Attachment_1_Statement_if_Work.pdf

Bureau of Land Management

Statement of Work

Arizona Strip District Office

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Arizona Strip District Office (ASDO), is acquiring t-posts for use on ASDO managed land. The t-posts will be used to maintain existing fencing on ASDO livestock grazing allotments.

Specifications:

Quantity Description 6,521 6 ft, 1.33 lb. heavy t-post, Color: green with white top 688 6.5 ft, 1.33 lb. heavy t-post, Color: green with white top

Delivery:

Materials shall be delivered by August 15, 2025, to BLM’s Brigham Road storage yard in St.

George, UT.

Address:

391 Brigham Road St. George, UT 84790

Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 – Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items

This acquisition will be solicited and awarded in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 12 -- Acquisition of Commercial Items and FAR Part 13 – Simplified Acquisition Procedures.

A Firm Fixed Price Contract will be awarded to the Offeror whose quote conforms to the solicitation requirements and represents the best value to the Government, in accordance with the evaluation factors defined below. Offerors must be deemed a responsible prospective contractor

IAW FAR 9.1.

This acquisition is being solicited as a Total Small Business Set-aside.

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS: All quotes must include all data and information requested and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. Any offeror who submits an incomplete package may be considered nonresponsive. All quotes are expected to conform to the solicitation provisions and be prepared in accordance with this section.

Return the following items with your response:

a. Technical Statement:

i. Provide a detailed description of the type and quantity of materials that will be provided.

ii. Provide a delivery date consistent with the period of performance.

b. References: Submit three references for jobs completed within the last three years, which are similar in size and scope to this project. References may be used to determine Past Performance rating.

c. Price: Price summary should include all materials and delivery fees.

QUESTIONS: All questions shall be submitted in writing via email to Rachel Henriques at rhenriques@blm.gov, no later than July16, 2025, by 12:00 PM MDT.

QUOTES: All quotes shall be submitted electronically to Rachel Henriques at rhenriques@blm.gov, no later than July 23, 2025, by 12:00 PM MDT.

Addendum to FAR 52.212-2 – Evaluation – Commercial Products and Commercial Services

Basis for Contract Award: This contract will be awarded in accordance with FAR 13, and consider the following factors: Schedule, Past Performance, and Price. Initially, quotes will be ranked according to total price.

Starting with the lowest priced quote, the Government will determine if the quote meets the pass/fail criteria of Schedule and Materials by rating them as acceptable or unacceptable. If the lowest priced quote receives an acceptable rating in both categories, it will then be assigned a rating for Past Performance. If the lowest priced quote receives an “Excellent Confidence” past performance rating, then that offer represents the best value for the government and the evaluation ends. Award shall be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other quotes.

If the lowest priced quotes receives an unacceptable rating for any factor, or receives less than an “Excellent Confidence” past performance rating, the next lowest priced offeror will be evaluated, and the process will continue (in order by price) until an offeror receives an acceptable rating on all factors and an “Excellent Confidence” past performance rating, or until all offerors have been evaluated.

If no offeror receives an “Excellent Confidence” past performance rating, award will be made to the offeror with the highest past performance rating and lowest price, whose quote receives an acceptable rating for all other factors.

Evaluation Factors:

a. Factor 1 – Schedule: The proposed delivery date will receive an acceptable or unacceptable rating, defined below, based on whether or not it aligns with the period of performance in the statement of work.

Rating Description Acceptable Offeror’s proposed delivery date aligns with the period of performance in the statement of work.

Unacceptable Offeror’s proposed delivery date does not align with the period of performance in the statement of work.

b. Factor 2 – Materials: The offeror’s proposed materials will receive an acceptable or unacceptable rating, defined below, based on whether or not it meets the specifications outlined in the Statement of Work.

Acceptable The offeror's proposed materials meets the specifications outlined in the Statement of Work.

Unacceptable The offeror's proposed materials does not meet the specifications outline in the Statement of Work.

c. Factor 3 – Past Performance: Past performance will be rated based on submitted references, and any other information deemed relevant by the Contracting Officer (E.g. prior work for the Department of the Interior, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System). Past performance projects deemed not relevant will not be considered. Projects deemed not recent (greater than three years) will be disregarded. Offeror’s who lack recent or relevant past performance will be assigned an Unknown Confidence rating.

Excellent Confidence Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Acceptable Confidence

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has an acceptable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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

Unknown Confidence No performance record is identifiable, or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

An “Unknown Confidence” past performance rating will be considered a neutral rating which will not negatively impact the offeror. However, an “Excellent Confidence” and “Acceptable Confidence” past performance rating will rank higher than an “Unknown Confidence” past performance rating.

d. Factor 4 - Total Price: Price will be evaluated for reasonableness in accordance with

FAR 13.106-3.