N6247024R0062 Amendment 0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The follow ing have been added by full text:

This amendment is issued to incorporate the follow ing:

1. Provide Site Visit Information

2. Provide attachments

2. Insert FAR Clause 52.223-23, Sustainable Products and Services

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

140 1 18

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 21-Mar-2025

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 N6247024R0062

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

04-Mar-2025

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

21-Mar-2025

CODE

COMNAVFACSYSCOM ATLANTIC

6506 HAMPTON BLVD

NORFOLK VA 23508-1278

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N6247024R0062

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00 21 00 - INSTRUCTIONS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. GENERAL

1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT

2. BASIS FOR AWARD

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

4. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS

4.1 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

4.2 PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRIES (PPIs)

4.3 CONTRACT OPPORTUNITIES (SAM.GOV)

5. INCORPORATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

6. ATTACHMENTS: MAY BE LOCATED ON CONTRACT OPPORTUNITIES UNDER

ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT A – PRE-PROPOSAL INQUIRY LOG

ATTACHMENT B – PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

ATTACHMENT C – CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE PROJECT DATA SHEET

ATTACHMENT D – HISTORICAL SMALL BUSINESS UTILIZATION

ATTACHMENT E – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION COMMITMENT DOCUMENT

ATTACHMENT F – INDIVIDUAL SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

ATTACHMENT G – PRICE PROPOSAL FORM

ATTACHMENT H – PIEE SOLICITATION VENDOR ACCESS INSTRUCTIONS

ATTACHMENT I – APPROVED IDENTITY PROOFING DOCUMENTS

ATTACHMENT J – CRITERIA FOR DENYING ACCESS TO NAVY INSTALLATIONS

ATTACHMENT K - 2025 RIOCC CVS SPONSOR NNSY TEMPLATE

ATTACHMENT L - 2025 RIOCC ODP DBIDS

ATTACHMENT M - SECNAV 5512 exp 2027

ATTACHMENT N - DIRECTIONS TO PWD_ROICC TRAILER

1. GENERAL

1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF PROCUREMENT PROCESS

1.1.1 This acquisition is being solicited on an unrestricted basis, with Full and Open

Competition.

1.1.2 The NAICS code for this procurement is 237990 and the size standard is $45,000,000.

1.1.3 In accordance with DFARS 236.204(v), the magnitude of construction for this project is over $500,000,000.

1.1.4 This solicitation is formatted as a Request for Proposal according to FAR Part 15.

This method permits evaluation of proposals based on price competition, technical merit and other factors; permits impartial and comprehensive evaluation of offerors' proposals; permits discussions if necessary; and ensures selection of the source whose performance provides the best value to the Government.

1.2 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF CONTRACT

Description of Work:

This project will include the following major components for the P1062 Dry Dock 3 Modernization: rebuilding the caisson seats with deep foundations, refurbishing the dock floor and walls, pinning the concrete floor, constructing a wet well and pump house to replace the existing pumpwell, rerouting all utilities into a new utility trench around the dock perimeter, and replacing the dry dock’s surrounding rail systems.

• Cofferdam: A temporary cofferdam at the entrance to Dry Dock 3 will be constructed to allow the contractor to perform demolition and construction under dry working conditions.

The cofferdam consists of a continuous steel pipe pile wall (SPP Wall) driven side-by-side to form a continuous wall. The wall will support approximately 40 feet of water on the riverside. The cofferdam will be constructed approximately 8 feet east of the dry dock entrance (in the river), beyond the existing timber pile supported apron. In the space between the dry dock entrance and the cofferdam, riverbed soils will be dredged and replaced with a tremie concrete slab to seal off upward water flow. In addition, composite sheet pile/concrete closure walls will be constructed on either side of the dock entrance, connecting the SPP Wall to the dock proper and therefore closing off the entrance.

• Dry Dock: The floors and walls of the dry dock will be reconstructed by initially removing all the dry dock’s existing granite blocks (ranging from 15 inches thick along the floor and up to 50 inches thick along the altars) and a minimum of 12 inches of existing concrete beneath the granite. The coping/floodwall elevation will be the entrance, will have a tie-down system to resist increased uplift demands due to higher flood events.

The dry dock’s walls and floor will be reconstructed with reinforced concrete to provide improved capacity accommodating the increased “superflood” load condition and reestablishing the 2009 FCR design blocking loads.

• Wet Well: Selective demolition of the existing below grade Pumpwell is required to accommodate the discharge piping for the Wet Well and Pump House. This includes the removal of the existing ladders, catwalks, platforms, stairs, concrete walls/slabs and fiberglass grating as required by structural work.

2. BASIS FOR AWARD

2.1 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, price and other factors considered.

2.2 As stated in the solicitation, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)).

The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In addition, if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

2.3 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.

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

2.5. 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. An Unacceptable rating in any of the non-price factors will result in an overall rating of “Unacceptable” for the non-price factors, unless corrected through discussions.

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

FAR Part 9.6 defines Contractor team arrangements. Contractor team arrangement, as used in this subpart, means an arrangement in which -- (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 subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent /LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract in order for the experience information of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies to be considered. The proposal shall state specific commitments of technical resources (e.g., personnel, management, equipment that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies shall commit to the performance of this contract).

In particular, the proposal shall clearly state the specific commitments of resources of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies in terms of the work it will either self-perform or manage on behalf of the Offeror in the performance of the contract.

Vague commitments to support are likely insufficient; rather, they must demonstrate intent/manner of actual performance on the contract action being solicited.

The Offeror shall submit a signed copy of partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment for each member of the Offeror’s team (e.g., partner, team member, subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary, or other affiliated company, etc.) whose projects are submitted to demonstrate Construction or Design Experience. The Government will not consider any project submitted for Factor 1 if it was performed by a firm other than the Offeror and there is no supporting partnership agreement, teaming agreement, or letter of commitment. Additional joint venture agreements are not permitted on MAC Task Orders. Note: See specific restrictions on the use of subcontractor experience under Factor 1.

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

Factor 1 – Corporate Experience Factor 2 – Schedule

Factor 3 – Small Business Utilization Factor 4 – Safety

Factor 5 – Past Performance

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.

2. The relative order of importance of the non-price evaluation factors is the technical factors Factor 1

Corporate Experience, Factor 2 Schedule, Factor 3 Small Business Utilization, and Factor 4 Safety are of equal importance to each other and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor 5. 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 significantly more important than 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.

3. Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor

(a) Non-price Factors:

Factor 1, Corporate Experience:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall complete the attached Construction and Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment C) for each construction project submitted and complete all individual blocks. Attachment C and all information therein is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to evaluate experience. The Government will evaluate only the information provided in Attachment C and all other information provided on other than Attachment C will not be considered. The Offeror may expand individual blocks on the Attachment C; however, Attachment C for each project submitted shall not exceed a total of four (4) single-sided pages or, two (2) double-sided pages, 8.5” x 11”, 1” margin left/right/top/bottom, and 10-point font or larger. Attachment C submittals that do not comply with these requirements will not be evaluated. For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP.

1. Construction Experience: Submit a maximum of five (5) construction projects that best demonstrates the offeror’s experience that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to this project. Similar projects are defined as large in-water facilities such as dry docks, piers, bulkheads, wharves, quay walls, bridges or water-retaining structures with a complete construction cost of $50 million or more with at least one project of $100 million or more. Submitted projects shall be completed within the last 10 years of the date of issuance of this RFP. If the offeror submits more than five (5) projects for evaluation, the Government will evaluate the first five (5) projects submitted and disregard any other project information after the first five (5). The construction projects submitted must collectively demonstrate experience in all three (3) of the following individual items. All individual items do not have to be within a single project scope.

a. New construction of shoring systems or combi-wall systems to construct in-water structures

b. Construction of waterfront utility systems for ship berthing or other waterfront operations

c. Deep excavation projects (e.g. wet wells)

Failure to demonstrate experience in all individual items shall be considered a deficiency.

A relevant construction project is further defined as a construction project performed under a single task order or contract. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project; rather offerors shall submit the work performed under a task order as a project.

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects may be submitted for the Joint Venture members. If a project was performed by a JV, and not all partners from that JV are on the JV proposed for this contract, the offeror shall clearly demonstrate what portion of the work was performed by the JV member offering on this contract and shall not include work performed by the JV as a whole.

The JV member proposed for this contract shall specifically address field work performed by that JV member including field staffing and direct field work oversight. The JV member proposed for this contract shall also address home office management performed by that JV member including the number/percentage of employees provided for the overall contract by the JV members as well as the overall percentage of work performed by the JV member. The Offeror shall also submit a SIGNED copy of the Joint Venture agreement indicating the proposed participation of each Joint Venture member. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined.

If an Offeror is utilizing experience information of affiliates/subsidiaries/parent/LLC/LTD member companies (name is not exactly as stated on the SF1442), the proposal shall clearly demonstrate that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract. The proposal shall state specific commitments of technical resources (e.g. personnel, equipment) that the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member companies commit to the performance of this contract. In particular, the proposal will clearly state the specific commitments of resources of the affiliate/subsidiary/parent/LLC/LTD member that will be located at the worksites and company offices in the city/area of the project. The proposal shall also describe specific roles of the affiliate/subsidiary/ parent/LLC/LTD member companies in terms of the work it will either self-perform or manage on behalf of the Offeror in performance of the contract. The Offeror MAY NOT utilize experience of a subcontractor to demonstrate construction experience under this evaluation factor unless specialized subcontractor experience is stated as acceptable. Failure to submit this information may result in a lower rating.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing relevant construction projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the Offeror’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP. The Government will only review five (5) projects for construction. Any projects submitted in excess of the five (5) for Construction Experience will not be considered.

Proposals demonstrating experience self-performing relevant features of work may be considered more favorably than those that do not demonstrate self-performance.

Proposals demonstrating projects that include multiple individual items in one project may be considered more favorably than those that do not demonstrate multiple individual items in one project.

Offerors who submit projects that demonstrate more relevance to the scope for this RFP may be considered more favorably than those who submit projects that demonstrate less relevance.

Offerors demonstrating relevant projects performed in highly dense industrial areas may be considered more favorably than those who do not.

Offerors demonstrating relevant projects performed on Department of Defense (DoD) contracts may be considered more favorably than those who do not demonstrate relevant projects performed on DoD contracts.

Factor 2 Schedule

Project Schedule Narrative: The “Offeror” shall provide a narrative limited to ten (10) single-sided pages or, five (5) double sided pages, 8.5” x 11”, 1” margin left/right/top/bottom, and 10-point font or larger. The following shall be addressed:

Based upon a total contract duration of 1825 days and an assumed award date of 12 January 2026 and Notice To Proceed for Full site access of 8 September 2026, at a minimum, clearly identify the proposed dates for the following:

a. Ordering and delivery of long lead materials impacting the critical path

b. Start of in-water work and completion of the cofferdam construction

c. Start and completion date for Dry Dock basin dewatering

d. Start and completion of testing of groundwater dewatering treatment system

e. Start and completion of groundwater dewatering

f. Demolition and construction completion of the wet well structure.

g. Dry Dock basin demolition and installation of precast panels.

h. Cofferdam removal and caisson testing.

1. Schedule: Provide a project schedule using P6 software. Submit the PDF of the full schedule output and the native (.xer) file with the proposal. The proposed project schedule need not be cost loaded; however, shall serve as the basis for the Offeror’s price proposal. The above completion dates in item (3)(i). shall be reflected in this schedule along with major construction activities, milestones, and critical path items. The schedule shall be on 11”x17” pages, single-sided, and there is no page limit.

NOTES:

• If the performance period proposed by the Offeror exceeds the time specified in the solicitation, and FAR 52.211-10, Commencement, Prosecution, and Completion of Work, the offer may still be considered responsive if adequately explained in the proposal.

Assumptions provided in the RFP shall be followed.

• Narrative and schedule are not allowed to propose variances from Contract requirements.

For example, Offerors are not allowed to propose contractual conditions that shift schedule risk to the Government or propose limitations on the ability of the Government to properly administer the contract.

• Failure to address any of the submission requirements will result in a deficiency.

• The assumed award date is stated for proposal evaluation purposes only and does not infer or guarantee that an award will be made by that date.

The Offeror's proposed construction completion dates, project schedule, and narratives will be evaluated to ensure timely completion of the project within the dates specified. The evaluation will consider how well the Offeror understands the major construction activities, task predecessors, and critical path items to execute the project.

Construction duration that meets the duration specified may be given more favorable consideration.

Completion dates that are ahead of the dates specified should not be provided and will not be considered.

The project narrative may show or explain the methodologies or innovative approaches that will be implemented to accelerate delivery, while fully mitigating risks to project execution and maintaining quality of construction.

Proposals that identify innovative approaches and lessons learned from previous completed projects that will be applied to this project to mitigate schedule risk and recover schedule time in the event of project delays may be rated more favorably.

Factor 3, Small Business Utilization and Participation

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

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

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

All Offerors (large, non-profits, AND small businesses) shall use Attachment E (Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) to submit the following required information for evaluation of this factor:

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

� If subcontractors are not identified by name, offerors shall provide a detailed explanation why subcontractors are not identified. If firm written commitments with SBs are not in place, offerors shall provide an explanation and rationale on the ability to achieve the proposed participation. (See Attachment E, paragraph 5)

� If a LB offeror does not intend to subcontract, provide a detailed explanation why subcontracting would not result in efficient contract performance. SBs intending to 100% self-perform are not required to provide an explanation. (See Attachment E, paragraph 6)

To demonstrate maximum practicable participation of small businesses, identify (in terms of dollar value and percentage of the total contract value) the offeror’s proposed small business participation. The minimum required small business participation (i.e. work to be performed by small business as the prime contractor and/or work to be performed by small business subcontractors) is 20% (this amount will be modified based on market research). Offerors who are not able to meet the minimum total small business participation requirement of 20% (of the total contract value) shall provide a detailed explanation why the minimum total small business participation requirement cannot be achieved.

Only complete Attachment E. Information provided in a different format and/or on a form created by the offeror will not be evaluated. Attachments or addendums to Attachment E will not be evaluated.

Large business offerors may achieve the minimum total small business participation requirement through subcontracting to small businesses.

Small business offerors may achieve the minimum total small business participation requirement through their own performance/participation as a prime as well as through a joint venture, teaming arrangement, and/or subcontracting with other small business concerns.

The Government will evaluate the likelihood of success in achieving the small business objectives of this acquisition based on the following:

a. The extent to which the offeror is able to demonstrate a history of supporting

Government policies concerning the utilization of small business concerns, including SDB, WOSB, HUBZone SB, VOSB, and SDVOSB and the success in achieving goals established by subcontracting plans on prior contracts. For projects submitted for Factor 1, Corporate Experience, that did not have established small business goals, consideration will be given to the utilization of the small business concerns and the degree of usage of small business relative to the total contract value.

Historical Small Business Utilization will only be evaluated if performed by the offeror.

b. The extent to which the offeror has demonstrated an achievable commitment to use small businesses, including SDB, WOSB, HUBZone SB, VOSB, and SDVOSB in the performance of this contract within the SBPCD.

The minimum small business participation requirement, through work performed by the small business prime and/or subcontracting with small businesses, shall meet or exceed 20% of the total contract value, unless the offeror provides a reasonable and well-documented explanation for why the minimum 20% small business participation requirement cannot be achieved.

� Offerors that demonstrate a commitment to providing maximum practical opportunity to small businesses may be rated higher.

� Proposing less than 20% total small business participation requirement may result in a deficiency.

� Offerors that do not demonstrate commitment to providing maximum practical opportunity to small businesses may result in a deficiency.

The SBPCD will be evaluated to determine the extent to which small business concerns are specifically identified by name and socioeconomic category in the document and the degree to which small business concerns, including SDB, WOSB, HUBZone SB, VOSB, and SDVOSB will participate relative to the total contract value. The complexity and variety of the work small business concerns will perform and the degree of commitment to use named sources through formal teaming agreements, joint venture agreements, mentor protégé agreements, written/signed letters of /commitment, etc. will be evaluated to assess achievability of the commitment.

� The offeror may receive a deficiency if firm commitments with subcontractors are not provided, and the offeror fails to provide a detailed explanation for how the proposed small business participation requirement will be achieved.

The offeror may be rated lower if they fail to provide a detailed explanation for why subcontracting would not result in efficient contract performance. (Not applicable to SBs intending to 100% self-perform or LBs and non-profits who intend to subcontract.)

Factor 4, Safety

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

The Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate; and Total Case Rate (TCR) for the specified five (5) Calendar Years (CY), as well as a safety narrative as described further below. For a partnership, joint venture, the Offeror shall submit separate DART, TCR for the specified five (5) CY for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. Any fatalities experienced within this 5-year timeframe must be explained in detail, to include root cause and corrective actions.

NOTE: DART and TCR shall not be submitted for subcontractors.

(1) DART Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ [CY2020, CY2021, CY2022, CY2023, and CY2024] worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no DART rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required, that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Dart cases include injuries or illnesses resulting in death, days away from work, and/or restricted work or transfer to another job days beyond the day of injury/illness.

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

𝑫𝑨𝑹𝑻 𝑹𝑨𝑻𝑬

Number of DART Incidents x 200,000

Total Number of Enployee Labor Hours Worked

(2) TCR Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ [CY2020, CY2021, CY2022, CY2023, and CY2024] worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no TCR rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required, that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

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

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

𝑻𝑪𝑹 𝑹𝑨𝑻𝑬

Number of TCR Incidents x 200,000

Total Number of Enployee Labor Hours Worked

(3) Technical Approach for Safety: Submit a narrative that addresses the following:

a. Describe the Offeror’s approach to implementing and executing a Safety Management System (SMS) including Management/Leadership involvement, Employee involvement, Hazard prevention, Hazard control, Worksite analysis, and Safety and health training, to include the standard(s) used to benchmark the SMS.

b. Describe the evaluation process used to select potential subcontractors.

c. Describe the processes of how the Offeror will oversee safety compliance of subcontractors at all levels throughout the performance of the contract (to include their own in-house workforce).

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one

(1) double-sided page.

(4) The Government reserves the right to review other available sources (public/Government internal) of information. These may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Electronic Contract Management System (eCMS), etc.

The Government is seeking to determine that the Offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors.

The evaluation will collectively consider the DART rate, TCR, Technical Approach to Safety, and other sources of information available to the Government as part of such collective evaluation. The board will evaluate the DART rates and TCR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any negative trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

(1) DART Rate: The board will evaluate trends over the last five years considering changes that take it from one risk level (or more) to the next up or down. Negative trends occurring above moderate risk levels require the Offeror to provide a detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Missing data without an explanation is considered a deficiency.

b. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk (LR) or

Very Low Risk (VLR) would indicate a strength.

c. An increasing DART rate trend could be considered a weakness (i.e. MR or better to High Risk

(HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate.

d. This chart correlates the DART rate to the level of risk:

Risk DART Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 1.0 Low Risk From 1.0 to 1.99 Moderate Risk From 2.0 to 2.99 High Risk From 3.0 to 4.0 Extremely High Risk Greater than 4.0

(2) TCR Rate: The board will evaluate trends over the last five years considering changes that take it from one risk level (or more) to the next up or down. Negative trends occurring above moderate risk levels require the Offeror to provide a detailed explanation that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

a. Missing data without an explanation is considered a deficiency.

b. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk (LR) or

Very Low Risk (VLR) would indicate a strength.

c. An increasing TCR rate trend could be considered a weakness (i.e. MR or better to High Risk

(HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate.

d. This chart correlates the TCR rate to the level of risk:

Risk TCR Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 2.49 Low Risk From 2.5 to 3.49 Moderate Risk From 3.5 to 4.49 High Risk From 4.5 to 5.99 Extremely High Risk Greater than 6.0

(3) The Technical Approach to Safety Narrative. To determine the degree to which the Offeror:

a. Describes a viable SMS that addresses elements; such as Management/Leadership involvement, Employee involvement, Hazard prevention, Hazard control, Worksite analysis, and Safety and health training, to include the standard(s) used to benchmark the SMS.

b. Describes a methodical process of evaluating subcontractor’s safety performance in their selection process.

c. Describes a logical management plan to hold themselves and their subcontractors accountable for adhering to the safety requirements of the contract.

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one

(1) double-sided page. Information on pages beyond this will not be considered.

(4) The Government reserves the right to review other available sources (public/Government internal) of information. These may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Electronic Contract Management System (eCMS), etc.

Factor 5, Past Performance:

If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 1 for construction experience. If there is not a completed CPARS evaluation then submit Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) (Attachment B) for each project included in Factor 1 for both Construction Experience and Design Experience. The Offeror should provide completed PPQ in the proposal. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). The Government may make reasonable attempts to contact the client noted for that project(s) to obtain the PPQ information. However, Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to help ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Daniel Rocha a Daniel.r.rocha2.civ@us.navy.mil.

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

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.

Performance award or additional information submitted will not be considered.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

This evaluation will consider how well the Offeror’s team performed on relevant projects submitted under Factor 1 – Corporate Experience and may also consider past performance on other projects currently documented in known sources.

The Government will consider the recency 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 team’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s team’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will receive a NEUTRAL Confidence rating.

(b) Price Factors

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Price shall be submitted on the Price Proposal Form included in the solicitation. The offeror shall submit one (1) electronic copy via PIEE, of the solicitation submittal requirements identified below. Also, price information included in the non-price/technical proposal will not be considered. Likewise, non-price/technical information included in the price proposal will not be Considered.

The Offeror is required to submit a complete Price Proposal Form that includes completion of all contract line item numbers (CLINs). Pricing information is not required to be completed under Section 00 10 00 – Solicitation Contract Form in SF 1442. All required proposal documents shall be submitted in accordance with FAR 15.208.

All submissions shall include the following:

(i) Executed SF1442. Offeror shall insert its company name and address in Block #14, telephone number in Block #15, acknowledge all amendments in Block #19 (if applicable), name and title of person authorized to sign in Block #20A, signature in Block #20B, and offer date in Block #20C of the SF1442. In addition, Offeror shall provide a cover page with solicitation number, solicitation title, Offeror name, address, phone number, fax number, Unique Entity Identifier (UEI), CAGE code, and Federal Tax ID number, Point of Contact (POC), POC phone number, and POC email address, with its proposal.

(ii) Completed Price Proposal Form

(iii) Bid Bond (SF-24). Offeror shall submit a bid bond (SF-24) in the amount of 20% of total project bid price for the project or $3M, whichever amount is less. The bid bond shall be in the name of the offeror identified on the SF1442.

(iv) SAM registration. Offeror shall ensure current registration on the SAM Website, www.sam.gov, including Annual Representations and Certifications are complete and updated for this procurement. If a Representation or Certification required by Section 00 45 00 of the RFP is not provided in SAM, include the representation or certification in your price proposal.

(v) SAM Contractor Responsibility. Offeror shall ensure their System for Award Management (SAM) Contractor’s responsibility Certification is up to date as required by FAR 52.209-7, Information Regarding Responsibility Matters.

(vi) VETS-4212 registration. Confirmation of filing of Veterans’ Employment and Training (VETS-4212) for the 2023/2024 filing cycle. Offeror shall ensure a current VETS- 4212 report has been submitted to the Department of Labor (DOL) website, http://www.dol.gov/vets/vets4212.htm if the Offeror is required to submit. An email confirmation of submission can be requested and received by the Offeror from the DOL website and submitted in the price proposal. If the Offeror is not required to submit a report to VETS-4212, include a brief statement and justification explaining why the Offeror is not required to submit a report. Visit the VETS-4212 website for details concerning if your company is required to submit a VETS-4212 report and to request an email confirmation of submission.

(vii) Small Business Subcontracting Plan – See details below in “ADDITIONAL

INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PRICE PROPOSAL PACKAGE”

NOTE 1: A small business joint venture Offeror must submit, with its offer, the representation required in paragraph (c) of FAR solicitation provision 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Products and Commercial Services, and paragraph (c) of FAR solicitation provision 52.219-1, Small Business Program Representations, in accordance with 52.204-8(d) and 52.212-3(b) for the following categories:

(A) Small business;

(B) Service-disabled veteran-owned small business;

(C) Women-owned small business (WOSB) under the WOSB Program;

(D) Economically disadvantaged women-owned small business under the WOSB Program;

or

(E) Historically underutilized business zone small business.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PRICE PROPOSAL PACKAGE:

RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION INFORMATION - In order to be eligible for award, the offeror must be determined responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9, specifically 9.104-1, General Standards. In a separate Tab, the offeror shall provide the following information in the price proposal package:

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

2. The Offeror shall provide the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for the prime contractor, certified by an independent accounting firm, if practicable, or signed by an authorized officer of the organization. Submit evidence of availability of working/operating capital, which will be used for the performance of the resultant contract. For Joint Venture arrangements, submit the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for each company in the Joint Venture and discuss the financial responsibilities among the companies.

The Government may also utilize Dun & Bradstreet reports to evaluate the financial capacity of the offeror. Offerors are not required to submit financial information as detailed in the price submission instructions via PIEE. However, if this is the case, the submitted copies in the hard copy proposal must be received no later than the established due date and time.

3. Description of offeror’s facilities and equipment.

4. Other offeror’s work presently under contract.

Although required to be submitted with offeror’s price proposal, this information will not be evaluated as part of the price proposal. This information forms the basis of your firm’s responsibility determination should your firm be considered for award. Proposal packages from unsuccessful offerors will not be returned to the offeror, but shall be destroyed by the Contracting Officer. No certificate of destruction will be issued.

5. SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (April 2020) (REFERENCE FAR 52.219-9

ALT II AND DFARS 252.219-7003) INFORMATION.

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

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

These goals will be incorporated into the solicitation.

Small Business (SB) 40% HUBZone SB 3% Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) 5% Small Disadvantaged Business 5% Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB) 9%

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

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

Although required to be submitted with offeror’s price proposal, this information will…