Amendment 0005 AUTEC.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

AUTEC Facility 1902 Pier Repair Project at Andros Island Bahamas

See BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE on Page 2

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 15

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 12-Aug-2021

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 N6945021R0028

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

01-Jul-2021

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

12-Aug-2021

CODE

NAVFAC ENGINEERING SYSTEMS COMMAND SE

CORE CONSTRUCTION

BLDG 903 YORKTOWN

PO BOX 0030

JACKSONVILLE FL 32212-0030

N69450 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N6945021R0028

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE (SF 30)

The following have been added by full text:

The following items are applicable to this modification:

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1. To provide the following attachments. See Attachments/Links section.

• 2021-08-05_Pier1902Repair_Amend5_Drawings

• 2021-08-06_Pier1902Repair_Amend5_Change Log

• 2021-08-06_Pier1902Repair_Amend5_Specifications

• AUTEC_map_Locations1

• Environmental Review Worksheet

• AUL Spreadsheet

2. To include 52.233-1 Disputes clause in the solicitation.

3. Section III. E. 2. Past Performance Evaluation and Section III. F. Evaluation Factors for Award, 3(b) Non-Price Factors 1(a)(1) Construction Experience, Relevant Project Definition is revised as follows:

FROM:

RELEVANT PROJECT: A submitted relevant project must be a Waterfront construction project of similar size, scope, and complexity to this solicitation, completed by the Offeror as Prime Contractor, at a total contract value of $15 million or greater; and, must include both of the following:

• Construction of a new combi-wall or sheet pile supported pier/wharf

AND

• Construction of heavy concrete slabs and pile caps

TO:

RELEVANT PROJECT: A submitted relevant project must be a Waterfront construction project of similar size, scope, and complexity to this solicitation, completed by the Offeror as Prime Contractor, at a total contract value of $10 million or greater; and, must include both of the following:

• Construction of a new combi-wall or sheet pile supported pier/wharf

AND

• Construction of heavy concrete slabs and pile caps

4. The proposal due date and time remains unchanged at 5:30 PM Eastern on 24 August 2021.

5. All terms and conditions remain unchanged. Acknowledgement of this amendment is required with your proposal.

The following have been deleted:

SECTION 00 22 16 - SUPPLEMENTARY INSTRUCTIONS TO PROPOSERS

The following have been modified:

SUBMISSION REQ AND EVAL FACTOR

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Intentionally Left Blank

B. DESCRIPTION OF ACQUISITION

1. This acquisition will result in the award of a Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) contract for Design-Bid- Build (DBB) construction.

2. The intent of the project is to repair the primary operational pier facility at the Atlantic Undersea

Test and Evaluation Center (AUTEC) located at Andros Island, Bahamas. The existing superstructure will be removed, but the existing steel piles will be cutoff and incorporated in the new pier to help stabilize structural backfill. The proposed pier is a closed-pier mole-type structure with a steel pipe pile combination wall aligned with the existing pier perimeter that will retain compacted structural fill. The compacted fill will be capped with a reinforced concrete slab-on-grade deck. The new pier will abut the existing landside bulkhead. The proposed pier will include shore power, potable water, fire protection system, lighting, mooring hardware and foam filled fender system. Pier utilities will tie-in to existing landside sources.

Temporary mooring for AUTEC vessels will be constructed to provide safe mooring for the vessels during construction. The temporary mooring facility will be constructed to minimize interruptions to AUTEC operations.

The AUTEC pier facility is a berthing facility located at Andros Island, Bahamas to support the AUTEC Range. Potable water and AC electric power are available at the pier.

3. In accordance with Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 236 204, the Magnitude for this project is between $25,000,000 and $100,000,000.

4. Liquidated damages will be assessed as follows:

CLIN 0001 - $2,235/calendar day of delay CLIN 0002 - $250/calendar day of delay

5. The Government intends to award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose proposal represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors and their relative importance in the solicitation, as outlined in Section III of this plan.

6. This acquisition will be solicited on an unrestricted basis with full and open competition as authorized in the approved acquisition plan and approved DD Form 2579 Small Business Coordination Record.

II. Intentionally Left Blank

III. EVALUATION

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

1. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), the Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract; to negotiate with Offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the Offeror submitting the proposal determined to represent the best value—the proposal most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

2. 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.

B. Intentionally left blank C. Intentionally left blank D. Intentionally left blank E. Intentionally left blank

F. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. The solicitation requires the evaluation of Price and the following Non-Price factors:

Factor 1 – Construction Experience

Factor 2 – Past Performance

Factor 3 - Safety

Factor 4 – Technical Approach

Factor 5 – Small Business Utilization

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

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

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

3. Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor

(a) Price:

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

Submit one electronic copy of the Price Proposal as an Adobe PDF file. The entire Price proposal shall not exceed 30 pages in length utilizing a minimum Arial Font of 12 with pages numbered. Title page, table of contents, dividers, acknowledgement of all amendments, and any pages specifically excluded under each section do not count towards the total page count and should not be numbered. If page count exceeds 30 pages, only the first 30 pages will be reviewed.

(i) Cover letter containing the following information:

Authorized negotiator’s (Point of Contract (POC)) name with middle initial POC telephone number POC email address DUNS number CAGE code Federal Tax ID Number (TIN) Business Size (Large or Small Business) It is recommended to also include an additional POC’s contact information

(ii) Executed Standard Form (SF) 1442. Offeror shall insert its company name, address, DUNS Number, CAGE Code, and Federal Tax ID number in Block #14, telephone number in Block #15, acknowledge all amendments (if applicable) in Block #19, name and title of person authorized to sign in Block #20A, signature in Block #20B, and offer date in Block #20C of the SF 1442. If proposing as a joint venture, Offeror shall provide the DUNS number for all members of the joint venture.

(iii) SF 1442 Schedule of Prices for Contract Line Items Number (CLINs) 0001 and 0002. Complete the Section 00 10 00 CLIN SF 1442 Schedule of Prices. The price for Contract Line Item Numbers CLIN 0001 (Base Bid) through CLIN 0002 shall be considered available for award for 120 calendar days after the proposal due date.

(iv) Bid bond (SF-24). Offeror shall submit a bid bond (SF24) in the amount of 20% of your total project bid price or $3,000,000 whichever amount is less.

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

(vi) Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). Offeror shall ensure FAPIIS Certification as required by FAR 52.209-7, Information Regarding Responsibility Matters (July 2013) is current through maintaining an active registration in the System for Award Management (SAM).

(vii) Veteran’s Employment & Training Service (VETS). VETS-4212 Federal Contractor Reporting. Offeror shall ensure a current VETS-4212 (previously VETS-100 and/or VETS- 100-A) report has been submitted to the Department of Labor website, http://www.dol.gov/vets/vets4212.htm, if the Offeror is required to submit. An email confirmation of submission can be requested and received by the Offeror from the DOL website and is to be submitted in the price proposal. If the Offeror is not required to submit a report to VETS-4212, include a brief statement stating that the Offeror is not required to submit a report and state the reason. Visit the VETS-4212 website for details concerning if your company is required to submit a VETS-4212 report and to request an email confirmation of submission.

Note: The bid bond, SAM, FAPIIS, and VETS-4212 registrations must be in the name/CAGE and DUNS of the Offeror identified on the SF 1442.

(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. The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in 00 22 16 of the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). 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 Independent Government Estimate (IGE).

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

(iv) Comparison of market survey results.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PRICE PROPOSAL PACKAGE:

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

1. One (1) signed bank reference demonstrating adequate financial resources.

If Offeror's firm has a line of credit - provide information on how many figures Offeror can borrow against the line of credit (i.e. minimum 6 figures – exact line of credit is not required).

2. The Offeror shall provide the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for the prime contractor, certified by an independent accounting firm, if practicable, or signed by an authorized officer of the organization.

Submit evidence of availability of working/operating capital, which will be used for the performance of the resultant contract. For Joint Venture arrangements, submit the latest three complete fiscal year financial statements for each company in the Joint Venture and discuss the financial responsibilities among the companies. The Government may also utilize Dun & Bradstreet reports to evaluate the financial capacity of the Offeror.

3. Description of Offeror's facilities and equipment.

4. Other Offeror's work presently under contract.

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

(b) Non-Price Factors:

(1) Factor 1 - Construction Experience:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information:

(1) Construction Experience:

Submit a minimum of two (2) and 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.

All projects must meet the definition of a Relevant Project to be considered.

RELEVANT PROJECT: A submitted relevant project must be a Waterfront construction project of similar size, scope, and complexity to this solicitation, completed by the Offeror as Prime Contractor, at a total contract value of $10 million or greater; and, must include both of the following:

• Construction of a new combi-wall or sheet pile supported pier/wharf

AND

• Construction of heavy concrete slabs and pile caps

At least one (1) Project submitted shall be completed within the past seven (7) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. The remaining additional projects, up to four (4) shall be completed within the past ten (10) years of the date of issuance of this RFP. Maximum number of projects submitted for consideration shall not exceed five (5).

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 Construction Experience Project Data Sheet (Exhibit A) is MANDATORY and SHALL be used to submit project information. Except as specifically requested, the Government will not consider information submitted in addition to this form. 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 (i.e.: contract value, completion date, capacity, construction methods, scope, and automation system incorporation).

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects may be submitted for the Joint Venture members. Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture members may be rated lower. Offerors are still limited to a total of five (5) projects combined. If a joint venture/partnership arrangement is being proposed, include copies of agreements and letters of commitment signed by an Officer of each firm with the authority to bind the company. Agreements must include company name, DUNS number, address, point of contact, email address, phone number and fax numbers. The agreements shall demonstrate the relationship between firms, the percentage of work that each firm will complete, and the type of work each firm will perform. The experience of any member for the joint venture/partnership will be evaluated as that of the Offeror.

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.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

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

Offerors who fail to submit experience for all Joint Venture members may be rated lower.

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

Relevant projects with construction costs of $25 million or greater will be considered more favorably.

(2) Factor 2 - Past Performance:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

If a completed Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluation is available, it shall be submitted with the proposal for each project included in Factor 1 – Construction Experience. If there is not a completed CPARS evaluation then submit Past Performance Questionnaires (Exhibit C) for each project included in Factor 1 – Construction Experience. The Offeror should provide completed Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) in the proposal. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the Past Performance evaluation. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror shall complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). The Government may make reasonable attempts to contact the client noted for that project(s) to obtain the PPQ information. However, Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to help ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Alex Noriega, via email at alex.noriega@navy.mil. PPQ’s do not count towards the overall page limitation.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1 – Construction Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse Past Performance issues. Explanations shall not exceed two (2) double-sided pages (or four (4) single-sided pages) in total.

The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. The Government’s inability to contact any of the Offeror’s references or the references unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this factor.

Performance award or additional information submitted will not be considered.

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

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

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

Offerors lacking relevant Past Performance history will receive a NEUTRAL Confidence rating.

Past Performance ratings of “Substantial Confidence” and “Satisfactory Confidence” hold more value than a “Neutral Confidence” rating and will be considered more favorably in the evaluation of Past Performance.

(3) Factor 3 - Safety:

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

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

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

1. DART Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ [CY2020, CY2019, CY2018, CY2017, and

CY2016] worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no DART rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

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

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

DART RATE = Number of DART Incidents x 200,000 Total Number of Employee Labor Hours Worked

2. TCR Rate: Submit five (5) previous complete calendar years’ [CY2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, and 2016] worth of data (not an overall average). If the Offeror has no TCR rate, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why.

Should a negative trend occur above moderate risk levels, an acceptable/detailed explanation is required that includes any corrective actions taken for improvement.

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

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

TCR RATE = Number of TCR Incidents x 200,000 Total Number of Employee Labor Hours Worked

3. Technical Approach to Safety: Submit a narrative that addresses the following:

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

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

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

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one (1) double-sided page.

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

(c) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government is seeking to determine that the Offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors. The evaluation will collectively consider the DART rate, TCR, Technical Approach to Safety, and other sources of information available to the Government as part of such collective evaluation. The board will evaluate the DART rates and TCR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any negative trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

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

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

b. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk (LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) would indicate a strength.

c. An increasing DART rate trend could be considered a weakness (i.e. MR or better to High Risk (HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate.

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

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

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

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

b. Declining trends that push the risk levels from Moderate Risk (MR) or higher to Low Risk (LR) or Very Low Risk (VLR) would indicate a strength.

c. An increasing TCR rate trend could be considered a weakness (i.e. MR or better to High Risk (HR) or Extremely High Risk EHR)) if an acceptable explanation is not provided for any trends that rise above Moderate.

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

Risk TCR Rate Very Low Risk Less Than 2.49 Low Risk From 2.5 to 3.49

Moderate Risk From 3.5 to 4.49 High Risk From 4.5 to 5.99 Extremely High Risk Greater than 6.0

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

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

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

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

d. The Technical Approach to Safety narrative shall be limited to two (2) single-sided pages or one (1) double-sided page. Information on pages beyond this will not be considered.

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

(4) Factor 4 - Technical Approach:

a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

1. Provide a narrative describing the technical approach to the project that meets the requirements of the RFP. Include the following:

- approach to demolition of the pier concrete and partial demolition of H-piles

- approach to completing the combi-wall pile substructure and concrete deck superstructure

- approach to maintaining the AUTEC mooring, berthing, and loading/unloading operations

- approach to meeting the environmental requirements

- approach to satisfying quality control inspections and testing

- innovative construction methods proposed to save time and/or price or improve quality.

2. Up to three (3) conceptual drawings may be provided to supplement the narrative (i.e., floor plan, exterior elevation, and site plan).

3. Provide a critical path method (CPM) time scaled logic diagram and schedule reports showing critical path activities using scheduling software such as Primavera P6. This schedule shall include key milestones and activities, including submittals, procurement, major construction items, quality control and testing and work requirements as specified in specification section 01 14 00.00 25. The schedule shall consider potential work stoppage and possible delays as described in specification section 01 14 00.00 25 along with work requirements contained on sheets G-003, and G-101. The awardees proposed schedule will become the basis for initial schedule submission as outlined in specification section 01 32 17.00 25.

Narrative describing the technical approach to the project shall not exceed five (5) double-sided pages or (ten (10) single-sided pages). The CPM and conceptual drawings are not included in the page limitation for the technical approach description.

b) Basis of Evaluation:

The Government will evaluate the narrative and conceptual drawings (if included) considering the extent to which the Offeror demonstrates a clear understanding of the architectural and engineering requirements of the project.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror's technical solution to determine adherence to the technical requirements of the RFP.

The Government will evaluate the CPM schedule considering the extent to which the Offeror demonstrates a clear understanding of the project scope and the contract Period of Performance. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's CPM schedule to determine a clear understanding of the project features, critical path items, and adherence to the Period of Performance of the RFP.

Offeror’s who propose innovative construction methods or other solutions that provide improved project quality and/or time/price savings may be rated higher.

(5) Factor 5 - Small Business Utilization And Participation:

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

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

(a) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

1. All Offerors (both Other than Small Businesses (OTSB) AND SBs shall use Exhibit D (Historical Small Business Utilization) to demonstrate their historical utilization of SBs. Exhibit D shall be provided for each project submitted under Factor 1, Corporate Experience. Failure to submit Exhibit D for each project submitted under Factor 1, Corporate Experience, or the failure to fully complete Exhibit D may result in a deficiency.

2. All Offerors (both OTSBs and SBs) shall use Exhibit E (Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SPCD)) to submit the following required information for evaluation of this factor:

a. To demonstrate commitment to use Small Business concerns in the performance of this contract, identify all planned subcontractors by name that will be used to support each specific Small Business category (i.e., SB, HUBZone SB, WOSB, SDB, VOSB, and SDVOSB). Identify the type and complexity of product/service to be subcontracted, the estimated subcontract value, and the type of commitment (i.e., teaming agreement, letter of commitment, etc.) with each subcontractor.

b. To demonstrate maximum practicable participation of Small Businesses, identify (in terms of dollar value and percentage of the total contract value) the Offeror’s proposed Small Business participation. The minimum required Small Business participation (i.e. work to be performed by Small Business as the prime contractor and/or work to be performed by Small Business subcontractors) is 20%. All Offerors who are not able to meet the minimum total Small Business participation rate of 20% (of the total contract value) shall provide a detailed explanation why the minimum total Small Business participation rate cannot be achieved.

- Large business Offerors may achieve the minimum total Small Business participation rate through subcontracting to Small Businesses.

- Small Business Offerors may achieve the minimum total Small Business participation rate through their own performance/participation as a prime and also through a joint venture, teaming arrangement, and/or subcontracting with other Small Business concerns.

- Offerors are encouraged to exceed this percentage and seek meaningful levels of participation in each of the Small Business categories (i.e., SB, HUBZone SB, WOSB, SDB, VOSB, and SDVOSB) consistent with efficient contract performance. Offerors are required to provide a detailed explanation for the methods used to develop the Small Business participation rates.

- Offerors simply proposing a 20% total Small Business participation rate without describing the methods used may be rated lower.

- If the Offeror does not intend to subcontract, provide a detailed explanation why subcontracting would not result in efficient contract performance.

Forms to be used for Offeror submission of Small Business Utilization and Participation Factor information are:

Exhibit D – Historical Small Business Utilization Exhibit E – Small Business Participation Commitment Document

(b) Basis of Evaluation:

1. The Government will evaluate the likelihood of success in achieving the Small Business objectives of this acquisition based on the following:

2. The extent to which the Offeror is able to demonstrate a history of supporting Government policies concerning the utilization of Small Business concerns (including all of the various socioeconomic categories of Small Business, HUBZone SB, WOSB, SDB, VOSB, SDVOSB) and the success in achieving goals established by Subcontracting Plans on prior contracts.

3. The extent to which the Offeror has demonstrated an achievable commitment to use Small Businesses (including HUBZone SB, WOSB, SDB, VOSB, SDVOSB) in the performance of this contract in the SBPCD. The SBPCD will be evaluated to determine the extent to which Small Business concerns are specifically identified by name and socioeconomic category in the document and the quantitative degree to which Small Business concerns (including HUBZone, WOSB, SDB, VOSB, and SDVOSB) will participate relative to the total contract value. The complexity and variety of the work Small Business concerns will perform and the degree of commitment to use named sources through formal teaming agreements, letters of intent/commitment will be evaluated to assess achievability of the commitment. The minimum required Small Business participation (i.e. work to be performed by Small Business as the prime contractor and/or work to be performed by Small Business subcontractors) shall meet 20% of the total contract value. All Offerors who are not able to meet the minimum total Small Business participation rate of 20% (of the total contract value) shall provide a detailed explanation why the minimum total Small Business participation rate cannot be achieved.

4. Although required to be submitted with the Offeror's Factor 5 proposal, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan (SBSP) information will not be part of the evaluation for Factor 5.

Forms to be used for Offeror submission of Small Business Utilization and Participation Factor information are:

Exhibit D – Historical Small Business Utilization Exhibit E – Small Business Participation Commitment Document

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE SUBMITTED WITH PROPOSAL FOR FACTOR 5

In a separate tab, the Offeror shall provide the following information in the proposal package for Factor 5:

SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

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

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

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

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

Please note that SBSP goals and the participation rates provided in the Small Business Participation

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

Although required to be submitted with the Offeror's proposal for Factor 5, this information will not be part of the evaluation for Factor 5. If the apparently successful Offeror fails to negotiate a Subcontracting Plan acceptable to the Contracting Officer within the time limit prescribed by the Contracting Officer, the Offeror will be ineligible for award.

SECTION 00 70 00 - CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT

The following have been added by reference:

52.233-1 Disputes MAY 2014

(End of Summary of Changes)