36C24422R0041 0003.docx

The purpose of this amendment is to extend the closing date to March 31, 2022.

Mammography equipment provider is Hologic Hologic POC is Jason Tschillard Senior Project Manager -Appalachians & Penn/NJ

339.927.6081 Jason.Tschillard@hologic.com

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 numb ers. 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 doc ument 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 REJECTI

ON 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 th is 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 SI

GNER

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) 693-22-104 00244 Department of Veterans Affairs Network Contracting Office 4 Wilkes-Barre VAMC Acquisitions (049E) 1111 East End Blvd Wilkes-Barre PA 18711 00244 Department of Veterans Affairs Network Contracting Office 4 Wilkes-Barre VAMC Acquisitions (049E) 1111 East End Blvd Wilkes-Barre PA 18711 To all Offerors/Bidders

36C24422R0041

X X X ** HOUR & DATE for Receipt of Offers is EXTENDED to: March 31, 2022 4:00 PM Local The purpose of this amendment is to extend the closing date to March 31, 2022 4:00 PM Local time.

Additional information and clarification is also included with this amendment.

Scot Plank Contracting Officer

PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTAL OF OFFERS AND

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. Overview.

1.1 The intent of this solicitation, 36C24420R0041, is to select one contractor to provide professional construction services in accordance with the Statement of Work (SOW), drawings, and specifications for the Construct Women’s Health Radiology Suite Project.

1.2 The Government intends to use the “Best Value” tradeoff process source selection approach in accordance with FAR 15.101-1. Award will be made to the responsive responsible offeror whose offer in conformance with this solicitation, results in the best value to the Government, price plus other factors considered. The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed price contract to the responsive responsible offeror whom the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable and offers the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers. Setting aside for an SDVOSB firm is in compliance with regulations to meet our goals and fulfill the VA’s mission to meet socioeconomic goals.

2. Submittal of offers.

2.1 Offerors submitting proposals for this project should limit submissions to data essential for evaluation of proposals, so that a minimum of time and monies will have been expended in preparing information required herein. However, in order to be effectively and equitably evaluated, the proposals must include information sufficiently detailed to clearly describe the offeror's experience, technical approach, and management capabilities to successfully complete the project. Proposals should follow in the order of sequence set forth in the Request for Proposal (RFP). Information provided out of sequence may not be evaluated and may result in the offeror's disqualification from award. Requirements stated in this RFP are minimums. Innovative, creative or cost-saving proposals that meet or exceed the requirements should be clearly noted and justified in the proposal.

2.2 Offerors must comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the proposal; proposals that do not comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the proposal may be considered non-responsive and may render the Offeror ineligible for award.

2.3 All proposal materials shall be submitted in binders with a table of contents and tabbed section dividers. The sections should parallel the submission requirements identified below.

Volume I - Technical Proposal (Three-Ring Binder) Section 1 Technical Capability Section 2 Past Performance Volume I: Sections 1-2 shall be submitted in original and a compact disk (CD). Proposal must be typed using 11- point Times New Roman font. Packages that are handwritten will not be evaluated. Failure to place the required submission information under the appropriate tab (factor or sub factor) and format may result in a lower rating if the evaluators cannot readily find the appropriate information.

Volume II - Price Proposal Section 3 Standard Form 1442, Proposal Pricing Page, and any additional submissions such as Certs and Reps and Bonding. Shall be submitted as an original only, and shall be placed in a separate envelope, included in the proposal package.

2.4 All proposals (original and one CD) shall be submitted to:

Wilkes-Barre VA Medical Center Contracting Office (049E) Attention: Scot Plank 1111 East End Blvd Wilkes-Barre, PA 18711

3. Proposal Evaluation Process.

3.1 A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of representatives of the Department of Veterans Affairs will evaluate the proposals. SSEB may also include Architect and Engineering firm non-voting members. The identities of the SSEB personnel are confidential, and any attempt by the offerors to contact these individuals is prohibited. The evaluation will be based on the content of the proposal and any subsequent discussions, if necessary, as well as information obtained from other sources, e.g. past performance information. Offerors are advised that the technical evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence in that technical and past performance proposals are reviewed and rated without knowledge of the price offered. During deliberation, the number and identities of offerors are not revealed to anyone who is not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other offerors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and award will be made to the responsive responsible offeror whose offer in conformance with this solicitation, results in the best value to the Government, price and other factors considered.

The Government intends to use the “Best Value” tradeoff process source selection approach in accordance with FAR 15.101-1. Award will be made to the responsive responsible offeror whose offer, in conformance with this solicitation, results in the best value to the Government, price plus other factors considered. The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed price contract to the responsive, responsible offerors whom the Source Selection Authority determines conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable and offers the best overall value to the Government, all factors considered. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers. Tiered evaluations will be used in compliance with regulations to fulfill the VA’s mission to meet socioeconomic goals.

The evaluation process essentially consists of two parts: Technical/Past Performance Evaluation and Price Evaluation.

1. Technical/Past Performance Evaluation: Proposals shall be evaluated against the Evaluation Factors and Criteria.

2. Price Evaluation: The CO will evaluate price proposals independent of the technical/past performance evaluation. The SSEB will not have access to price information until completion of the technical/quality evaluation.

NOTE: Price/Technical Trade-off Analysis: Once above evaluations are complete, the SSEB will compare the relative advantages and disadvantages of technical proposals and weigh against the prices. Technical Approach and Past Performance are equal and when combined are significantly more important than Price. The SSEB will then consider all factors and recommend an awardee to the Source Selection Authority (SSA), the proposal offering the best value to the Government. The SSA’s decision shall be based on a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation.

Evaluation Factor 1 – Technical Provide a clear and concise narrative not to exceed 25 pages (front and back side use of a single page will count as 2 pages) company advertising literature shall not be included. The narrative shall address the following scored subfactors Proposed Team, Construction approach and Management Plan, which will be rated equally:

1) The evaluation will be divided into five (5) sub-factors. Sub-factors 1 and 2, Capability and Experience and Organization, which are of equal importance, are somewhat more important than Sub-factors 3 through 5, which are of equal importance. An overall sub-factor rating will be assigned for sub-factors one (1) through five (5) based all reviewers’ ratings.

1. Capability and Experience

2. Organization and Specific Personnel

3. Scheduling Methodology

4. Quality Control

5. Safety

1. Capability and Experience:

Using the information from the projects/contracts discussed and listed in EXHIBIT A PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY QUESTIONNAIRE, the Government will evaluate the quality and extent of related experience and determine if the offeror has the capability and experience to manage construction projects, which are comparable to the work requirements of this solicitation.

2. Organization and Specific Personnel:

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s response to the Technical Proposal Data and attachments concerning overall organization, organizational chart, as well as number of personnel and the duties of proposed technical staff to determine if offeror has the ability to manage multi-discipline projects within the areas of consideration chosen without significant difficulty. The specific criterion proposed (skill levels, experience, and background) for personnel, if adequate, is an indicator of an acceptable organization.

The proposed subcontractors, applicable for multi-discipline consideration, are verifiable, and information provided indicates a good professional relationship with Plumbing, Pre-cast Concrete, Electrical, etc. Subcontractors shall have completed Exhibit B-Subcontractor Information and Consent Form.

In addition, Exhibit C, calculations of self-performed work, must be completed and submitted, in accordance with FAR 52.219-14, limitations on subcontracting.

3. Scheduling methodology:

The offeror shall submit information concerning scheduling methodology, to determine if they have scheduling processes that ensure completion and control of the project from beginning to the end of the project. Adequate scheduling processes are necessary to ensure completion and control of the project from beginning to the end. Offeror must provide an organizational chart and tentative schedule, including a timeline for major features of work. In addition, please identify the person responsible for ensuring the schedule is met (ex. Project Manager).

Also note any improvements exceeding the RFP requirements or betterments provided, including an explanation of proposed systems, as outlined in SOW. A detailed Statement of Work is provided within the Specification and Drawing package.

4. Quality Control:

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s response to Technical Proposal Data and attachments concerning proposed quality control activities for compliance with the solicitation requirements.

5. Safety Activities:

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s response to Technical Proposal Data and attachments concerning proposed safety program, including, but not limited to Training and documentation. EMR rating.

Any improvements exceeding the RFP requirements or betterments provided, including an explanation of proposed systems, as outlined in the SOW, should be noted.

Evaluation Factor 2 – Past Performance Provide references for three construction projects that best illustrate Prime contractor’s team qualifications. The document should be written to show the team’s construction performance, qualifications with respect to civil sitework projects (e.g. Parking site construction, Parking Garage Construction), health care exterior construction projects, construction contracts, and projects of a similar construction cost. The past performance section shall not exceed 8 pages.

1) Project description, at a minimum the description should include scope, size and cost of the project and can include photographs.

2) Show the participation of key personnel (identified previously with resume) in the listed projects. The offeror can also include the subcontractors by company name. Including subcontractors may be beneficial to show the experience of the company in addition to the key personnel.

3) The Government may also use other information to gather documentation on past performance.

4) Complete and include Exhibit A – Performance Relevancy Questionnaire, Exhibit D -Sample Transmittal letter for Past Performance Questionnaire, and Exhibit E – Past Performance Questionnaire.

Evaluation Factor 3 – Price

1) The purpose of the Price evaluation is to provide an assessment of the reasonableness and fairness of the proposed price in relation to the solicitation requirements. Proposals will be evaluated in the following manner.

a) Proposal Price Schedule of Values with a Breakdown identifying at a minimum each of the following major functional areas:

· Existing conditions

· Concrete

· Masonry

· Metals

· Woods, plastics and composites

· Thermal and moisture protection

· Openings

· Finishes

· Specialties

· Equipment

· Furnishings

· Conveying equipment

· Fire suppression

· Plumbing

· Heating, ventilating and air conditioning

· Electrical

· Electronic safety and security

· Earthwork

· Exterior improvements

· Utilities

2) Discounts: Prompt payment discounts will not be considered in the evaluation of offers

See attached document: S02 Amd 3 tile information 03.

End of Document