Sol_140F0321R0008_Amd_0002.pdf

(x)

140F0321R0008 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

F03

Bloomington MN 55437-1458 5600 American Blvd West Suite U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Rgn 3

07/23/20210002

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

07/23/2021

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.)

Project: Predator Exclusion Fence and Eradication.

Magnitude of Construction: Between $1,000,000 and $5,000,000.

LIST OF CHANGES:

Bids due date : 23-AUG-21 changed to 10-SEP-21 at 1400 Pacific Time.

See updated proposal evaluation criteria. Previously submitted proposals may be resubmitted using the updated evaluation criteria.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

Period of Performance: 09/15/2021 to 09/30/2023

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)

Anthony Kuntz

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 .

Solicitation Number: 140F0321R0008 Title: Kilauea Point Predator Proof Fence and Feral Cat Exclusion Eradication

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

A. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

The "Lowest-Priced, Technically-Acceptable (LPTA)" Source Selection Process shall be utilized in accordance with (IAW) FAR Part 15.101-2 as the basis for award. The lowest priced proposal will be based upon the combined total cost for all bid items (attachment 1). Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of an offer meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. There are three (3) non-cost evaluation factors as follows:

Relevant Experience and Technical Capabilities, Pre-Award Submittal for Kilauea Point Predator Proof Fence and Exclusion / Eradication of Feral Cats and Recent Relevant Past Performance. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than ‘Acceptable’ must be achieved for each of these non-cost evaluation factors.

The Government will first conduct a price analysis to determine fairness, reasonableness and if unbalanced pricing exists.

Offerors proposals will then be ranked from the lowest to the highest-priced. The Government will then evaluate the technical proposal of the apparent, lowest-priced offeror. If the apparent, lowest-priced offeror's technical proposal is "Unacceptable" the Government will then evaluate the technical proposal of the apparent, second lowest-priced offeror.

This process will continue until a lowest-priced offeror's technical proposal is "Acceptable."

Once the Government identifies the lowest-priced, technically-acceptable offeror, an award will be made and no other proposals will be evaluated from offerors who proposed higher pricing.

B.FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors and will be used to evaluate each proposal:

Award will be made on the basis of the lowest combined total cost for all bid line items (attachment 1) which meet or exceed the acceptability standards for the three (3) non-cost factors.

Evaluation of the offeror’s proposal shall address the non-cost factor as it applies to the statement of work, specifications and drawings. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in paragraph c below (Evaluation Approach) below. An offer will receive an ‘Acceptable’ rating if it meets the minimum requirements of all evaluation factors described below

C.EVALUATION APPROACH

FACTOR 1 – RELEVANT EXPERIENCE AND TECHNICAL CABILITY

Offerors shall be evaluated to determine whether they have performed similar contracts, in terms of size and complexity, to the work required within the solicitation. Offerors shall provide the minimum requested project information on at least one (1) recent, relevant project for similar work in terms of size and complexity as described in the associated specs and drawings for this requirement. Additionally, past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key

FACTOR 1 – RELEVANT EXPERIENCE

AND TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES

FACTOR 2 -- PRE-AWARD SUBMITTAL FOR

PREDATOR PROOF FENCE AND FERAL CAT

ERADICATION

FACTOR 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE

FACTOR 4 -- PRICE

personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement will also be taken into account when such information is relevant to this requirement. Projects do not have to have been with a Federal Agency to be considered.

A project is considered ‘relevant’ if it is similar in terms of scope and price to the work required within the solicitation.

To be considered similar in scope, one project shall demonstrate work experience in similar size and complexity as described in the associated specs and drawings.

FACTOR 1

RECENT RELEVANT EXPERIENCE AND TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

Rating Description Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation for this factor.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation for this factor.

FACTOR 2 – PRE-AWARD SUBMITTAL FOR PREDATOR PROOF FENCE AND FERAL CAT

ERADICATION

Offerors shall include with their proposal submission, a submittal that addresses a viable approach to accomplish the predator proof fence and feral cat eradication task of this requirement.

This predator proof fence and feral cat eradication submittal must adequately demonstrate the required experience and provide a viable approach on accomplishing this critical aspect of the work, FACTOR 2

PRE-AWARD SUBMITTAL FOR PREDATOR PROOF FENCE AND FERAL CAT

ERADICATION

Rating Description Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation for this factor.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation for this factor.

FACTOR 3 – RECENT RELEVANT PAST PERFORMANCE

Offeror’s past performance shall be reviewed to determine relevancy and confidence assessment. Offerors shall provide at least one (1) recent, relevant project for similar work of size and complexity of associated specs and drawings for this requirement. Projects shall include current points of contact and phone numbers. The contractor is solely responsible for the accuracy of this information as the Government will not pursue incorrect contact data.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance.

Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE / Unique Entity Identifiers (i.e. DUNS) of team members (i.e. partnerships, joint ventures, teaming arrangements or parent companies / subsidiaries / affiliates) identified in the offeror’s proposals, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System (eSRS) and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the offeror.

FACTOR 3

RECENT RELEVANT PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RATINGS DEFINITION

Rating Description

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. (See note below.)

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

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 IAW FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv); therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of ‘Acceptable’ / ‘Unacceptable,’ unknown past performance shall be considered ‘Acceptable.’

FACTOR 4 – PRICE

Price – the total value of all tasks combined will be assessed to determine the overall Price Fair and Reasonable. If any of the tasks appear to be unbalanced, a review of the breakdown of each task will be conducted.

Offeror’s prices for each item within the bid schedule shall represent the best price in response to the solicitation. Prices will be evaluated using price analysis IAW FAR 15.404-1(a)(2) and 15.404-1(b). Prices shall be evaluated to determine fairness, reasonableness and if unbalanced pricing exists.

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over or understated. If price analysis techniques indicate that a proposal is unbalanced, the contracting officer shall consider the risks to the Government associated with the unbalanced pricing. An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government (no page limit).

(End of provision)