SPECIFICATION

RR-W-410 - Wire Rope and Strand

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDIZATION (ISO)

15408 Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation

NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION (NECA)

1-2015 - Standard Practice of Good Workmanship in Electrical

Contracting

NATIONAL ELECTRICAL MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION (NEMA)

ICS 8 - Industrial Control and Systems Crane and Hoist Controllers MG 1 - Motors and Generators 250 - Enclosures for Electrical Equipment (1000 Volts Maximum)

NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION

NFPA 70 - National Electric Code NFPA 70E - Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND

NAVFAC P-307 Management of Weight Handling Equipment

NAVSEA TECHNICAL PUBLICATION

T9074-AS-GIB-010/271 Requirements for Nondestructive Testing Methods

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (OSHA)

29 CFR, Part 1910.66, Appendix C - Personal Fall Arrest System 29 CFR, Part 1910.179 - Overhead and Gantry Cranes 29 CFR, Part 1910.306 - Specific Purpose Equipment and Installations Title 47 CFR Part 15 - Radio Frequency Devices 29 CFR, Part 1910.28 - Duty to have fall protection and falling object protection

RESEARCH COUNCIL ON STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS (RCSC)

Specification for Structural Joints Using High-Strength Bolts

SOCIETY FOR PROTECTIVE COATINGS (SSPC)

SSPC-SP1 - Solvent Cleaning SSPC-SP2 - Hand Tool Cleaning SSPC-SP3 - Power Tool Cleaning

WO #1614003 Amendment 00003 Page 6 of 72

SSPC-SP10 - Near-White Metal Blast Cleaning

SOCIETY OF AUTOMOTIVE ENGINEERS (SAE)

SAE J376 - Load Indicating…