N627224R1313_Amd0002.pdf

Offers 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 or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication 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 letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

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

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

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

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, 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)

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.

15C. DATE SIGNED

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

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

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

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

N62742

RFP N62742-24-R-1313, NAVFAC WORK ORDER NUMBER 1737354 FY24 MCON P-870 9TH ENGINEERING SUPPORT

BATTALION (ESB) TRAINING COMPLEX, US NAVSUPPACT, MARINE CORPS BASE GUAM

Amendment No. 0002 is continued on page 2.

HAND DELIVER

NAVFAC PACIFIC

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS BR (ACQ33)

4256 RADFORD DR, BLDG 62

HONOLULU HI 96818-3296

See Item 6

J

21RXXX3

N6274224R1313

1 3

03/04/2024

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

01-Apr-2024

RFP N62742-24-R-1313

Amendment No. 0002

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

DOCUMENT 00 21 00, INSTRUCTION TO PROPOSERS

Para 1.1 Number of copies/time of receipt

Subpara c, Price and Technical Proposals (Electronic). Delete “with the paper copy of the subcontracting plan.”

Para 1.3, Instructions for Submitting Questions Regarding Solicitation

Delete Rachael Isara Phan, rachel.m.isara.phan.civ@us.navy.mil, and replace with Dayna Matsumura, dayna.n.matsumura.civ@us.navy.mil.

DOCUMENT 00 22 00, EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Para 2.3 Technical Evaluation Factors, Factor 1 – Experience, 1st and 2nd sentences are to be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

If a completed final or interim Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or

Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS) evaluation is available on substantially complete projects (at least 90% complete), it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 1. If a completed final or interim CPARS or CCASS evaluation is not available on substantially complete projects (at least 90% complete), then submit Past Performance Questionnaires

(Attachment B) for each project included in Factor 1.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

DOCUMENT 00 01 15 LIST OF DRAWINGS

1.2 CONTRACT DRAWINGS

REVISED DRAWINGS

The following drawings bearing the revision date of March 22, 2024, supersede previously issued drawings bearing the same number and title. The revised drawings accompany this amendment.

SHT

NO.

DWG

NO.

NAVFAC

DWG NO.

REV

NO.

TITLE

13 B-001 17312258 2 BORING LEGEND AND NOTES

14 B-701 17312259 2 BORING LOG (1 OF 4)

15 B-702 17312260 2 BORING LOG (2 OF 4)

16 B-703 17312261 2 BORING LOG (3 OF 4)

17 B-704 17312262 2 BORING LOG (4 OF 4)

103 M-401 17312361 2 BLEACHERS AND HEAD: PLUMBING FLOOR PLAN

AND ROOF PLAN

110 M-901 17312368 2 FUEL AREA AND HEAD PIPING DIAGRAMS,

EQUIPMENT SCHEDULE

114 E-101 17312373 2 ELETRICAL SITE PLAN

126 T-101 17312386 2 TELECOMMUNICATIONS SITE PLAN

mailto:rachel.m.isara.phan.civ@us.navy.mil mailto:dayna.n.matsumura.civ@us.navy.mil

PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 10 56 13 STEEL SHELVING (AMENDMENT 0002) is removed from the Project Table of Contents. This section has been deleted in its entirety.

Section 32 12 143 POROUS GRASS PAVING (AMENDMENT 0002) is removed from the

Project Table of Contents. This section has been deleted in its entirety.

SECTION 01 78 24.00 20, FACILITY ELECTRONIC OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

SUPPORT INFORMATION (eOMSI)

Delete this section in its entirety and replace with Section “01 78 24.00 FACILITY ELECTRONIC

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE SUPPORT INFORMATION (eOMSI)” (AMENDMENT 0002).

The revised section accompanies this Amendment.

SECTION 08 81 00, GLAZING

Delete this section in its entirety and replace with Section “08 81 00 GLAZING” (AMENDMENT 0002).

The revised section accompanies this Amendment.

SECTION 09 65 00, RESILIENT FLOORING

Delete this section in its entirety and replace with Section “09 65 00 RESILIENT FLOORING”

(AMENDMENT 0002). The revised section accompanies this Amendment.

SECTION 10 26 00, WALL AND DOOR PROTECTION

Delete this section in its entirety and replace with Section “10 26 00 WALL AND DOOR

PROTECTION” (AMENDMENT 0002). The revised section accompanies this Amendment.

SECTION 12 32 00, MANUFACTURED WOOD CASEWORK

Delete this section in its entirety and replace with Section “12 32 00 MANUFACTURED WOOD

CASEWORK” (AMENDMENT 0002). The revised section accompanies this Amendment.

SECTION 22 31 00, WATER OSFTENERS, CATION-EXCHANGE (SODIUM CYCLE)

Delete this section in its entirety and replace with Section “22 31 00 WATER SOFTENERS, CATION-

EXCHANGE (SODIUM CYCLE)” (AMENDMENT 0002). The revised section accompanies this

Amendment.

SECTION 32 12 13, BITUMINOUS TACK AND PRIME COATS

Delete this section in its entirety and replace with Section “32 12 13 BITUMINOUS TACK AND PRIME

COATS” (AMENDMENT 0002). The revised section accompanies this Amendment.

SECTION 32 31 13.53, ORNAMENTAL FENCE

Delete this section in its entirety and replace with Section “32 31 13.53 ORNAMENTAL FENCE”

(AMENDMENT 0002). The revised section accompanies this Amendment.

-- End of Amendment --

FY 24 MCON P-870 9TH ENGINEERING SUPPORT BATTALION (ESB) WON# 1737354

TRAINING COMPLEX, US NAVSUPPACT, MARINE CORPS

BASE GUAM

N62742-24-R-1313

DOCUMENT 00 21 16

DOCUMENT 00 21 16

INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

2/24

1.1 NUMBER OF COPIES/TIME OF RECEIPT

a. PRICE PROPOSAL (PAPER): An original paper and one (1) paper copy of the price proposal shall be submitted on 30 April 2024, 2:00 p.m., H.S.T. in a sealed envelope and marked in the bottom right corner "PRICE

PROPOSAL SUBMITTED UNDER RFP N62742-24-R-1313 - DO NOT OPEN IN MAILROOM." The PRICE

PROPOSAL shall include the following:

(1) Manually (wet signature) signed and completed SF 1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award)(NOTE: SF1442

Block 14 shall include the offeror’s name and physical address exactly as shown in the System for Award

Management registration. If mailing address is different from physical address, both addresses may be shown in Block 14, however both addresses shall be EXACTLY as shown in SAM)

(2) Signed and completed Bid Guarantee

(3) Representations and Certifications (See Document 00 45 00)(COMPLETE ALL PROVISIONS)

(4) Information required by paragraph 1.5, Pre-Award Survey/Responsibility Determination

(5) Information required by paragraph 1.6, Partnerships, Joint Ventures (JV), Limited Liability Companies

(LLC), Limited Partnerships (LP), Etc.

b. TECHNICAL (FACTORS 1, 2 AND 3) (PAPER): An original paper and three (3) paper copies of the technical for Factors 1 and 2 shall be submitted on 30 April 2024, 2:00 p.m., H.S.T. in a sealed envelope/package/box and marked in the bottom right corner "TECHNICAL PROPOSAL SUBMITTED UNDER RFP N62742-24-R-1313 -

DO NOT OPEN IN MAILROOM." Identify the original proposal as "Original" on the cover of the proposal. The

NON-PRICE PROPOSAL shall be submitted in a three-ring binder with table of contents and tabbed. The NON-

PRICE PROPOSAL shall include the following:

(1) All information required by Factor 1, Experience

(2) All information required by Factor 2, Past Performance

(3) All information required by Factor 3, Safety

c. PRICE AND TECHNICAL PROPOSALS (ELECTRONIC): An electronic copy of the price and technical proposals shall be submitted in .pdf format on a CD-ROM with the paper copy of the subcontracting plan. The offeror is responsible for ensuring that all original paper and electronic copies are identical. Should there be a discrepancy between the paper and electronic versions, the paper copy shall govern.

d. Proposals shall be submitted as follows:

(1) If sent via U. S. Postal Mail/Express Courier:

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS COMMAND, PACIFIC

Construction Contracts Branch (CON33)

258 Makalapa Drive, Suite 100

Pearl Harbor, HI 96860-3134

N62742-24-R-1313

DOCUMENT 00 21 16

(2) If hand-carried (Delivery hours between 7:00 AM and 2:00 PM, Monday through Friday except Federal

Holidays)

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING SYSTEMS COMMAND, PACIFIC

Construction Contracts Branch (CON33)

4256 Radford Drive, Building 62 (if facing the building office is on the right. DO NOT drop off at the

Navy Federal Credit Union)

Honolulu, HI 96818-3296

1.2 INSTRUCTIONS FOR OBTAINING THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

The RFP can be accessed at https://sam.gov. Printed copies of the RFP will not be issued.

1.3 INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMITTING QUESTIONS REGARDING SOLICITATION

Questions regarding the solicitation shall be submitted in writing in WORD format via electronic mail to Ms. Dayna

Matsumura, dayna.n.matsumura.civ@us.navy.mil Rachel Isara-Phan, rachel.m.isara-phan.civ@us.navy.mil.

Questions shall reference the drawing/detail and/or the specification section including paragraph number. Verbal queries will not be entertained. Responses to the questions will be provided in the form of a Notice and posted to the web site https://sam.gov. The Government may not respond to questions submitted less than 10 business days before the proposal receipt due date.

1.4 AMENDMENTS

Amendments will be posted to https://sam.gov. It is highly recommended that firms register on the SAM website as an interested vendor as this will be the only planholder’s list available. It is the offeror's responsibility to check the website periodically for any amendments to the solicitation.

1.5 PREAWARD SURVEY/RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION

FAR §9.104 requires prospective contractors to demonstrate, among other things, that they have adequate financial resources to perform the contract or the ability to obtain them, capability to comply with the required performance schedule, a satisfactory performance record, and be otherwise eligible to receive an award under applicable laws and regulations. The pre-award survey is not a part of the technical evaluation. The following information shall be submitted:

a. The offeror shall submit a document that appoints, in writing, one or more individuals, by name, each of whom will have full and independent authority to bind the offeror with respect to any act connected with this solicitation, including but not limited to: the submission and revisions of a proposal or proposals by the company, the conduct of discussion or negotiations, the submission of a Final Proposal Revision (FPR), and the execution of a contract and associated documents including bonds. Documents of appointment by a supporting resolution of the board of directors in the case of a corporation and by an instrument of similarly binding character in the case of an unincorporated entity. If bonds are not signed manually (wet signature), documents of appointment must include specific authorization and corporate approval for the use of electronic and facsimile signatures by the appointed individual(s).

b. Company financial statements (balance sheets and income statements) for past three years.

c. Financial resources available to perform the contract. Submit evidence of availability of working/operating capital that will be used for the performance of the contract. If the offeror plans to rely on financial support from other sources, identify the maximum lines of credit that will be available to include documentation to support the amounts. The maximum lines of credit should be based upon the inclusion of this contract effort. For joint ventures discuss the financial responsibilities for each partner.

https://sam.gov/ mailto:dayna.n.matsumura.civ@us.navy.mil mailto:rachel.m.isara-phan.civ@us.navy.mil https://sam.gov/ https://sam.gov/

DOCUMENT 00 22 00

Table of Contents

DOCUMENT 00 22 00

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I. GENERAL

1.1. INTENT TO AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

1.2 COMPETITIVE RANGE

1.3 ENFORCEABILITY OF PROPOSAL

PART II. EVALUATION FACTORS / RATING SCHEME

2.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS OF AWARD

2.2 PRICE EVALUATION

2.3 TECHNICAL EVALUATION

2.4 RATING SCHEME

ATTACHMENTS

(A) Construction Experience Data Sheet

(B) Past Performance Questionnaire

BASE GUAM

RFP N62742-24-R-1313

Amendment No. 0002

DOCUMENT 00 22 00

PART I. GENERAL

1.1 INTENT TO AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306 (a)). Therefore, the initial proposal shall conform to the solicitation requirements and should contain the best offer from a technical and price standpoint.

Only the three (3) lowest-priced proposals will be evaluated for fair and reasonable pricing and technical acceptability. If none of the three (3) lowest-priced proposals are found to be technically acceptable, then the next three (3) lowest-priced proposals will be evaluated for technical acceptability. If none of the six (6) lowest priced proposals are found to be technically acceptable, then all remaining proposals will be evaluated for technical acceptability.

The Government intends to select the lowest reasonably priced technically acceptable offer and award a contract

(within the funds available) without conducting discussions.

1.2 COMPETITIVE RANGE

The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines discussions are necessary, the Contracting Officer may conduct discussions with Offerors determined to be in the competitive range. The Government may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the most highly rated. If the Contracting Officer determines the number of proposals 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.

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. The awardee’s proposal will be incorporated into the contract and all items proposed will become binding requirements of the contract. By submission of the offer, the Offeror agrees that all items proposed (e.g., subcontractors with teaming agreements, etc.) will be utilized for the duration of the contract and any substitutions must be equal or better and will require prior approval by the Contracting Officer.

PART II. EVALUATION FACTORS / RATING SCHEME

2.1 EVALUATION CRITERIA AND BASIS OF AWARD

The contract resulting from this solicitation will be awarded to that responsible Offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to be the lowest evaluated price of proposals (within the funds available) meeting the acceptability standards for the technical evaluation factors. An overall technical factor rating must be at least “ACCEPTABLE” in order to be considered for award. An “UNACCEPTABLE” rating in any factor will result in the overall technical proposal being rated “UNACCEPTABLE” unless corrected through discussions. An overall technical rating of “UNACCEPTABLE” will make a proposal ineligible for award.

2.2 PRICE EVALUATION

a. One or more of the following techniques may 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

BASE GUAM

RFP N62742-24-R-1313

Amendment No. 0002

DOCUMENT 00 22 00

2.3 TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

The following evaluation factors shall be used to evaluate the technical proposals.

FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

FACTOR 3: SAFETY

Factor 1 –EXPERIENCE:

Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall complete the attached Construction Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment A) for each project submitted and complete all individual blocks. Attachment A and all information therein is

MANDATORY and SHALL be used to evaluate experience. The Offeror may expand individual blocks on the

Attachment A; however, Attachment A for each project submitted shall not exceed a total of four (4) single-sided or two (2) double-sided pages, 8.5” x 11”, 1” margin left/right/top/bottom, and 10-point font or larger.

Information exceeding the four (4) single-sided pages or two (2) double-sided pages, will not be evaluated. 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.

Submit a maximum of three (3) construction projects that best demonstrates the Offeror’s experience that are similar in size, scope, and complexity to the types of projects described below. If the Offeror submits more than three (3) projects for evaluation, the Government will evaluate the first three (3) projects submitted and disregard any other project information after the first three (3). For purposes of this evaluation, a relevant construction project is further defined as:

New construction of cast-in-place reinforced concrete structures/buildings that resist seismic (Seismic Design

Category D) AND wind loads (3-second gust (ultimate) of 195 mph or more). Projects must be approximately

$5M or more in construction dollar value. Completed or substantially completed within the last 15 years.

Substantially complete is defined as at least 90% complete.

NOTES:

1. Building repair, renovation, conversion, and addition work will not be considered as a relevant project.

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. The “Offeror” is defined as the exact name in Block 14 of the Solicitation, Offer and Award (SF1442). If the

Offeror is utilizing experience and past performance information of any entity other than (1) the Offeror; (2) if the Offeror is a joint venture, its joint venture partners jointly and severally liable for the contract; or (3) a firm that has been acquired by the Offeror and is now part of the Offeror, the Offeror shall provide in its proposal a fully-executed teaming agreement or other contractual agreement. The teaming agreement or other contractual agreement shall, at a minimum, (1) be signed by the Offeror and the other entity, (2) specifically reference this solicitation/contract, and (3) specify the work to be performed by the other entity such that it is clear that the other entity will be meaningfully involved in this contract. For item (3), clearly state the specific

BASE GUAM

RFP N62742-24-R-1313

Amendment No. 0002

DOCUMENT 00 22 00

commitments of resources of the other entity in terms of the work it will specifically perform or manage in the performance of the contract at the worksite. Note that generalized statements concerning commitment of resources are not sufficient to demonstrate that an entity will be meaningfully involved in the performance of the contract.

Examples of “generalized statements” include a commitment of resources merely based on an entity’s “access” to resources and other generalized statements such as an entity will “provide support and expertise on the project.”

The government will only consider information provided in the teaming agreement for the purpose of determining whether the Offeror has clearly demonstrated that any entity (other than the Offeror and, if the offeror is a joint venture, its joint venture partners jointly and severally liable for the contract) will have meaningful involvement in the performance of the contract. For experience and past performance information of a firm that has been acquired by the Offeror and is no longer a separate legal entity, the Offeror shall provide an explanation of the acquisition sufficient to demonstrate that the predecessor firm is now part of the Offeror in Block 1 of Attachment A.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation and acceptability include the Offeror’s demonstrated experience in performing at least one relevant construction project as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements and Part II, paragraph 2.4 below.

Factor 2 –Past Performance

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

If a completed final or interim Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or Construction

Contractor Appraisal Support System (CCASS) evaluation is available on substantially complete projects (at least 90% complete), it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 1. If a completed final or interim CPARS or CCASS evaluation is not available on substantially complete projects (at least 90% complete), then submit Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment B) for each project included in Factor 1.

Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) shall be completed and signed by the contracting agent and/or their representative responsible for the construction contract administration. A PPQ shall not be from a prime contractor to a subcontractor or from a designer to a constructor on a design-build project. The Offeror shall provide completed PPQs in the proposal. Offerors may submit PPQs previously submitted for other solicitations.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1. 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.

NOTES:

1. 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. In addition, 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 CPARS using all UEI/CAGE 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), Electronic Subcontract Reporting

System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror.

2. Performance awards, letter of appreciation, certificates, or additional information submitted will not be considered.

3. See Notes for Factor 1.

BASE GUAM

(b) Basis of Evaluation

The Offeror’s past performance will be evaluated on how well the Offeror performed on the relevant projects submitted under Factor 1 – Experience and past performance on other relevant construction projects currently documented in known sources. In addition to the above, the Government may consider information in the

Offeror’s proposal as well as information gathered from other sources including former customers, Government agencies, Federal databases and other references. The information provided by the Offeror may provide the major portion of the information used in the Government’s evaluation for past performance. The Government however, is not restricted to the information provided by the Offeror and may use other sources (such as those listed in the submittal requirements) to assess past performance information.

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, and the context of the data in the Offeror’s performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the

Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the Offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeror’s probability to successfully meet the requirements of the RFP.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably in past performance. The Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, unknown past performance shall be considered “acceptable”.

The basis of evaluation will consider the Offeror’s performance record that demonstrates the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform the required effort or the Offeror’s performance record is unknown or neutral. See also paragraph 2.4 below.

Factor 3 – SAFETY

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

The Offeror shall submit the following information: For a partnership, joint venture, or LLC etc., separate TRC, DART, OSHA 300 logs and OSHA Form 300A submittal requirements are required for each partner/member;

however, only one safety narrative is required. If any Offeror/partner/LLC member has TRC and/or DART rates, then, TRC and DART Rates shall not be submitted for any subcontractors or affiliates of that Offeror/partner/LLC member. If any Offeror/partner/LLC member does not have TRC and/or DART rates, provide an explanation as to why it is unable to provide them and submit TRC and DART information specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) below for the firm(s) that will be providing the on-site construction labor resources for that Offeror/partner/LLC member.

(1) OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate and Total Recordable Case

(TRC) Rate: Submit the OSHA DART and TRC rates and supporting OSHA 300 log and OSHA Form 300A summary for the five previous complete calendar years (2023, 2022, 2021, 2020 and 2019). If an Offeror does not have the OSHA DART or TRC rates, affirmatively state so, explain why and submit equivalent DART and TRC rates based upon the OSHA formula shown below. Provide an explanation for any DART rate 2.99 or higher and the actions taken to prevent future occurrences. Provide an explanation for any TRC rate 4.49 or higher and the actions taken to prevent future occurrences. Any fatalities experienced within this 5-year timeframe must be explained in detail, to include root cause and corrective actions. The following provides the OSHA formula for DART and TRC:

The OSHA DART rate is calculated by adding up the number of incidents involving work related deaths, one or more Lost Days, one or more Restricted Days, or the transfer of an employee to a different job within the same company, multiplying that number by 200,000, and then dividing that number by the number of employee labor hours worked.

Total Number of DART incidents x 200,000

DART Rate = Number of Employee Labor Hours Worked

RFP N62742-24-R-1313

Amendment No. 0002

DOCUMENT 00 22 00

BASE GUAM

RFP N62742-24-R-1313

Amendment No. 0002

DOCUMENT 00 22 00

The OSHA TRC rate is calculated by multiplying the number of recordable cases by 200,000, and then dividing that number by the number of labor hours.

Total Number of Recordable Cases x 200,000

TRC Rate =Number of employee labor hours worked

“Recordable cases” include each work related death and each work related injury or occupational illness involving days away from work, restricted work, transfer to another job, medical treatment beyond first aid, or loss of consciousness.

(2) Technical Approach for Safety: Describe the plan for safety that will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. The Offeror shall submit a narrative that fully describes the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and subcontractor performed work. The Offeror will describe methods that will be employed to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and/or all subcontractor levels. Additionally, the Offeror shall describe their methodology to execute an effective program that utilizes sound mishap prevention techniques and processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps.

There is no page limitation to address paragraph (1) above. The narrative to address paragraph (2) above shall not exceed two (2) pages (single-sided, 8.5” x 11”, 1” margin left/right/top/bottom, and 10-point font or larger).

Narrative pages shall contain the page number.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

The basis of evaluation and acceptability are DART rates of 2.99 or less for the five previous years (2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, and 2019); TRC rates of 4.49 or less for the five previous years (2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, and 2019) and an acceptable technical approach for safety as defined in the solicitation submittal requirements for Factor 3 and Part II, paragraph 2.4 below.

2.4 RATING SCHEME

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

(a) Deficiency: A material failure of the proposal to meet a Government requirement.

(b) If the proposal contains an “UNACCEPTABLE” rating for any of the Factors, the overall rating of the technical proposal will be “UNACCEPTABLE”. An overall technical rating of “UNACCEPTABLE makes a proposal ineligible for award.

FACTOR 1 – EXPERIENCE and FACTOR 3 – SAFETY

ACCEPTABLE Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

UNACCEPTABLE Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE

BASE GUAM

RFP N62742-24-R-1313

Amendment No. 0002

DOCUMENT 00 22 00

ACCEPTABLE Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the Offeror’s performance record is unknown.

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 so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably 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 neutral shall be considered “acceptable.”

UNACCEPTABLE Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.