12314422R0004 - amd 3.pdf

(x)

12314422R0004 x x

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 electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 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.

x

DASO-OCP-POD-AMB-CO

Fort Collins CO 80521-2795 301 S. Howes St., Suite 321 Acquisition Management Branch-CO USDA, DM/OCP/POD/AMB, POD Acq Mgmt

01/05/20220003

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) is not extended.is extended, Items 8 and 15, and returning

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

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

FACILITY CODE CODE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

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

PAGE OF PAGES

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.3. EFFECTIVE DATE2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

01/05/2022

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

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

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

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

Solicitation 12314422R0004, titled 'MATOC for Construction, Design, and/or Design Build

Projects', is hereby amended by Amendment 3, including:

-Question & Answer dated 1/20/2022.

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 16C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

TODD LENNOX

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Previous edition unusable

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9 A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect .

MATOC for Construction, Design, and/or Design Build Projects Amendment 3 Dated 1/20/2022

RFP 12314422R0004

I. Question and Answer:

Reference: QA19

"19. Reference: RFP p. 39-40, 6. TAB F – FACTOR 2: PAST EXPERIENCE (ATTACHMENT B), Minimum Criteria, a. Number of Projects: “Offerors must submit three (3), but no more than five (5) projects meeting the criteria. For Offerors submitting as a Teaming Arrangement, each firm/contractor in the Teaming Arrangement shall submit five (5) projects each, at least one (1) of which was performed jointly by the proposed team members. Submitted projects performed jointly by the proposed team members will be credited as one project for each team member.”

Question: For an SDVOSB Joint Venture Offeror, please confirm that they must submit a total of three (3) but no more than five (5) projects guidelines, that projects may have been performed by either JV partner, at least one (1) project performed by each JV partner, and at least 1 project must have been performed by all JV partners.

a. In a Joint Venture or Teaming Arrangement, EACH FIRM must submit three (3), but no more than five (5), past similar projects, with at least one (1) of the projects performed jointly by the proposed team members. In a Joint Venture or Teaming arrangement, Offerors therefore would submit 3 - 9 total past similar projects. Also see II. Revisions to the RFP, item 4 for further information."

Question: Thank you for the clarification in QA19. However, we understand that this requirement would violate SBA regulations as applied to joint ventures between an SBA-approved mentor and protégé. 13 CFR 125.8(e) reads:

(e) Capabilities, past performance and experience. When evaluating the capabilities, past performance, experience, business systems and certifications of an entity submitting an offer for a contract set aside or reserved for small business as a joint venture established pursuant to this section, a procuring activity must consider work done and qualifications held individually by each partner to the joint venture as well as any work done by the joint venture itself previously. A procuring activity may not require the protégé firm to individually meet the same evaluation or responsibility criteria as that required of other offerors generally. The partners to the joint venture in the aggregate must demonstrate the past performance, experience, business systems and certifications necessary to perform the contract.

(Emphasis added in underline). The RFP requires offerors to "submit three (3), but no more than five (5), projects meeting the criteria," and via QA19 this requirement was applied to "EACH FIRM" within a joint venture, which would include protégé firms. Therefore, USDA is requiring a "protégé firm to individually meet the same evaluation . . . criteria as that required of other offerors generally." This violates 13 CFR 125.8(e).

SBA promulgated the current version of 13 CFR 125.8(e) on October 16, 2020, and in doing so wrote:

“It is unreasonable to require the protégé concern itself to have the same level of past performance and experience (either in dollar value or number of previous contracts performed, years of performance, or otherwise) as its large business mentor. . . . SBA believes that a solicitation provision that requires both a protégé firm and a mentor to each have the same level of past performance (e.g., each partner to have individually previously performed 5 contracts of at least $10 million) is unreasonable, and should not be permitted.”

See 85 Fed. Reg. 66,146, 66,167-68 (Oct. 16, 2020). By requiring that both a mentor and protégé submit 3-to-5 past similar projects with a minimum value of $150,000, the solicitation is requiring “both a protégé firm and a mentor to each have the same level of past performance.”

Would the Agency consider changing the requirements of the Solicitation such that a protégé is not required to have the same experience as the mentor in a mentor-protégé joint venture?

a. USDA is not requiring equal experience from the protégé and mentors in Joint Ventures but rather giving each firm in the Joint Venture the opportunity to provide their relevant past experience.