3_Addendum 52.212-2 - Evaluation.pdf

FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS

ADDENDA TO 52.212-2 -- EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS

THIS SECTION IS FOR SOLICITATION PURPOSES ONLY. THIS SECTION WILL BE PHYSICALLY

REMOVED FROM ANY RESULTANT AWARD BUT WILL BE DEEMED INCORPORATED BY

REFERENCE. THIS ADDENDA SUPPLEMENTS FAR 52.212-2.

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

A. Basis for Contract Award

1. The Government will award a firm-fixed price contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation represents the best value to the Government, price and other factors considered. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) part 12, Acquisition of Commercial Items, procedures will be followed. To be considered for award, the proposal must conform to the evaluation criteria described herein, conform to all RFP requirements, and other information required in accordance with (IAW) Attachment 3, Instructions to Offerors, and the offeror must be deemed responsible IAW FAR 9.104-1. Award shall be made to the responsible contractor, who is registered and has current reps and certs in SAM.gov, is not listed on the SAM excluded parties list, and whose proposal complies with the terms and conditions of the RFP, is deemed technically acceptable, and is considered to be the best value.

2. By submission of its offer, the Offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors.

3. The Contracting Officer (CO) has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the CO will review this determination and if, in the CO's opinion, adequate price competition exists, no additional cost information will be requested.

However, if at any time during this solicitation process the CO determines that adequate price competition no longer exists; Offerors may be required to submit other than certified cost or pricing data to the extent necessary for the CO to determine the reasonableness of the price.

Assumptions, conditions, or exceptions within the Offeror’s proposal shall be reviewed for potential impact on the Offeror’s ability to successfully meet the Government’s requirements. Any assumptions, conditions, or exceptions, which may negatively impact performance of this requirement, could render the proposal ineligible for award.

B. Interchanges.

1. Interchanges allow for informal interaction between the Contracting Officer and the offerors that may address any aspect of the proposal. It is the Government's intent to award without interchanges with offerors. Offerors are encouraged to present their best technical solution and prices in their initial pr submission. However, should interchanges become necessary, the Government reserves the right to conduct them with one, some, none, or all of the offerors at its discretion. If the Government awards without interchanges, the Offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of proposals or to resolve minor clerical errors. The Government may reject any or all offers if such action is in the public interest. FAR 15 procedures will not be used.

C. Evaluation Process

1. The following shall be used to evaluate proposals: the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal will be determined to represent the best value. Technical acceptability will be determined by an evaluation of the proposed requirements that meet the technical criteria. The offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms. The Government may hold interchanges as discussed in paragraph B above with offerors that have the highest potential to offer the best value.

2. The Government will rank proposals based on initial assessment of Total Evaluated Price (TEP) from lowest to highest, followed by a complete evaluation of technical acceptability of the lowest priced offer.

If lowest priced offer is deemed technically acceptable, the Government reserves the right to conclude evaluations and make award to that Offeror. If determined technically unacceptable, the Government will evaluate the second lowest price, followed by a complete evaluation of technical acceptability. If the second lowest priced Offeror is deemed technically acceptable, the Government will make award to that Offeror. If deemed technically unacceptable, the Government will continue the process until an acceptable proposal is identified. The Government reserves the right to evaluate additional proposals for technical acceptability if in the Government's best interest. If additional proposals are evaluated for technical acceptability, proposals will be selected in the order of TEP. Failure to meet an evaluation factor will result in an offer being determined technically unacceptable.

3. The TEP will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified by the proposed unit price for each Contract Line-Item Number (CLIN) then totaling all CLINs. The Offeror shall ensure the price proposal is reasonable and complete. If the CO determines that additional information is needed or that adequate price competition no longer exists, the Government reserves the right to require the submission of Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data as is deemed necessary to arrive at a fair and reasonable price.

D. Evaluation Criteria

Proposals will be evaluated based on the following evaluation factor:

a. Factor 1: Technical

• Sub-Factor 1: Technical Approach

b. Factor 2: Price

Factor 1 – Technical.

The technical evaluation provides an assessment of the Offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s requirements. The technical approach will be evaluated to determine the Offeror’s technical capability to demonstrate a clear understanding for accomplishing the requirements outlined in the Performance Work Statement (PWS), Attachment 1, of this solicitation. This factor evaluates the technical approach to meet capabilities required by the PWS.

Sub-Factor 1: Technical Approach. The Offeror’s approach meets the requirements when its proposed approach provides evidence of knowledge and capability of delivering the services as outlined in the PWS. At a minimum, the technical approach shall:

a) Demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of accomplishing the required services as outlined in the PWS.

b) Identifies an offsite disposal facility permitted and licensed by the State of California, and/or by local authorities for which the concrete and asphalt rubble will be transported and disposed.

c) Provided a detailed project schedule, to include the work breakdown structure and milestones, to complete the requirements of the PWS within the specified period of performance.

Technical Acceptability Rating: The Government will evaluate the technical sub-factors by assigning a rating of acceptable or unacceptable, using the rating and descriptions outlined below:

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

Factor 2 – Price.

The Government will evaluate the price information submitted in each Offeror’s price proposal as described below. Any other data provided by the Offeror with their price proposal that is not required IAW 52.212-1 will not be considered or evaluated. The price information submitted in each Offeror’s price proposal as required by 52.212-1, will be evaluated to determine if proposed prices are fair and reasonable, complete, and balanced IAW FAR 15.404-1(b). A contract will not be awarded to an Offeror whose price is not determined to be fair and reasonable.

Price Reasonableness. The Offeror submitted a price that was determined fair and reasonable IAW the methods in FAR 15.404-1(b) in its nature and amount, and it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business.

If at any time during this competition the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) has determined that adequate price competition no longer exists, or that price reasonableness cannot be determined, Offerors may be required to submit certified cost or pricing data or additional data other than certified cost or pricing data, as appropriate, and may use other proposal analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404;

to the extent necessary, in order to make a determination of price reasonableness.

Balanced Pricing. Proposed unit prices may be evaluated for unbalanced pricing IAW FAR 15.404-1(g).

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable TEP, the price of one or more contract line items or sub-line item(s) appear to be significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. An Offeror’s proposal may be rejected if the PCO determines the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government. If an Offeror’s pricing is determined to be unbalanced IAW FAR 15.404-1(g), the Offeror may be ineligible for award.

Completeness. Offerors must propose on all FFP CLIN(s). Failure to provide a completed Price Proposal in the Schedule B – Supplies or Services and Prices/Cost section of the SF 1449 will render the proposal unacceptable and ineligible for award in the absence of interchanges.

Responsibility Determination. The Government will perform a responsibility determination for the apparent awardee IAW FAR Part 9. If found not responsible, the Government may request a Certificate of Competency IAW FAR 19.6. If a Certificate of Competency cannot be obtained from the Small Business Administration, the apparent awardee will be deemed not responsible and be ineligible for award.