!141310-amd1.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

RFP N62742-14-R-1310, NAVFAC WORK ORDER NUMBER 796698, FY14 MCON P-852, 3D RADIO BATTALION MAINTENANCE /

OPERATIONS COMPLEX, MARINE CORPS BASE HAWAII, KANEOHE BAY, HAWAII

Amendment No. 0001 is continued on page 2.

THE CLOSING DATE REMAINS UNCHANGED.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 2

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 08-Nov-2013

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 N62742-14-R-1310

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

18-Oct-2013

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 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

08-Nov-2013

CODE

NAVFAC PACIFIC

A-E/CONSTR CONTRACTS BRANCH (CODE ACQ31)

258 MAKALAPA DR STE 100

JBPHH HI 96860-3134

N62742 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N62742-14-R-1310

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

CONTINUATION

DOCUMENT 00100 INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

The attached DCMA Form 1620 was inadvertently omitted from the Request for Proposal.

DOCUMENT 00202 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Replace pages 1 through 8 with the attached pages 1 through 8.

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

(End of Summary of Changes)

Guaranty Agreement DCMA Form 1620 04-04 Page 1 of 2

GUARANTY AGREEMENT FOR CORPORATE GUARANTOR

(Applicable to One or More Government Contracts)

The undersigned (Insert Guarantor’s Name)

(Insert Guarantor's Address) for itself, its successors and assigns, hereinafter referred to as the Guarantor, requests the United States of America (Department of Defense) hereinafter called the Government, to award contract or contracts to a corporation (Insert Contractor's Name) organized under the laws of the State of having its principal place of business at (Street Address) in the City of in the State of , herein after called the Contractor. The undersigned Guarantor agrees to guarantee absolutely to the Government the full, complete and faithful performance of the Contractor of any and all contracts, hereinafter referred to as such contract, according to the terms and conditions thereof and at the time and in the manner provided therein.

In consideration of the award of any and all contracts to the Contractor, the undersigned Guarantor agrees as follows:

1. Guaranty. The Guarantor absolutely guarantees the full, complete and faithful performance by the Contractor of such contract, as such contract may be from time to time amended as authorized by its terms, according to the terms and conditions of such contract as so amended, and at the time and in the manner provided therein. The Guarantor agrees to provide the Contractor all necessary and required resources including financing, which are necessary to assure the full, complete and satisfactory performance of such contract.

2. Extension of Time of Performance. Any extension of the time of performance of such contract as so amended shall not release the undersigned Guarantor from liability hereon.

3. Assignment. This instrument shall bind the undersigned Guarantor, its successors and assigns. If any person, firm, corporation or entity other than the Contractor becomes obligated to perform the contract or any part thereof, whether by operation of law or otherwise, any and all rights of the Government against the Guarantor shall remain in full force.

4. Default. In the event of termination for default under the terms of such contract, or in the event of failure, insolvency, default, bankruptcy, arrangement, appointment of receiver of the Contractor or other liquidation of the Contractor, the Guaranty herein shall become absolute.

5. Waiver of Notice. The Guarantor waives notice of default on the part of the Contractor and agrees that its Guaranty shall become absolute without necessity for the giving of such notice.

6. Continuation of Guaranty. The Guaranty herein shall continue until full, complete and faithful performance of such contract as it may be from time to time amended as authorized by its terms.

7. Default Liability. In addition to all other guarantees contained in this Agreement, in the event that the Government terminates such contract for default and awards the uncompleted portion of such contract to another source at a fair and reasonable price, the Guarantor shall be liable for any excess costs incurred by the Government as a result of such reprocurement and for the repayment of any unrecouped payments (e.g., partial payments, Progress Payments, or Advance Payments) paid to the Contractor by the Government. In addition, the Guarantor shall be liable for all costs end expenses paid or incurred by the Government in enforcing this Guaranty. The Contracting Officer representing the Government in connection with such contract shall determine the total costs and expenses, if any, incurred by the Government.

8. Enforcement. This Guaranty Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and may be enforced by the Government.

9. Construction. Nothing in this Guaranty Agreement shall be construed to obligate the Government to award a contract to the Contractor.

Guaranty Agreement DCMA Form 1620 04-04 Page 2 of 2

10. Coverage, Termination, Waiver, and Expiration.

a. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Guaranty Agreement refers to and shall be effective with respect to any and all contracts for supplies or services entered into, on or after the date of this Agreement between the Government and the Contractor. Unless otherwise indicated by the context the singular of the word "contract" as used in this Agreement shall mean the plural term "contracts" whenever this Agreement shall become effective with respect to more than one contract between the Government and the Contractor. For the purpose of any additional procurement of supplies or services called for by any agreement supplemental to a contract between the Government and the Contractor, the term "contract" shall refer to such supplemental agreement.

Additionally, this Agreement will include the contracts already in existence between the Contractor and the Government before the Agreement date, as specified here:

b. The Guaranty Agreement is a continuing guaranty and shall remain in full force and effect until the later of (1) the performance in full of the guaranteed obligations, or under the guaranteed contracts. (2) the termination of all continuing obligations and commitments of the Contractor under the guaranteed contracts. In the case of termination of the continuing commitments of the Contractor on any guaranteed contract, the termination notices must be given in writing citing the affected contracts.

c. When the Government Contracting Officer determines that it is in the best interest of the Government to do so, the Contracting Officer may, by written notice addressed to the Guarantor at the Guarantor’s address shown herein, waive the effect of this Agreement with respect to any specifically identified individual contract between the Government and the Contractor entered into after the date of such written notice. A separate written notice shall be given with respect to each contract that the Contracting Officer determines shall not be subject to the effect of this Agreement.

d. In the event that all of the contracts covered by this Guaranty Agreement have been satisfactorily completed by the Contractor including all continuing commitment of the Contractor under the contracts, the Guarantor may request the cognizant Government Contracting Officer for this Guaranty Agreement to issue a written notice which states that this Guaranty Agreement is considered to have expired.

Executed the day of year of .

(Guarantor)

By (Title)

(Business Address)

Witness

Witness

I, , certify that I am the duly elected Secretary of the Corporation named as Guarantor herein; that who signed this

Agreement on behalf of the Guarantor, was then of said Corporation, that said Agreement was duly signed for and in behalf of said Corporation by authority of its governing body, and is within the scope of its corporate powers.

Corporate Seal:

(Secretary)

Receipt of a copy of the above Guaranty Agreement is acknowledged.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

By

(Contracting Officer) (Contracting Officer Address)

RFP N62742-14-R-1310

Amendment No. 0001

Document 00202

DOCUMENT 00202

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

PART I. GENERAL

1.1 INTENT TO SELECT/AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

The Government intends to select the most highly qualified offerors (not-to-exceed five) to submit proposals for phase-two without conducting discussions with any Offeror, except for clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a);

therefore, the initial phase-one proposal shall conform to the solicitation requirements and should contain the best offer .

The Government intends to evaluate phase-two proposals received and award a contract without conducting discussions; therefore, the initial phase-two proposal shall conform to the solicitation requirements and should contain the best offer from a technical and price standpoint.

1.2 COMPETITIVE RANGE

If discussions are deemed necessary in phase-one and/or phase-two to maximize the Government's ability to obtain the best value, discussions will be held with those Offerors within the competitive range. The Government may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the most highly rated proposals, considering technical merit in phase-one and considering price and technical merit in phase-two.

1.3 ENFORCEABILITY OF PROPOSAL

The proposal must set forth full, accurate and complete information as required by this solicitation. The Government will rely on such information in the award of a contract. By submission of the offer, the Offeror agrees that all items proposed (e.g., technical approach, subcontractors with teaming agreements etc.) will be enforced for the duration of the contract. Any substitutions after contract award will be equal or better than as proposed and shall require Contracting Officer's approval prior to implementation.

PART II. EVALUATION FACTORS AND BASIS OF AWARD

2.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS OF AWARD

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 36.3, this acquisition is based upon two-phase design-build selection procedures. Phase-one will select the most highly qualified offerors (not-to-exceed five) to submit phase-two proposals. Phase-two will select the best value offeror using the tradeoff source selection process. The contract resulting from this solicitation will be awarded to that responsible Offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to be the most advantageous to the Government considering price and non-price evaluation factors. Award may be made to other than the lowest priced Offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror. Business judgments and tradeoffs will be used to determine the proposal offering the best value to the Government. In determining the best value to the Government, the Government need not quantify the tradeoffs that led to the best value decision.

The term “technical factors” refers to any non-price factor other than past performance. At the conclusion of phase-two, the government will consider Factors 2 through 5 and price in making the best value award decision. The relative order of importance of the non-price evaluation factors is that technical factors are equal to each other and when combined are equal to the performance confidence assessment (past performance). The subfactors within Factors 2 and 3 are descending order of importance. The combined non-price factors are approximately equal to price.

2.2 NON-PRICE EVALUATION FACTORS

Phase-One:

Factor 1: Technical Approach Factor 2: Experience Subfactor A: Offeror’s Experience Subfactor B: Lead Designer’s Experience Factor 3: Past Performance Subfactor A: Offeror’s Past Performance Subfactor B: Lead Designer’s Past Performance

Phase-Two:

Factor 4 – Safety Factor 5 – Energy and Sustainable Design

PHASE-ONE

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL APPROACH

(a) Basis of Evaluation:

The assessment of the Offeror’s technical approach will be used as a means to evaluate the organizational structure and teaming relationships proposed by the Offeror.

(b) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The composition and management of the firms proposed as the design-build (DB) team for this contract will be evaluated in this factor.

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Provide a narrative describing the proposed primary construction firms and primary design firms for this contract and the rationale for proposing this arrangement. Provide the role, responsibilities, and contractual relationships between the various firms (see FAR Subpart 9.6). The narrative shall also include a simple organizational chart that clearly identifies the lines of authority between the entities. If the experience of a significant subcontractor is being claimed in Factor 2, the firm must be named in the above narrative and organizational chart.

(2) The technical approach narrative shall be limited to one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages) including the organizational chart.

Factor 2 – Experience:

(a) Basis of Evaluation:

(1) Offeror’s Experience

The basis of evaluation will include the Offeror’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing recent 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.

(2) Lead Designer’s Experience

The basis of evaluation will include the lead designer’s demonstrated experience and depth of experience in performing recent relevant design projects as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements. The assessment of the lead designer’s relevant experience will be used as a means of evaluating the capability of the Offeror to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

NOTES:

There is a clear distinction between “experience” and “past performance”. Experience is related to the types and amounts of projects previously accomplished. Past performance relates to how well a contractor has performed.

Relevant projects where the Offeror and the proposed lead design firm have previously worked together may be considered more favorably than those that have not worked together.

Relevant projects that demonstrate design-build experience may be considered more favorably than those that do not have design-build experience.

Relevant projects that demonstrate experience with sustainable features may be considered more favorably than those that do not demonstrate experience with sustainable features.

(b) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Offeror’s Experience:

Submit a maximum of five (5) relevant construction projects for the Offeror that best demonstrates your experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. The Offeror’s submission is limited to not more than a combined total of five (5) of its and its sub-contractors’ (if applicable) most recent relevant projects. If the Offeror submits more than five (5) projects for evaluation, the Government will evaluate the first five (5) projects and disregard any other project information after the first five (5). For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as:

RELEVANT PROJECT: Construction of a new administrative office type facility. Each project shall be approximately $7M or approximately 15,000 square feet. Projects must have been completed or substantially completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. Substantially complete is defined as at least 90% completion of construction.

A project is 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.

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment A) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages).

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP. In addition, the description should also address any sustainable features for the project, including specific descriptions of those features.

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 each Joint Venture partner. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture partners may be rated lower. 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 Offeror may utilize experience of a subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement to demonstrate construction experience under this evaluation factor. The Offer must provide a letter of commitment and an explanation of the meaningful involvement that the subcontractor will have in performance of this contract.

(2) Lead Designer’s Experience

Submit a maximum of five (5) relevant design projects for the lead designer that best demonstrates design experience on relevant projects that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the RFP. The Offeror’s submission is limited to not more than a combined total of five (5) of its most recent relevant projects. If the Offeror submits more than five (5) projects for evaluation, the Government will evaluate the first five (5) projects and disregard any other project information after the first five (5). Do not submit project information for subconsultants. For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant project is further defined as:

RELEVANT PROJECT: Design of a new administrative office type facility. Each project shall have a construction cost of approximately $7M or approximately 15,000 square feet. Projects must have been completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. For design-build projects, the design portion of the contract shall have been completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP.

A project is defined as a complete design effort performed under a single task order or contract/subcontract. 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.

The attached Construction & Design Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment A) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. If the same project is being used to demonstrate construction and design experience, submit separate Project Data Sheets for construction and design. Individual blocks on this form may be expanded; however, total length for each project data sheet shall not exceed one (1) double-sided page (or two (2) single-sided pages).

For all submitted projects, the description of the project shall clearly describe the scope of work performed and the relevancy to the project requirements of this RFP. In addition, the description should also address any sustainable features for the project, including specific descriptions of those features.

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.

Factor 3 – Past Performance:

(1) Offeror’s Past Performance

This evaluation focuses on how well the Offeror performed on the relevant projects submitted under Factor 2 – Experience.

(2) Lead Designer’s Past Performance

This evaluation focuses on how well the Lead Designer performed on the relevant projects submitted under Factor 2

– Experience.

NOTES:

In addition to the above, the Government reserves the right to obtain information for use in the evaluation of past performance from any and all sources including sources outside of the Government. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of Contractors who are part of a partnership or joint venture identified in the Offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror.

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the Contractor’s performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the Offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s probability of successfully meeting the requirements of the RFP.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably in past performance and will receive an Unknown Confidence (Neutral) rating.

(b) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

(1) Offeror’s Past Performance

If a completed DD Form 2626, Performance Evaluation (Construction) is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 2 for construction experience. If a completed DD2626 is not available, then submit Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment B) for each project included in Factor 2, Experience, for the Offeror. The Offeror shall provide completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) with the proposal.

(2) Lead Designer’s Past Performance

If a completed DD Form 2631, Performance Evaluation (Architect-Engineer) is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 2 for Lead Designer’s Experience. If there is not a completed DD2631 evaluation then submit Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment B) for each project included in Factor 2, Experience, for the Designer. The Offeror shall provide completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) with the proposal.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 2 – Experience. Offerors should 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.

Performance awards or certificates of appreciation shall not be submitted and if submitted, will not be considered.

PHASE II (This section applies to offerors selected to submit phase-two proposals)

Factor 4 – Safety

The Government is seeking to determine that the Offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s overall safety record, the Offeror’s plan to select and monitor subcontractors, and any innovative safety methods that the Offeror plans to implement for this procurement. The Government’s sources of information for evaluating safety may include, but are not limited to, OSHA, NAVFAC’s Enterprise Safety Applications Management System (ESAMS), and other related databases. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete safety information regarding these submittal requirements rests with the Offeror. The evaluation will collectively consider the following:

- Experience Modification Rate (EMR)

- OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate

- Offeror Technical Approach to Safety

- Other sources of information available to the Government

(1) Experience Modification Rate (EMR):

The Government will evaluate the EMR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward or downward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

Lower EMRs may be given more favorable consideration.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate:

The Government will evaluate the OSHA DART Rate to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward or downward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rates. Lower OSHA DART Rates may be given more favorable consideration.

(3) Technical Approach to Safety:

The Government will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which subcontractor safety performance will be considered in the selection of all levels of subcontractors on this project. The Government will also evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which innovations are being proposed that may enhance safety on this procurement. Those Offerors whose plan demonstrates a commitment to hire subcontractors with a culture of safety and who propose innovative methods to enhance a safe working environment may be given more favorable consideration.

(b) Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information: (For a partnership or joint venture, the following submittal requirements are required for each Contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. EMR and DART Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

(1) Experience Modification Rate (EMR):

For the three (3) previous complete calendar years (2010, 2011, and 2012), submit your EMR (which compares your company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums over a three (3) year period). If you have no EMR, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the EMR and upward or downward trends shall be addressed in your proposal. Lower EMRs may be given more favorable consideration.

(2) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate:

For the three (3) previous complete calendar years (2010, 2011, and 2012), submit your OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If you cannot submit an OSHA DART Rate, affirmatively state so, and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART Rate data and upward or downward trends shall be addressed in your proposal. Lower OSHA DART Rates may be given more favorable consideration.

(3) Technical Approach for Safety:

Describe the plan that the Offeror will implement to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors, as a part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. Also, describe any innovative methods that the Offeror will employ to ensure and monitor safe work practices at all subcontractor levels. The Safety narrative shall be limited to two pages.

Factor 5 – Energy and Sustainable Design

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s response to the Energy and Sustainable Design Factor considering the proposed energy savings.

EPAct 2005 Energy Efficiency Narrative: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed energy budget reduction relative to EPAct 2005 energy efficiency goals, including evaluation of assumptions.

(b) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Provide the following information, which describes how the project will meet or exceed the following sustainable design contract requirements.

(1) EPAct 2005 Energy Efficiency Narrative:

Using the guidance outlined in Part 3 of this RFP, provide a detailed narrative to describe whether the proposed solution will meet or exceed the goal of a 30% energy reduction using the ASHRAE Std 90.1-2007, Appendix G, Building Performance Rating Method, excluding receptacle and process loads. Provide the proposed percent energy reduction. Provide the assumptions the Offeror will use to obtain a high-performance building, which will comply with these energy reduction goals. Describe the Offeror’s proposed building with regards to building orientation, shape, fenestration, solar heat gain coefficients (SHGC), wall and roof insulation values (U-values), HVAC systems, water heating systems, lighting systems, and control systems. Organize/divide the assumptions into four areas;

building orientation and configuration, building envelope, mechanical systems, and electrical systems. If the Offeror cannot achieve the 30% reduction within the budget identified, the Offeror shall state what percent energy reduction is proposed within their proposal. Do not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages). Note: Building performance rating and percent energy reduction are calculated in terms of energy rather than energy cost.

2.3 RATING SCHEME

2.3.1 The following information is pertinent to the rating of the technical proposals:

a. Strength: An aspect of an offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

b. Weakness: A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

c. Significant Weakness: A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

d. Deficiency: A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

e. If a proposal is evaluated to have a weakness that requires correction before award that results in a “Marginal” rating for a subfactor, the corresponding rating for the Factor will be “Marginal.” If the proposal contains a “Marginal” rating for any of the Factors, the overall rating of the technical proposal will be “Marginal” despite weighing of the Factors and subfactors. Similarly, if a proposal is evaluated as “Unacceptable” for a subfactor, the corresponding rating for the Factor will be “Unsatisfactory”. If the proposal contains an “Unacceptable” rating for any of the Factors, the overall rating of the technical proposal will be “Unacceptable” despite the weighing of the Factors.

2.4 PHASE-TWO PRICE EVALUATION FACTOR

a. CLIN 0001 will be funded with fiscal year 2014 Military Construction Appropriations. It is the Government’s objective to obtain CLIN 0001 without utilizing deductive CLIN 0002 (Deductive Items No. 1) within the funds available for award from the Military Construction Appropriations. All prices will be evaluated on the basis of the same items. The resulting total will be evaluated by adding the total price CLIN 0003 (planned modification for FF&E) to the total price for the basic requirement (CLIN 0001 minus 0002 as applicable).

b. The following techniques will be used to evaluate the total evaluated price to ensure that it is fair and reasonable:

Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation Comparison of proposed prices with the independent Government Estimate

c. The price proposals will be ranked from lowest to highest based on the evaluation criteria stated above.