Sol_140P6025Q0045_Amd_0001.pdf

(x)

140P6025Q0045 x x 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

PMH

NPS, ConOps Central - Nebraska MABO

06/13/20250001

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

06/13/2025

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.)

Preparation of Scope of Collection Statements (SOCS) At Multiple National Park Units and

Develop Tool for Museum Property Removal for the National Park Service, Interior Regions 3, 4, and 5

The purpose of amendment 0001 is to provide questions and answers.

Q1: For scheduling and budgeting purposes, what is the minimum and maximum number of consecutive days parks will provide collection access and staff availability per required site visit? (SOW On-site evaluations)

A1: Due to staffing shortages, parks may only be able to provide a minimum of 1-day onsite

Continued ...

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)

James Bissaillon

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 .

ITEM NO. SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

NAME OF OFFEROR OR CONTRACTOR

2 9

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED PAGE OF

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)

140P6025Q0045/0001 access with a maximum of 2 days of consecutive onsite access.

Q2: May the three required park visits be scheduled consecutively in a single travel event, or should each park be visited individually at separate times? (SOW On-site evaluations)

A2: The onsite visits may be conducted consecutively if this is of best value to the government.

Q3: May two contractor personnel (collections specialist and project manager) attend each required park visit simultaneously? (SOW Site visits)

A3: Yes, if it is of best value to the government.

Q4: Does the Government require final deliverables to be submitted as both native

Microsoft Word and Excel documents plus a

508-compliant PDF, or as Microsoft Word alone?

(SOW Digital deliverables)

A4: 508-compliant Microsoft Word and Excel

Q5: Please specify the required conformance level for Section 508 compliance (e.g., WCAG 2.0 AA, WCAG 2.1 AA). (SOW Section 508 Compliance)

A5: Department of the Interior Section 508

Policies | U.S. Department of the Interior

Q6: Is original photography production by the contractor required, or will all required photographs be provided by the parks? (SOW

Inclusion of photographs)

A6: The document may include color photographs to be inserted into the text.

Q7: Will payments for ¿acceptance of Review

Drafts¿ occur separately for each park's SOCS upon acceptance, or after all three park drafts have been collectively approved? (SOW Payment

Schedule)

A7: The awardee may submit one invoice up to once per month for work performed or for costs

Continued ...

NSN 7540-01-152-8067 OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)

Sponsored by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.110

3 9

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED PAGE OF

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)

140P6025Q0045/0001 incurred or less often. Either must first be accepted and approved by the appointed

Contracting Officer¿s Representative.

Q8: Is hands-on inspection or physical interaction with collection items expected or permitted, or must review strictly be based upon accession records and documentation only? (SOW

Working from "scratch")

A8: Access to museum collections is permitted under the supervision of the regional curator.

Onsite visits are required per the SOW.

Q9: Please confirm the authoritative schedule for deliverable submissions and reviews (reconciling

14 calendar days, 15 working days, and 30 days mentioned). (SOW Deliverables table vs. narrative)

A9: The "Project Schedule and Deliverables" table should be followed. The final draft submission is measured in working days, the other deadlines are calendar days. The narrative has errors, so follow the table.

Q10: Will review comments from park and regional offices be consolidated into a single response per draft SOCS, or provided separately per reviewing entity? (SOW Comments Coordination)

A10: Single response consolidated by COR.

Q11: Does the 300-calendar-day performance period officially start from the date of contract award

(SF-18 Block 26) or from the post-award kickoff meeting date? (SOW Performance period)

A11: The period of performance begins the date of contract award.

Q12: Does the Government prefer the cost proposal breakout by individual CLIN, by individual park, or both? (ITO Price breakdown)

A12: By CLIN.

Q13: Do bibliographies or extensive project lists count towards the two-page resume limit, or may these be provided separately outside the page limitation? (ITO Resume page limits)

Continued ...

NSN 7540-01-152-8067 OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)

4 9

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED PAGE OF

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)

140P6025Q0045/0001

A13: Yes.

Q14: Does the Government have a page limit or other restriction on length for Technical

Questionnaire responses, or is length unrestricted? (ITO Technical Questionnaire length)

A14: Page limit of 20 pages.

Q15: Given the performance period of 300 calendar days, will the Government consider an Economic

Price Adjustment clause for potential travel cost inflation? (ITO Pricing duration)

A15: If an award is made, it will be Firm Fixed

Price.

Q16: Are Technical and Past Performance evaluation factors equally important and individually more important than Price, or does another explicit weighting apply? (FAR 52.212-2

Factors)

A16: There is no weight assigned. If an award is made, it will be a firm-fixed price award to the offeror submitting the quote that provides the best value to the Government as evaluated by the

Government.

Q17: Will the Government apply standard NPS adjectival ratings (Outstanding/Good/Acceptable, etc.) and document strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies per factor? (FAR 52.212-2 Rating method)

A17: Adjectival ratings are not required in Part

13. Quotes will be evaluated to determine which provides the best value to the government considering the information provided in response to technical, past performance, and price.

Q18: Does the Government intend to award strictly without any discussions, or are clarifications/interviews anticipated following proposal submission? (FAR 52.212-2 Clarifications)

A18: We intend to award without discussions but reserve the right to conduct them.

Continued ...

NSN 7540-01-152-8067 OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)

5 9

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED PAGE OF

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)

140P6025Q0045/0001

Q19: Please clarify explicitly if the source selection approach will be based on a Best Value trade-off method or Lowest Price Technically

Acceptable (LPTA). (FAR 52.212-2 Best value method)

A19: Neither a trade-off method nor LPTA is selected. Quotes will be evaluated to determine which provides the best value to the government considering the information provided in response to technical, past performance, and price.

Q20: How will proposed travel costs be evaluated:

realism analysis, reasonableness-only evaluation, or a combination of both methods? (FAR 52.212-2

Travel cost evaluation)

A20: Quotes will be evaluated to determine which provides the best value to the government considering the information provided in response to technical, past performance, and price.

Q21: Will minor administrative proposal omissions permit opportunity for correction, or will such proposals be immediately eliminated? (FAR

52.212-2 Preliminary review)

A21: We intend to award without discussions but reserve the right to conduct them.

Q22: Must the "anticipated schedule of events" strictly align with the exact deliverable dates from the SOW, or may the contractor propose additional intermediate milestones/events? (TQ

Item #1)

A22: The "Project Schedule and Deliverables" table should be followed. However, due to limited availability of funds for COR travel the onsite visits must be completed prior to September 15, 2025.

Q23: Are provided examples required to explicitly demonstrate multiple SOCS projects completed concurrently across geographically dispersed locations, or are single-location SOCS examples equally acceptable? (TQ Item #2)

A23: Examples should accurately demonstrate the experience of the vendor.

Continued ...

NSN 7540-01-152-8067 OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)

6 9

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED PAGE OF

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)

140P6025Q0045/0001

Q24: Should provided examples specifically demonstrate Section 508 compliance experience for museum collection documents, or is general document accessibility experience sufficient? (TQ

Item #2)

A24: Examples should accurately demonstrate the experience of the vendor.

Q25: Must the submitted project examples explicitly include experience in collections disposal/deaccessioning recommendations, or is general SOCS experience acceptable? (TQ Item #2)

A25: Examples should accurately demonstrate the experience of the vendor.

Q26: Are provided examples limited strictly to

NPS-specific museum standards experience, or are equivalent federal agency museum standards acceptable? (TQ Item #2)

A26: Examples should accurately demonstrate the experience of the vendor.

Q27: Is explicit citation/reference of NPS Museum

Handbook required in the proposal, or is narrative description of compliance methodology sufficient? (TQ Item #3)

A27: Proposal should accurately reflect the experience of the vendor.

Q28: What is the total page count of each existing SOCS document at BUFF, FOSM, and SACN?

(Ref: SOW "Review each park's SOCS")

A28: BUFF - 37 pages; FOSM - 25 pages; SACN - 28 pages

Q29: How many meetings with park and curatorial staff are anticipated or required at each park during site visits? (Ref: SOW "Discuss museum collection management and SOCS with Midwest

Regional Curator, park curator, and other staff")

A29: An initial onsite meeting with park staff and the regional curator.

Continued ...

NSN 7540-01-152-8067 OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)

7 9

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED PAGE OF

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)

140P6025Q0045/0001

Q30: Approximately how many interviews with archeological staff or MWAC advisors are required at each park, and what is the anticipated length per interview? (Ref: SOW "contact park archeological staff and/or MWAC archeology advisor")

A30: Dependent upon the size of the archeological collection.

Q31: Approximately how many additional pages or sections per SOCS are anticipated beyond existing

SOCS due to updates and new formatting requirements? (Ref: SOW "Reformat and update the three SOCS using the current SOCS template")

A31: Dependent on findings during onsite visit.

Q32: Please specify explicitly the required conformance level for Section 508 compliance

(WCAG 2.0 AA, WCAG 2.1 AA, or other)? (Ref: SOW

"Section 508 Compliance")

A32: See 5A.

Q33: How many distinct permitted activity types require a written Best Practices discussion in the SOCS appendix? (Ref: SOW "Best Practices for collections created through permitted activities")

A33: Dependent on park permitted activity.

Q34: What is the anticipated or permitted average duration (number of days onsite) per required park site visit? (Ref: SOW "Conduct one site visit to each park")

A34: See 1A.

Q35: What is the estimated total number of relevant documents, database records, or interviews per park requiring review? (Ref: SOW

"conduct onsite collection research, documentary research, database reviews, and interviews")

A35: Total is different for each park and dependent on findings during onsite visit.

Q36: How many contractor personnel are permitted to attend each required park site visit? (Ref:

Continued ...

NSN 7540-01-152-8067 OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)

8 9

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED PAGE OF

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)

140P6025Q0045/0001

SOW "Conduct one site visit to each park")

A36: The best value to the government.

Q37: Are there any explicit restrictions regarding hands-on inspection or physical interaction with collection items, or must review be strictly accession/document-based? (Ref: SOW

"Not a hands-on item level review")

A37: See 8A

Q38: How many internal QC/review cycles per SOCS deliverable does the Government anticipate or require? (Ref: SOW "Review/comments submitted to contractor")

A38: Each SOCS and removal tool will be reviewed by the NPS during the 45-day period outlined on the "Project Schedule and Deliverables" table.

The contractor then has 15 working days to submit the final draft.

Q39: Beyond the Excel spreadsheets provided by the Government, is additional detail or a separate tool/application required for the

"Museum Property Removal Tool"? (Ref: SOW "COR will provide contractor copy of Excel spreadsheets")

A39: From the SOW: "The SOCS for each park will include an appendix detailing recommendations for removal/disposal of museum property that does not fit the scope or mission of each respective park unit...These recommendations for collection refinement will be presented with rationales and tables or lists by deaccession/disposal action type."

Q40: The current payment schedule outlined in the

SOW allows for 25% contract amount to be invoiced after all site visits are completed. This will require contractors to carry travel costs for up to 90 days before invoicing. Is the contracting team open to alternative payment schedules, such as allowing contractors to invoice for roughly

8.33% after each site visits to offset the travel costs? (Then the 50% after Draft 1 and 25% after final draft submittals, as outlined in the SOW).

Continued ...

NSN 7540-01-152-8067 OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)

9 9

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED PAGE OF

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F)

140P6025Q0045/0001

A40: Allowing payments after the completion of each site visit is acceptable.

Q41: The current project schedule and deliverables outlined in the SOW would mean that all work is completed by approximately week 25 of a 43-week period of performance. Is the contracting team open to an alternative project schedule that allows for 1) more time to complete the site visits; 2) more time to compile drafts;

and 3) more time for the NPS Draft 1 review?

A41: Completing the site visits requires a COR to be onsite with the contractor. Funds for COR travel are only available for the fiscal year so all travel must be completed prior to September

15, 2025. Flexibility may be allowed for compiling drafts and NPS draft review.

Reminder that all amendments must be acknowledged by the solicitation close date and time.

James Bissaillon

Contract Specialist

DOI, National Park Service, Interior Region 3,4,5

ConOps Central, Nebraska Major Acquisition Buying

Office

Email: james_bissaillon@nps.gov

Phone: (402) 800-8292

NSN 7540-01-152-8067 OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)