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

N62473-18-R-5011 Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, Base Operation Support Services

Description of this amendment begins on page 2.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 22

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 30-Nov-2018

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 N6247318R5011

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

02-Nov-2018

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 4 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

30-Nov-2018

CODE

NAVFAC SOUTHWEST

PW CONTRACTS CORE - PPV

CODE RAQ10-PPV

1220 PACIFIC HWY

SAN DIEGO CA 92132-5190

N62473 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N6247318R5011

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0003

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1. Respond to Requests for Information (RFIs).

2. Revise Sections L and M of the RFP, which are provided below. Please note that revisions are noted in red font.

3.Provide the following attachment J-1503050-03&04 CNIC GROUNDS COLS

4. Provide the revised Unpopulated Exhibit Lin Item Number (ELIN) Pricing Schedule dated 30 NOV 2018.

RFIs:

Question 104: CBA for Boilermakers was part of issued documents on NECO zip file 2 Nov 2018 but there was no CBA for the Teamsters. Will the Government please provide Teamsters CBA?

Response 104: A CBA has been provided as an attachment to the solicitation. The CBA's Boilermakers is the only union. The Teamsters are no longer involved in this contract.

Question 105: 1502000 J Facilities, Attachment 15020000-20, page 122 of 123. Will the Government fill in the rest of the table with Manufacture, Model No, Serial No., Capacity and Year we must maintain?

Response 105: The typical capacity averages 100 pounds.

Question 106: PWS, Section J, Attachment J-1503010-03, page 4. This attachment stated provided Excel spreadsheets pictures to provide Janitorial workload and inventory. However, these are just pictures of an Excel spreadsheet and will not open. Would the government please provide these spreadsheets so that the offeror can properly staff and supply this requirement?

Response 106: See Custodial-04 1of2.xlsx and Custodial-04 2of2.xlsx.

Question 107: Attachment J-1503010-04, paragraph 1, page 6 of 43. When I was reviewing “Attachment J-1503010 J Custodial” specifically attachment J-1503010-04 Services by Location, there are two excel files referenced on page 6 that are titled “1503010 Janitorial Workload” and “Janitorial Inventory Sorted” respectively. I cannot find them in the zip file. Can you please provide or clarify?

Response 107: See Custodial-04 1of2.xlsx and Custodial-04 2of2.xlsx.

Question 108: Attachment J-1502000-12, paragraph 1, page 66 of 123. When I was reviewing “Attachment J- 1502000” specifically attachment J-1502000-12 Irrigation Backflow Prevention/Irrigation Pumps Inventory and Site Map, there is an excel file referenced on page 66 that is titled “Backflow & Irrigation Pump List”. I cannot find it in the zip file. Can you please provide or clarify?

Response 108: See FI-12 Irrigation Backflow and Pumps.xlsx file.

Question 109: 1502000 J Facilities, Attachment 15020000-20, page 123 of 123. How many portable fire extinguishers are inspected as the quantity is not listed for that part?

Response 109: There is an average of two per site.

Question 110: 1502000 J Facilities, Attachment 15020000-13, page 67 of 123. Does the embedded PDF file, which is not currently accessible, provide historical data on how many times the pumping systems are pulled out of the ground and worked on? If not, will the Government provide this workload to help staff and price this area?

Response 110: Provided as a separate file. See PI-13 Water Well System Data Sheets.pdf.

Question 111: 1502000 J Facilities, Attachment 15020000-11_Note and Historical Data Area, page 65 of 123.

Which facilities above are part of the JCIF/APF Facilities as they are not identified currently?

Response 111: APF areas are identified as 6 toilets, 3 hand wash stations, JCIF is the Darwin Wash facilities and has 8 toilets and 2 hand wash stations.

Question 112: 1502000 J Facilities, Attachment 15020000-09 Para 2, pages 59 to 63 of 123. Para 2 has the work broken out by Funding Activity but there is only one ELIN for NAVAIR which is x003AF, Does the Government want all the work staffed and priced only against ELIN x003AF ?

If not will Government add ELINs for the following funding activities : MRTFB, REGION?

Response 112: ELINS will be added to include REGION and MRTFB.

Question 113: 1502000 J Facilities, Attachment 15020000-09 Para 4, page 63 of 123. Para 4 assumes there are 2 ELINs to price and staff but there is only one for NAVAIR but none for REGION-ST. Will an ELIN be added for

REGION-ST?

Response 113: The Government assumes this is in reference to page 62 vice 63. ELINS will be added to include REGION and MRTFB.

Question 114: 1502000 J Facilities, Attachment 15020000-03 Emergency and Routine Service Orders, page 6 of

123. Will the Government provide workload for MWR, EOD and Naval Construction Group Emergency Service Orders as none is currently provided?

Response 114: We have historical data for the ones with 0 service calls. Most of these are new requirements with no history.

Question 115: 1502000 J Facilities, Attachment 15020000-03 Emergency and Routine Service Orders, page 6 of

123. Will the Government provide ELIN for DECA and NEX Emergency Service Orders as none is currently provided?

Response 115: Historically only 1 emergency service order requested for DECA and none for NEX. If routine or emergency service orders are required in the future, nonrecurring task orders will be generated.

Question 116: 1502000 J Facilities, Attachment 15020000-03 Para 3 VTE Maint historical Svs Orders, page 6 of

123. What ELIN are this workload to be staffed and priced against?

Response 116: A003AD for PM work and A003BL for inspection, testing, and certification work for base year and others ELIN line items for ensuing option years.

Question 117: 1502000 J Facilities, Attachment 15020000-08 para 1 Exhaust Hood & Duct Cleaning, page of 52 of

123. Will the Government provide the information for the blank areas so we can properly staff and price this work?

Is the contractor to assume at least one Exhaust Hood and Duct where there is a line with no information? Please clarify.

Response 117: #2 of this attachment gives inventory of buildings listed in #1.

Question 118: 1502000 J Facilities, Attachment 15020000-06, page 42 of 123. Will the Government Add ELINs to cover work for MRTFB, NAVFAC and DLA under PWS Spec 3.2.11 as there are no ELINs associated between x003AX and x003BC?

Response 118: Attachment 1502000-06 has to do with Emergency Generator, Water and Fuel Pump PM services.

ELINS for MRTFB is listed in line items x003AQ; NAVFAC (NWCF) is listed in line items x003AJ; and x003AR for DLA.

Question 119: 1503020 J Pest Control, Attachment 1503020-10, page 55 of 88. Will the Government provide workload for NAVFAC(NWCF) and Geothermal Facilities as currently none is provided? IF not will ELINs x005AA and x005AL be deleted from the ELIN sheet J-0200000-11?

Response 119: NAVFAC (NWCF) is listed in ELIN Line Item A005AT; whereas Geothermal is listed as A005BA.

Question 120: 1503030 J Integrated Solid Waste Management, Attachment 1503030-05, page 18 of 22. It appears this table is pasted together. Please confirm that nothing is missing as there are breaks in the table and looks like overlaps that could be hiding data.

Response 120: Nothing is missing. This section contains multiple captured screens.

Question 121: 1503050 J Ground Maintenance, Attachment 1503050-05, page 11 of 18. Will the Government make the imbedded Excel Sheet active so we can properly staff and price this area?

Response 121: Grounds-05 By Customer.xlsx was provided as an attachment in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

Question 122: 1503050 J Ground Maintenance, Attachment 1503050-04, page 10 of 18. Will the Government make the imbedded PDF file active so we can properly staff and price this area?

Response 122: Attachment J-1503050-04 Grounds map 1of2.docx was provided as an attachment in Amendment 0002 of this solicitation.

Question 123: 1503050 J Ground Maintenance, Attachment 1503050-03, page 9 of 18. Will the Government provide the PDF attachments J-1503050-03 &40 Ground COLS as referenced?

Response 123: Attachment J-1503050-03&04 Grounds COLS.pdf is provided as an attachment to this amendment.

Question 124: 1503050 J Ground Maintenance, Attachment 1503050-08, page 15 of 18. Will the Government add a column or break the table out by Funding activity so it can be properly staffed and priced?

Response 124: See Attachment J-1503050-08.pdf with funding sources.

Question 125: 1503050 J Ground Maintenance, Attachment 1503050-06_ Para 3 Tenant Activities, page 12 of 18.

Will the Government please identify when ELIN in Class x007 The 2 tenant activities should be priced to?

Response 125: As specified in the parentheses; these two tenant activities are Dispensary - Branch Medical Clinic (BMC) and MAD - Marine Aviation Detachment.

Question 126: Section of the Request for Proposal: J-1800000-04; J-0200000-11 Unpopulated ELINS: In the ELIN schedule there are three ELINS for each year X010AC, X010AD, and X0101AE that pertain to waste tire services for NAVFAC (NWCF), NAVAIR, and REGION respectively. The historical data is contained in J- 1800000-04 “Environmental Services Waste Tire Pickup/Accumulation Sites”. In the historical data there is no indication for which pickup spots correspond to which customers that are indicated in the ELIN schedule. Will the Government please clarify which pickup spots correspond to which customers?

Response 126: Public Works Transportation is NAVFAC and Lower Baker is NAVAIR, Airfield Ground Support is

REGION.

Question 127: J-0200000-11_Unpopulated ELINS_dated_19Nov18: In the ELIN Schedule Records 1393 – 1566 in Column B, it states that the period 8 is 6 months but in Column J, the units are shown as 12 (months, per Column K). Will the Government please clarify and correct the ELIN schedule to resolve this conflict?

Response 127: The Period 8 Column J should be stated 6-month period. ELINS pricing schedule has been revised.

See attachment J-0200000-11.

Question 128: N62473-18-R-50110002Custodial-04_2of2: In the referenced attachment, most of the provided inventory lists floor surface with letters such as K, C, O, RT, EFT, QT, G, RTK, W, AS, and PC. There is no corresponding key provided to indicate what these surface types are contained in any supporting documents that have been provided (C, J, and F, etc.). Will the Government please provide the key for the floor surface type?

Response 128: Key legend: K=Carpet; C=Concrete Floor; O=Surfaces other than listed; RT=Resilient Tile or Terrazzo; RFT/RFK=Raised Floor Tile or Carpet; QC/CT=Quarry or Ceramic Tile; W=Wood Floor)

Question 129: 1. J-0200000-11 Unpopulated ELINS: In the ELIN schedule- Non-recurring portion of the Environmental Sections, there are numerous ELINS that site Hazardous Waste without much specificity. The term “hazardous waste” is utilized but not defined but not defined nor is the type of contamination provided. 2. Will the Government provide the definition of hazardous waste for the purposes of this proposal as well as the composition and exact contamination levels of hazardous waste as that has a significant impact on pricing? 3. Will the Government provide the relevant regulations and oversight agencies. For example, is the waste government by CERCLA or RCRA? 4. Will the Government provide whether oversight is state, federal or both? 5. Is the “Hazardous Waste” Transuranic, Volatile Organic Compounds, Nuclear Waste, or something else? 6. As exact disposal methods and acceptable storage containers are dictated by the contaminants, will the Government provide the exact contaminants of concern and the concentration levels of each?

Response 129: 1. See Amendment 0002, question and response #21. 2. See Amendment 0002, question and response #21. 3. See Amendment 0002, question and response #21. 4. Whichever oversight agency is more stringent. 5. See Amendment 0002, question and response #21.

Question 130: 1503020 – Pest Control. Can you please provide a list of locations and their square footage of the locations to be serviced?

Response 130: See Annex 1503050, section, J attachments 4 and 5 and Annex 1503010, section J, attachments 4 and 18. All areas of China Lake are to be serviced by pest control services by service calls.

Question 131: 1503020 – Pest Control. What is the amount of acres to be treated for weed control and turf and ornamental pests?

Response 131: See Annex 1503050, Section J, attachments 4 and 5, which provides the quantities for weed control, turf, and ornamental pest.

Question 132: 1503020 – Pest Control. Do you have maps of the locations for services?

Response 132: Pest control services all areas of China Lake in different degrees see Annex 1503010 sect J attachment 18 maps and locations.

Question 133: 1503020 – Pest Control. Can you please list the total number of acreage for fence line and bash spraying?

Response 133: Annex 1503050 sect J attachment 5 under the tab Region Runways and fence lines are addressed.

The number of fence line at China Lake are quite extensive and would never be asked for complete clearing, select fence lines are addressed in the inventory.

Question 134: Amendment 2, RFIs, Cutoff Date of 3 Dec, page 13 of 13. Will the Government provide answers to all RFI’s before 3 Dec, to allow time for review and clarifications as was needed for Amend 2? If not, the Government is setting up potential for a pre award protest as the incumbent and their team has unfair advantage over other bidders.

Response 134: The Government intends to provide responses to the RFIs received on 03 DEC 2018 NLT 07 DEC 2018. However, the Government may, at the discretion of the Contracting Officer, respond to RFIs received after 03

DEC 2018.

Question 135: Instructions to Offerors (g) 91: Only one Technical proposal file should be submitted. Please confirm this requirement is in reference to the electronic copy of the technical proposal, i.e., one electronic file on each of two CD ROMs.

Response 135: See RFP, page 90, Section L, paragraph 7(d)(c)1&2.

Question 136: RFP N62473-18-R-5011, Section L (D)3(a)(1): Section L 6 Proposal Format/Submission; 6(d)c) states offeror(s) shall submit proposal copies as follows: 2. Volume #1 – submit (2) two electronic copies and (5) five paper copies in a separate binder (an original and (4) four paper copies). 3. Volume #2 – submit (1) electronic copy, and (5) five paper copies in a separate binder (an original and (4) paper copies). Page 94 instructions state that the ‘offeror shall complete and submit (in a sealed envelope) the following’. It is the understanding that the Price Proposal has a requirement for multiple documents and information and that the only sealed item is identified in Tab 3 – Financial Questionnaire, Section J, Attachment J-L-04. Will the Government clarify and de-conflict the instructions regarding Volume #2, Price Proposal? Is it the expectation of the Government to have Volume #2 binders in individual sealed envelopes?

Response 136: See revised Section M, paragraph D. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD, (3)(a)(1) below.

Question 137: RFP N62473-18-R-5011, Section L 6 c. 1: Section L.6.c.1 states ‘Electronic and paper submittal page sizes shall be 8.5’’ x 11’’. Font size shall be 10 or 12 point’ and (g) states ‘in order to maximize efficiency and minimize the time or proposal evaluation, it is required that the Offeror submit the proposal in accordance with the format and content specified. The electronic proposal shall be prepared so that if an evaluator prints the proposal it meets the format requirements 8.5x11 inch paper, single spaced typed lines, graphics or pictures are not allowed, 1 inch margins, 10 or 12-point font text, no hyperlinks, Microsoft Word software all files named with the file extension .doc. Supporting Cost Data may contain spreadsheets in Microsoft Excel software, with all the files named with the file extension .xls.’ The provided ELIN schedule cannot be compliant with these requirements while printing on 1 page to show all columns for understanding. Attempts to print on 11x17 paper do not allow for the font size without scaling, which would be technically non-compliant font sizes. Would the Government please revise the requirements to account for the ELIN schedule and/or revise the ELIN schedule to allow for printing that complies with requirements?

Response 137: The ELIN schedule is exempt from the 8.5x11 printing size limitation.

Question 138: Amendment 2, RFIs, Question and Answer # 69, page 9 of 13. Is the contractor to assume the workload has been roughly the same for the past 10 yrs. since historical workload is not available for FY 16 and FY 17?

Response 138: Historical nonrecurring overtime hours provided for reference only.

Question 139: Amendment 2, RFIs, Question and Answer # 76, page 9 of 13. Pricing by cleaning area would be fine if the ELINs were set up that way, they are not. Request the Cleaning areas be broken out by Funding activity so they can be properly priced against the Funding activity. Please see the example below.

x004 x004AA Perform Janitorial Services for NAVFAC (NWCF) x004 x004AB Perform Janitorial Services for NAVAIR x004 x004AC Perform Janitorial Services for REGION x004 x004AD Perform Janitorial Services for BMC x004 x004AE Perform Janitorial Services for DLA/DLA x004 x004AF Perform Janitorial Services for NCIS x004 x004AG Perform Janitorial Services for NEX x004 x004AH Perform Janitorial Services for Geothermal x004 x004AJ Perform Janitorial Services for EOD The ELINs are only by funding activity and not by PWS Spec Requirements. If the government wants them to be priced by PWS Spec Requirements the whole ELIN area of x004 will need to be changed. Is that going to happen?

Response 139: There will be no change to the ELIN format.

Question 140: Amendment 2, RFIs, Question and Answer # 83 thru 90, pages 10 n 11 of 13. We want to price each ELIN line item as noted in Q&As 83 to 90 but the J attachments 1503010-08, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18 and 19 have to be broken out by the Funding activity so we can provide a unit cost and total cost. Will this be done or will the ELIN structure for x004 be changed to match the J attachments? Please clarify x004 x004AA Perform Janitorial Services for NAVFAC (NWCF) x004 x004AB Perform Janitorial Services for NAVAIR x004 x004AC Perform Janitorial Services for REGION x004 x004AD Perform Janitorial Services for BMC x004 x004AE Perform Janitorial Services for DLA/DLA x004 x004AF Perform Janitorial Services for NCIS x004 x004AG Perform Janitorial Services for NEX x004 x004AH Perform Janitorial Services for Geothermal x004 x004AJ Perform Janitorial Services for EOD.

Response 140: There will be no change to the ELIN format. It is up to each Contractor to develop their own pricing and then align to the ELIN structure.

Question 141: Amendment 2, RFIs, Question and Answer # 62, page 8 of 13. 1. Since there is no historical data, is this a new requirement? 2. With no historical data available, what is the Government’s best estimate in order to staff and price this work?

Response 141: This is not a new requirement. There would be at least one transport for each GSA vehicle within a local radius of 25 miles. It would be unknown to the Government the number of transports for warranty work or recalls that would occur for transport outside the local area within a 150-mile radius.

Question 142: J-0200000-11 UNPOPULATED ELINS, ELIN A053AF, TABS ‘ENTER EACH ELIN PRICE HERE ‘, ‘SUMMARY’, ‘ELINS NONRECURRING BASE’: AO53AF Janitorial Services Wash Interior Walls states: Provide service to wash interior walls. 1. What is the maximum vertical limit for washing interior walls?

Response 142: There is no maximum vertical limit for interior wall. China Lake has nothing over 4 stories tall.

Question 143: Facility Investment, Spec Item 3.1, Page 8 of 40: “Services orders are not limited to work performed on existing facilities, structures and equipment identified in the respective section J attachments or spec items for each annex. Additional facilities, structures and equipment added during the course of the contract will become part of the service order program at no additional cost to the government” Please clarify – given that Contractor is expected to maintain parts and be OEM certified, will the Contractor be able to request an a modification or adjustment if the Government adds new pieces of equipment to the contract?

Response 143: Additional facilities, structures and equipment added during the course of the contract, these will become part of the service order program. In other words, if service orders are issued for work on new facilities, structures and equipment, costs of service orders will be charged the Government once service rendered. No modification is needed to add new facilities, structures and equipment in order to issue service orders.

SECTION L

INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS

1. Inquiries Inquiries regarding the Request for Proposal (RFP) shall be submitted electronically using the Request for Proposal Information (RFI) form provided as Attachment J-L-01 of this solicitation. The Point of Contact (POC) for inquiries is Jennifer Reece at jennifer.m.reece@navy.mil and Eley DeCuba eley.decuba@navy.mil. The Government cannot guarantee a response to inquiries received less than 10calendar days before proposal due date.

2. Proposal Due Date Proposal due date information is identified on the SF 33 and/or as amended on the SF 30. Refer to these documents for date and time of proposal submission.

3. Pre-Proposal Conference There will be a pre-proposal conference conducted on 15 November 2018 at 9:00 AM, local time. All attendees are required to meet at the Pass and ID Office, Building 01487 at 9:00 AM. The Government will provide transportation to the actual pre-proposal conference site on NAWS China Lake and for the subsequent site visit tour, returning to the Pass and ID Office, Building 01487 at approximately 12:00 PM. During the pre-proposal conference questions will be answered relative to this RFP. Comments, constructive criticism, and identification/notification of RFP inconsistencies are welcome during this conference.

Those wishing to attend the pre-proposal conference or site visit must complete the attached “2018 Badge Request” form send it to Eley DeCuba via e-mail at eley.decuba@navy.mil by COB 07 November 2018.

All prospective Offerors are urged to attend this conference. In order to make this conference as productive as possible, Offerors are requested to submit one week prior to the pre-proposal conference any questions they may have in writing to Jennifer Reece at jennifer.m.reece@navy.mil and Eley DeCuba at eley.decuba@navy.mil. The submission of written questions will not preclude anyone from posing questions during the pre-proposal conference.

Failure of a prospective Offeror to submit any questions or to attend the conference will be construed to mean that the Offeror fully understands all requirements of the solicitation. Prospective Offerors are advised that the preproposal conference will be held for the sole purpose of explaining terms and conditions of this solicitation only.

No minutes of this meeting will be issued. All prospective Offerors are advised that this solicitation will remain unchanged unless it is amended in writing. If an amendment is issued, normal procedures relating to the acknowledgment and receipt of any such amendment as required by FAR clause 52.215-1 Instruction to Offerors – Competitive of the solicitation shall apply.

4. Site Visit The pre-proposal conference and site visit will be held on 15 November 2018 at 9:00 AM at NAWS, China Lake, California, departing from the Pass and ID Office, Building 01487 at 9:00 AM and returning to the parking lot at approximately 12:00 PM. Those wishing to attend the pre-proposal conference or site visit must complete the attached “2018 Badge Request” form send it to Eley DeCuba via e-mail at eley.decuba@navy.mil by COB 07 November 2018.

NOTE: Due to security issues and time constraints, only those who register by the COB 03 October 2017 deadline will be allowed to attend the pre-proposal conference and site visit.

The following information is required:

A valid Government-issued photo identification will be required (driver’s license, passport, etc.)

5. Proposal Delivery Location The Offeror must respond to all of the tasks solicited under this Request for Proposal (RFP). Proposal must be submitted in-person or via U.S. Postal Service or other delivery service, such as FedEx or UPS. Offeror must comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the proposal; if the proposal does not comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the proposal may be considered non-responsive and may render the offeror ineligible for award.

Proposals shall be delivered to the following address and clearly marked with the RFP number on the outside of the package:

Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest Attn: Jennifer Reece, Code ACQ2.JR 1220 Pacific Highway, Bldg 128 San Diego, CA 92132-5190

FASCIMILE PROPOSALS ARE NOT ALLOWED AND WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

6. Period of Acceptance of Offers The offeror agrees to hold its offer firm until 01 September 2019.

6. Proposal Format/Submission Requirements

(a) General: Proposals submitted in response to the solicitation shall be formatted as follows and furnished in the number of copies stated herein. Firms shall submit proposals in paper format and via electronic format on editable CD-ROM. CD’s shall be placed in binder sleeves in the 3-ring binder.

(b) The acceptable electronic format for proposals includes Microsoft 2007, Word and Excel, or latest version, and Adobe Acrobat 9.0 Pro, or latest version. Price Proposal is to be submitted in Microsoft Excel 2007 or latest version, with all formulas and links to detail worksheets intact.

PAPER PAGES SHALL BE STANDARD 8½ X 11” SHEETS. A DOUBLE-SIDED/DUPLEX PRINTED

SHEET WILL BE COUNTED AS TWO (2) PAGES.

(c) Electronic mail is not an acceptable media format for submission of proposals. Firms shall ensure that proposal disks are virus free, and free of password protection. If access to proposal data is prohibited due to viruses, passwords, or incorrect format, the proposal may be rejected.

(d) Proposal Submission Requirements:

a. All proposals (paper and electronic) shall be labeled with the Volume Number and Title, Solicitation Number, and the name, address, and phone number of the Offeror. The proposal shall be structured so that it directly identifies which factor, tab, and proposal requirement are being addressed.

b. The electronic/paper proposals shall be submitted on separate Disk and Binder. The proposal shall be submitted in two (2), three-ring binders, not comb-bound. The following information shall be included in each Section (Disk/Binder) and tabbed/labeled accordingly.

c. Offeror(s) shall submit proposal copies as follows:

1. Page limits, if stipulated, must be adhered to. Electronic and paper submittal page sizes shall be 8.5" x 11". Font size shall be 10 or 12 point. A table of contents, list of acronyms, and any relevant/associated tables or figures is required.

2. Volume #1 - Submit (2) two electronic copies and (5) five paper copies in a separate binder (an original and (4) four paper copies).

3. Volume #2 - Submit (1) one electronic copy, and (5) five paper copies in a separate binder (an original and (4) four paper copies).

(e) Proposals shall be delivered to the following address in accordance with the date and time set for receipt of proposals:

Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest Attn: Jennifer Reece, Code ACQ2.JR 1220 Pacific Highway, Bldg 128 San Diego, CA 92132-5190

(f) Proposal Content - Proposal(s) shall contain complete responses to Factors 1 thru 5 and price.

(g) In order to maximize efficiency and minimize the time for proposal evaluation, it is required that the Offeror submit their proposal in accordance with the format and content specified. The electronic proposal shall be prepared so that if an evaluator prints the proposal it meets the following format requirements: 8.5 x 11 inch paper;

single-spaced typed lines; graphics or pictures not allowed; 1 inch margins, 10 or 12-point font text, no hyperlinks;

Microsoft Word software all files named with the file extension .doc. Supporting Cost Data may contain spreadsheets in Microsoft Excel software, with all files named with the file extension .xls. Only one Technical proposal file should be submitted.

(h) Your proposal should be presented as follows:

VOLUME #1 – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL –

(1) Cover Letter (1 page limit)

(2) Technical Proposal Tab 1 - - Factor 1 Recent, Relevant Experience of the Firm: Section J, Attachment J-L-02

(3 page limit per project) Tab 2 - - Factor 2 Technical Approach:

(No page limit) Tab 3 - - Factor 3 Management Approach

(No page limit) Tab 4 - - Factor 4 Safety: Section J, Attachment J

(Technical Approach to Safety: 2 page limit) Tab 5 - - Factor 5 Past Performance on Recent, Relevant Projects:

(No page limit except as otherwise stated in Section M Factor F, Past Performance)

VOLUME #2 – PRICE PROPOSAL –

Tab 1 - - Cover Letter and Standard From (SF) 33 Tab 2 - - ELINS Worksheets for Base and Option Periods Tab 3 - - Financial Questionnaire, Section J, Attachment J-L-04 Tab 4 - - Joint Venture and/or Mentor-Protégé Agreement, if applicable Tab 5 - - Copy of Online Representations and Certifications from the System for Award Management

7. Period of Acceptance of Offers The offeror agrees to hold its offer firm until 01 September 2019.

SECTION M

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

1. The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract; to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the offeror submitting the proposal determined to represent the best value—the proposal most advantageous to the Government, cost/price and other factors considered.

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

3. The 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. As stated in the solicitation, 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. The evaluation report must document the evaluation board’s assessment of the identified weakness(s) and the associated risk to successful contract performance resulting from the weakness(es). This assessment must provide the rationale for proceeding to award without discussions.

B. SAFETY EVALUATION

1. Per NFAS 15.304(d), solicitations utilizing source selection procedures for procurements within the 50 United States, the District of Columbia, and outlying areas shall contain a standard “Safety” technical evaluation factor. This factor shall be included as a stand-alone evaluation factor and not as a sub-factor or an element of the Past Performance evaluation factor. This action will result in the selection of contractors that have consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and the ability to properly manage and implement safety procedures for themselves and all tiers of subcontractors under their purview.

2. The safety evaluation has three elements: Experience Modification Rate (EMR); Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA) Days Away from Work, Job Restriction, or Transfer (DART); and Technical Approach to Safety.

3. The three elements of safety identified above are not sub-factors. The evaluators should collectively consider all elements of safety when assigning an overall adjectival rating for this factor. The SSEB will need to make a qualitative determination of the rating for this factor, taking into account the risk ratings for EMR and DART and the subjective evaluation of the narrative.

4. Evaluators will not average the rating from the three previous complete calendar years (2015, 2016, and 2017) for the EMR and DART and should consider data trends.

C. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

1. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. The recency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered. These are combined to establish one performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror.

2. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

The first is to evaluate the recency of the offeror’s past performance. The second is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. The third is to establish the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant, and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration should be given to those aspects of an offeror’s contract history that would give the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will satisfy the current procurement. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to, the following:

similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of key personnel (for services) and extent of subcontract/teaming. The past performance evaluation conducted in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts;

rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as projects or task orders that are a government or commercial contract/project or task order that were at least 51% performed by the offeror as the prime contractor, at least 50% complete within the last five (5) years prior to the RFP issuance date, with an annual award value of $9 million or more, for services similar to the services described in the solicitation technical annexes:

1502000 Facilities Investment, 1503010 Custodial (Janitorial) Services, 1503020 Pest Control, 1503050 Grounds Maintenance and Landscaping, to include Xeriscaping, 1503060 Pavement Clearance (Street Sweeping/snow removal), and 1503030 Integrated Solid Waste Management.

Note: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or for whom information on past performance is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonable assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

3. The SSEB will review all past performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate these into the performance confidence assessment. A separate quality assessment rating is not required;

rather, the past performance confidence assessment rating is based on the offeror’s overall record of recency, relevancy and quality of performance.

In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past contract performance. In this case, the offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a confidence rating of “neutral.” Although the SSEB may not rate an offeror that lacks recent, relevant past performance favorably or unfavorably with regard to past performance, the SSAC may recommend and the SSA may determine, that a “Substantial Confidence” or “Satisfactory Confidence” past performance rating is worth more than a “Neutral Confidence” past performance rating in a best value tradeoff as long as the determination is consistent with stated selection criteria.

D. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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

Factor 1 – Recent, Relevant Experience of the Firm Factor 2 – Technical Approach Factor 3 – Management Approach Factor 4 – Safety Factor 5 – Past Performance on Recent, Relevant Projects

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

2. The relative order of importance of the non-cost/price evaluation factors is the technical factors Factors 1, 2, 3 and 4 are of equal importance to each other and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor Factor 5. When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-cost/price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price.

The importance of price will increase if the Offerors’ non-cost/price proposals are considered essentially equal in terms of overall quality, or if price is so high as to significantly diminish the value of a non-cost/price proposal’s superiority to the Government. Award will be made to the responsible Offeror(s) whose offer conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, price and non-cost/price factors considered.

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

(a) Price:

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The offeror shall complete and submit (in a sealed envelope) the following: Price proposal shall be submitted in separate binders from the Technical Proposal, and clearly marked “Volume 2 – Price Proposal.” Include a separate tab for each item shown below:

TAB #1: Cover Letter, and Standard Form (SF) 33 Solicitation, Offer and Award (offeror to complete blocks 12 through 18). Include Telephone Number, Fax Number, Email Address, Tax Identification Number (TIN), DUNs Number, and Cage Code on the SF 33, in block 15a. With regard to the price shown on the SF 33, only Contract Line Item Numbers (CLIN) 0001 through 0018 are to be completed.

TAB #2: Exhibit Line Item Number (ELIN) Pricing: Complete a paper copy of Exhibit Line Item Number (ELIN) Pricing, and an electronic version on a CD-ROM using Excel worksheets posted online at the following website: https://www.neco.navy.mil/ and/or http://www.fbo.gov. Electronic version must be compatible with Microsoft Office 2010. Leave all excel formulas in the spreadsheet.

TAB #3: Completed Exhibit D, “Financial Questionnaire” from banking institution.

TAB #4: If offeror is proposing as a joint venture and/or mentor-protégé, offeror shall provide a copy of the joint venture agreement and, if the joint venture is with a mentor-protégé, a copy of the relevant mentor-protégé agreement approved by the Small Business Administration.

TAB #5: Copy of the Online Representations and Certifications from the System for Award Management, at the following website: www.sam.gov, including all completed applicable sections of the FAR Clause 52.212-3, offeror Representations and Certifications – Commercial Items (Mar 2015).

(2) Basis of Evaluation: The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price consists of the basic requirements and all option items (see Section B of the solicitation). The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in Section M of the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). To ensure balanced pricing, the total proposed price per annex may be compared to the IGCE for that annex. For proposed prices for technical annexes that have a total value with a +/-30% or more differential compared to the IGCE, the proposed prices for those technical annexes will appear to be unreasonable. Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

(i) Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the RFP.

(ii) Comparison of proposed prices with the IGCE.

(iii) Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

(iv) Comparison of market survey results.

(b) Non-cost/price Factors:

(1) Factor 1 Recent, Relevant Experience of the Firm:

(i) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The offeror shall provide the following for evaluation under Tab #1 of the Technical Proposal Volume 1 on Exhibit “A” for each project. The attached offeror Recent, Relevant Experience of Firm Project Data Sheets, Exhibit A, is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. The Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total page limit for each project data sheet shall not exceed three single-sided pages.

NOTE: Projects submitted under Factor 1 - Recent, Relevant Experience of the Firm must be the same projects submitted for Factor 5 - Past Performance on Recent, Relevant Projects.

(1) Submit a minimum of two (2) projects and a maximum of five (5) projects, performed by the offeror as the prime contractor that best describes your experience on projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the solicited contract.

(2) Project experience is defined as a project performed under a single contract or task order. For multiple award contracts and Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) type contracts, the contract as a whole shall not be submitted as a project; rather offeror shall submit the work performed under a task order project.

(3) For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as follows:

(i) A government or commercial contract/project or task order that was at least 51% self-performed by the offeror as the prime contractor;

(ii) At least 50% complete within the last five (5) years prior to the proposal due date;

(iii) A total annual award value of $9 million or more;

(iv) This BOS contract consists of 10 technical annexes. At a minimum, the offeror shall demonstrate experience in the following technical annexes: 1502000 Facilities Investment, 1503010 Custodial (Janitorial) Services, 1503020 Pest Control, 1503050 Grounds Maintenance and Landscaping, to include Xeriscaping, 1503060 Pavement Clearance (Street Sweeping/snow removal), and 1503030 Integrated Solid Waste Management.

(4) The Government will not consider any project submitted for experience that was performed by a firm other than the offeror, except that if the offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the JV entity. If the JV does not have shared experience, relevant projects shall be submitted for each JV member. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects;

(5) The Government will consider otherwise relevant projects that were performed by the offeror’s proposed key personnel; however, experience of proposed subcontractor employees, key or otherwise, will not be considered; and,

(6) The Government will consider otherwise relevant projects performed by parent or subsidiary companies, predecessor companies, or satellite offices (i.e. any office(s) of the offeror other than the one submitting the current proposal) of the offeror, provided the offeror’s proposal clearly explains how the offered experience will be effectively utilized in the performance of the solicited contract. Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, if it is unclear how experience gained under a particular project will be utilized in or benefit the performance of the proposed contract, that project experience may not be considered in the evaluation. The Government will not consider the experience of proposed subcontractors.

(7) Exhibit A, offeror Recent, Relevant Experience of Firm Project Data Sheets submitted that exceed the maximum, three single-sided page limit will be removed prior to evaluation. Project Data Sheets submitted that exceed the maximum five (5) projects allowed for consideration will be removed prior to evaluation.

Exhibit A, Project Data Sheets submitted for entire multiple award contracts and/or Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) type contracts as a whole will be removed prior to evaluation. Exhibit A, Project Data Sheets submitted for projects that are not at least 50% complete within five (5) years prior to the proposal due date will be removed prior to evaluation. Exhibit A, Project Data Sheets submitted for evaluation that are not for services similar to the services described in the solicitation technical annexes in paragraph three (3) above will be removed prior to evaluation.

(ii) Basis of Evaluation: The basis of evaluation will include the offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience…