2.4.1 Amendment 2 - RFQ.docx

DOCX document 22 KB Posted

Attached to
Amendment 3 to RFP--Emergency Generator Repairs - Radiator Replacement--Frederick, MD
Solicitation number
02653
Issued by

About this file

This is an Amendment 2 Request for Proposal (RFQ) for emergency generator repairs at a FEMA facility in Frederick, MD. The solicitation (No. 02653) seeks a vendor to replace/repair a leaking generator radiator, with work to be completed within 90 days of contract award. The procurement is for the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (DHS/FEMA), with the contract to be performed at 4420 Buckeystown Pike, Frederick MD.

The source selection will be based on a best value determination using three evaluation factors in descending order of importance: schedule, proximity to facility, and price. Vendors must be within a 50-mile radius of the facility and provide a detailed timeline for completing the repair. The proposal is due by 04/30/2025 at 5:00 PM ET, with pricing to remain valid for 30 days after submission. Only one award will be made, and the contracting officer is Ms. Tara Shirley, located at Mt. Weather, VA.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
IMG_0079.jpg JPG image
IMG_0081.jpg JPG image
IMG_0080.jpg JPG image
IMG_0021.jpg JPG image
IMG_0024.jpg JPG image
IMG_0022.jpg JPG image
2.2.1 - RFQ.docx DOCX document
SOW.docx DOCX document

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFQ): 02653

DATE OF ISSUANCE: 04/21/2025

DUE DATE/TIME OF QUOTE: 04/30/2025, 5:00 PM/ET

END USER: DHS, FEMA

CONTRACTING AGENCY POC: Ms. Tara Shirley TITLE & LOCATION: Contracting Officer, Mt. Weather, VA

SERVICES CONTAINED IN THIS ESTIMATE ARE TO BE PERFORMED AT: 4420 Buckeystown Pike, Frederick MD 21740

Issued to: SAM.gov

Email Offers to tara.shirley@fema.dhs.gov

You are requested to provide firm-fixed pricing for the services specified in the Statement of Work (SOW). Funding has been obtained for this proposed procurement in an amount equal to or greater than the Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE). The Government requests pricing for the services listed in the SOW to be in effect for thirty (30) days after the date of your RFP response. Source selection will be based on a best value determination. There are three evaluation factors listed in descending order of importance, schedule, proximity to facility, and price with schedule being more important than proximity, and both schedule and proximity being more important than price. If there is more than one quote that has an acceptable schedule and proximity, price will be the determining factor for award. The price breakdown should be provided as a separate document.

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS:

Factor 1: Schedule

· The Offeror must provide a timeline in which work will be completed once work has commenced. Work must be completed within 90 days of contract award.

Factor 2: Proximity to Facility

· The Offeror must be within a 50 mile radius of the facility stated above.

Factor 3: Price

· The Offeror’s quoted price must address all requirements in the SOW. A total price is acceptable. If the Offeror misquotes the requirement, it will be at the risk of the Offeror if they receive the award.

EVALUATION CRITERIA:

Factor 1: Schedule

· The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed timeline in which work will be completed once work has commenced. Work must be completed within 90 days of contract award however, more weight will be given to a completion date that is less than 90 days.

Factor 2: Proximity to Facility

• The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proximity to the facility where the work is to be performed. Any company outside of a 50 mile radius will be disqualified from consideration.

Factor 3: Price

· Price will be evaluated to ensure that the final agreed-to price is fair and reasonable. In evaluating price, the Government will use price analysis techniques from FAR 15.404-1. Examples of such techniques include, but are not limited to the following:

· Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation. Normally, adequate price competition establishes a fair and reasonable price.

· Comparison of proposed prices to historical prices paid, whether by the Government or other than the Government, for the same or similar items. This method may be used for commercial items including those “of a type” or requiring minor modifications.

· Comparison with competitive published price lists, published market prices of commodities, similar indexes, and discount or rebate arrangements.

· Comparison of proposed prices with independent Government cost estimates.

· Comparison of proposed prices with prices obtained through market research for the same or similar items.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED BY THE OFFEROR:

a. UEI Number: ___________________

b. GSA Contract Number (if applicable): __________________

NOTE: Only one award will result from this RFQ.

image1.png

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .