S06_SOLICTIATION AMENDMENT- 36C10F23R0008 A00002.pdf

5. PROJECT NUMBER (if applicable)

CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

CODE

6. ISSUED BY

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED

PAGE OF PAGES

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED

BPA NO. 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

FACILITY CODE CODE

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:

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

E. IMPORTANT:

is extended,

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning __________ 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

ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

(REV. 11/2016)

is required to sign this document and return ___________ copies to the issuing office. is not, A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

15C. DATE SIGNED

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES

SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

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.

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER

Contractor

16C. DATE SIGNED

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

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

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

STANDARD FORM 30 PREVIOUS EDITION NOT USABLE

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

(Type or print) (Type or print)

(Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

(Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code)

(If other than Item 6)

(Specify type of modification and authority)

(such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.)

(If required)

(SEE ITEM 11)

(SEE ITEM 13)

(X)

CHECK

ONE

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

1 5

A00002 01/30/2023

593-CA-202

003C4E

Department of Veterans Affairs

Office of Construction and

Facilities Management (00CFM3B)

400 Mare Island Way Suite #100

Vallejo CA 94590

See Block #6

To all Offerors/Bidders

36C10F23R0008

12-13-2022

X x X

02/02/2023 at 1400 PST.

The purpose of this amendment is to amend Central Utility Plant Drain Lines Replacement Solicitation Number:

36C10F23R0008 at VA Southern Nevada Healthcare System 6900 Pecos Rd, North Las Vegas, NV 89086.

1. The Government amends the solictation to clarify factor 2 and other missing source criteria information.

Refer to the continuation page of the SF-30 for more information.

Dominik Gammon

Contracting Officer

Continuation Page of Block 14 SF-30 AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION (continued) Las Vegas Central Utility Plant Drain lines Replacement VA Southern Nevada Healthcare System Project No. 593-CA-2202 Solicitation No. 36C10F23R0008 Amendment A00002.

Factor 2 – Past Performance

The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror's probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each offeror's demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract's requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, the context of the data, and general trends in the contractor's performance shall be considered. These are combined to establish one performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror.

The VA will assign an adjectival rating based on the information provided by the references and any other source. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and will receive a neutral rating.

However, the proposal of an offeror with no relevant past performance history, while rated neutral in past performance, may not represent the most advantageous proposal to the

Government. The Evaluation Team may consider past performance data from a wide variety of sources both inside and outside the Federal Government. The Government evaluation team will evaluate the past performance of offerors as it relates to the probability of successfully performing the solicitation requirements, and the Past Performance evaluation will assess the relative risks associated with an offeror’s likelihood of success in fulfilling the solicitation’s requirements.

1. Past Performance Questionnaires – The Offeror or references will submit completed questionnaires to the Contracting Officer by the due date and time for receipt of proposals. The questionnaires will be evaluated to determine client satisfaction, for elements including Quality

Control, Effectiveness of Management, Timely Performance, and

Compliance with Labor and Safety Standards. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and will receive a neutral rating.

2. Safety Record – The Offeror will provide documentation that specifies Contractor in question has no more than three serious, or one repeat, or one willful OSHA or EPA violation(s) in the past 3 years and has an Experience Modification Rate (EMR) of equal to or less than 1.0.

VA Southern Nevada Healthcare System

Recency. The first is to evaluate the recency of the offeror's past performance. Recency is generally expressed as a period during which past performance references are considered relevant, which is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. With appropriate parameters to assess past performance recency, descriptions and ratings of

"acceptable" or "unacceptable" are provided.

Relevance. The second is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. The criteria to establish what prior performance is recent and relevant shall be unique to each source selection and shall be stated in the solicitation. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration should be given to those aspects of an offeror’s history of contract (or subcontract) performance that would provide the most context and give the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will successfully satisfy the current requirement. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to, the following: similarity of ·product/service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of key personnel (for services), and extent of subcontracting/teaming.

Quality of Products or Services. The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the offeror's past performance (see FAR 15.304(c)(2)). The past performance evaluation conducted in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror's past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts. Requirements for considering the history of small business utilization are outlined at FAR 15.304(c)(3)(ii) and DFARS 215.305(a)(2). The

Past Performance Evaluation Team will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the offeror's performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate these into the performance confidence assessment (see paragraph 3.

1.3.3). A separate quality assessment rating is not required; rather, the past performance confidence assessment rating is based on the offeror's overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance.

Information for evaluation are as follows:

VA Southern Nevada Healthcare System

Past performance information may be provided by the offeror, as solicited;

Past performance information may be obtained from questionnaires tailored to the circumstances of the acquisition; and

Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the

Government, including, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System

(PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic

Subcontract Reporting System (CSRS), or other databases;

Performance Confidence Assessment. "Satisfactory," "Limited, “No," and "Neutral" confidence ratings. The ratings may also be used for the evaluation of a technical factor or subfactor for

"Corporate Experience" that also evaluates past experience.

In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance information is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past contract performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv).)

In this case, the offeror's past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of "neutral." performance favorably or unfavorably with regard to past performance, SSAC may recommend and the SSA may determine, that a "Substantial Confidence" or

"Satisfactory Confidence" past performance rating is worth more than a "Neutral Confidence" past performance rating in the best value tradeoff as long as the determination is consistent with stated solicitation criteria.

VA Southern Nevada Healthcare System

Basis of Evaluation Factor 2, Past Performance: The basis of the evaluation will be the degree to which past performance evaluations and all other past performance information reviewed by the

Government (e.g., PPIRS, FAPIIS, eSRS, performance recognition documents, and information obtained from any other source) reflect a trend of satisfactory performance considering 1) a pattern of successful completion of tasks; 2) a pattern of deliverables that are timely and of good quality; 3) a pattern of cooperativeness and teamwork with the Government at all levels (task managers, contracting officers, auditors, etc.); 4) tasks that are identical to, similar to, or related to the task at hand; and 5) fiscal responsibility of Government funds. If the offeror lacks a record of relevant or available past performance history or there is no expectation of either successful or unsuccessful performance based on the offeror’s past performance record, the past performance evaluation will be given a neutral rating.

Note: The Past performance questionnaire remains unchanged. Those offerors with previous past performance in CPARS are well welcomed to provide other data without page limitation for only past performance responses.

Discussion- Based upon the Government review of the initial evaluation results, the SSA will decide to either (1) approve the award without discussions, or (2) enter into the discussion process. After the decision to conduct discussions has been made and prior to the establishment of the competitive range, the PCO may enter into limited "communications" with offerors only as described in FAR 15.306(b). Communications shall be documented on, and conducted via transmittal of, ENs to the applicable offeror. Each EN shall clearly indicate that the type of exchange being conducted is "Communications.” Written notice of this decision shall be provided to unsuccessful offerors in accordance with FAR 15.503.

Clarification- If an award will be made without discussions, offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of the proposal or resolve minor or clerical errors (see FAR

15.306(a)(l) and (2)). Clarifications shall be documented, and conducted via the transmittal of, Evaluation Notices (EN) to the applicable offeror. Each EN shall clearly indicate that the type of exchange being conducted is "Clarification." Offerors are not given an opportunity to respond to any identified weaknesses or deficiencies or revise their proposals. Instead, the SSA makes a best-value decision based on the evaluations of the initial proposal as submitted.

Based on the amendment A00002- Offerors are only required to submit Electronic offers to the

Contracting officer. No hard copy will be required. The offeror shall request a confirmation of receipt of the offer from the Government as a matter of record.

All terms and conditions of the solicitation remain unchanged.

=======================END OF DOCUMENT=============================