4. Evaluation Factors for Award.pdf

(Attachment # 4)

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

NATIONAL VESSEL CONTRACT

SOLICITATION NO.: 15M50023RA4400003

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION - COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND

COMMERCIAL SERVICES (ADDENDUM).

(a) The contract will be awarded to the responsible company whose proposal conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the government, based on the evaluation of Technical Capability, Past Performance, and Price.

TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

PAST PERFORMANCE

PRICE

Technical and past performances, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price.

(b) Options. The government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. FAR 52.217-8 will be calculated by using 50% of Option Year 4. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer’s specified expiration time, the government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

End of Provision

2. EVALUATION PROCESS

a) The evaluation process consists of three (3) components: (1) Technical Capability, (2) Past

Performance, and (3) Price by way of Written Proposals and Site Visits if deemed appropriate. Even though there are three components, the contract will be awarded to the responsible company whose proposal conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the government, based on the evaluation of Price, Past Performance, and Technical Capability.

b) The government may choose to conduct site visits; companies selected for site visits will be notified of the date and time. No rescheduling of site visits will be done unless determined necessary by the government to resolve unanticipated problems or delays encountered in the proposal process.

c) The best value determination will be made as follows:

The total evaluated price will be the determining factor for award among proposals that are considered substantially equal with regards to non-price factors. That is, where the USMS determines that the non-price factors of each offeror are not significantly different among competing proposals, then the proposal with the lowest evaluated price will be selected for award.

If the USMS determines that there are non-price factor differences among competitive proposals, then a more expensive proposal may be selected for award where the contracting officer determines that the value of the selected proposal is worth the price differential.

USMS has the right to determine whether two or more technical proposals are "substantially equal" or whether any differences in technical score are "significant" for purposes of evaluating the overall merit of quotations.

Between acceptable quotations with a significant difference in technical merit, a determination will be made as to whether a higher-priced acceptable quotation warrants paying a premium in price for a superior technical quotation. The term premium, as used herein, means the difference in price between the lower-priced acceptable quotation and that quotation deemed superior from a technical standpoint.

The government anticipates selecting the best‐ suited contractor from initial responses, without engaging in exchanges with contractors. Contractors are strongly encouraged to submit their best technical solutions and price in response to this Request for Proposal.

Once the government determines the contractor that is the best-suited (i.e., the apparent successful contractor), the government reserves the right to communicate with only that contractor to address any remaining issues, if necessary, and finalize a task order with that contractor. These issues may include technical and price. If the parties cannot successfully address any remaining issues, as determined pertinent at the sole discretion of the government, the government reserves the right to communicate with the next best-suited contractor based on the original analysis and address any remaining issues.

3. TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

a) Technical Capability will be presented to the government by means of a Written Proposal and via the government’s observations at a site visit if deemed appropriate and scheduled.

The specific technical evaluation sub-factors, which must be addressed in the Written Proposal, are set forth below. The responses to each section of Technical Capability must contain an adequate description of the services being offered in sufficient detail for the Technical Evaluation Board (TEB) to determine that your company can meet the requirements of the solicitation. Any Offeror whose technical proposal is found to be unacceptable may be removed from further consideration for award at the discretion of the

CO.

b) The Technical Capability factors and sub-factors as seen below will be used by the Technical Evaluation Board (TEB) to comparatively evaluate each company. All responses must be presented to the TEB in the Written Proposal, and the current or proposed storage facilities must be available for the TEB members to conduct a Site Inspection if deemed necessary in the evaluation process.

c) Technical Capability will be scored by Confidence Rating:

High Confidence: The Government has high confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement, proposes a sound approach, and will be successful in performing the contract with little or no Government intervention.

Some Confidence: The Government has some confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement, proposes a sound approach, and will be successful in performing the contract with some Government intervention.

Low Confidence: The Government has low confidence that the Offeror understands the requirement, proposes a sound approach, or will be successful in performing the contact even with Government intervention.

Your technical proposal should address all of the following:

A. FACILITY, STAFFING, AND SECURITY

i. Your firm’s descriptions of current or proposed facilities will be evaluated on the Technical Evaluation Board’s (TEB’s) degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the Statement of Work (SOW).

ii. Your firm’s detailed description of the Phase-In/Phase-Out Plan for contract and asset transition will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

iii. Your firm’s description of your proposed workforce (including sub-lets) will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW. Workforce description must detail all professional certifications and licenses.

B. RELOCATION

i. Your firm’s proposed equipment for use to meet the transportation requirements for all types of assets will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

ii. Your firm’s proposed plan for the relocation of assets from incumbent facility to newly awarded facility will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

iii. Detail a relocation plan for a vessel (luxury motor yacht) valued at $2 million from receipt of the STO to arrival at the final storage facility. Your firm’s proposal will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed relocation plan can successfully achieve all the requirements in the SOW.

C. INITIAL INTAKE

i. Your firm’s description of the initial intake process for an asset to be stored in dry dock will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

ii. Your firm’s description of the initial intake process for an asset to be stored in wet dock/moored will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

iii. Provide a sample intake report with mechanical assessments for a large vessel (over 80 feet), a small pleasure craft (less than 30 feet) and a commercial fishing vessel.

Your firm’s proposal will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the provided sample reports can successfully achieve all the requirements in the SOW.

iv. Provide the methods of valuation for a large vessel (over 80 feet), a small pleasure craft (less than 30 feet), a commercial fishing vessel with a commercial fishing permit. Your firm’s proposal will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the provided sample valuations can successfully achieve all the requirements in the SOW.

v. Describe the process to inventory assets along with any contents and subsequent removal of any non-vessel related property. Your firm’s proposal will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the indicated process can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

D. STORAGE, AND MAINTENANCE

i. Your firm’s description of your ability to obtain and maintain liability insurance commensurate with the value of asset inventory throughout the life of the contract (Example: Insurance quotation and policy documents) will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

ii. Your firm’s description of your ability to track assets in contractor’s custody will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

iii. Your firm’s description of your ability to perform routine maintenance to assets in dry dock storage when requested via STO will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

iv. Your firm’s description of your ability to perform routine maintenance to assets in wet dock/moored storage when requested via STO will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

v. Your firm’s description of your ability to perform mechanical repairs as requested to all vessel types along with ability to perform additional services such as mold remediation, conducting sea trials, and winterization; will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposal can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

vi. Your firm’s description of your ability to prepare vessels for hazardous weather shall be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

vii. Provide your maintenance plan for an 80-foot luxury motor yacht valued at $3 million. Your firm’s proposal will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the provided plan can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

E. DISPOSAL

i. Live auction: Your firm’s entire auction process from preview day through the USMS receipt of sale proceeds and documentation (security, registration, and documentation, etc.) will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

ii. Online auction: Your firm’s planned process for online sales to include website sample, how auctions will be conducted online, duration proposed, online security protocols, and marketing plan and outreach efforts will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW

iii. Your firm’s sample marketing plan for one low valued vessel (less than $10k) and one high valued vessel (over $3M) for a live and online sale (to include market research, advertising, proposed sales campaign, creative sales strategy, etc.) will be evaluated on the TEB’s degree of confidence that the proposed solution can successfully achieve the requirements in the SOW.

4. PAST PERFORMANCE

i. Each company must submit three (3) Past Performance Data Worksheets for similar and relevant Federal Government or Commercial contracts worked on within the last three (3) years from the solicitation closing date. The information provided should reflect the offeror’s record of performance in the areas of conforming to specifications, adherence to contract schedules, reputation for reasonable and cooperative behavior, commitment to customer satisfaction and business-like concern for the interest of the customer. Additionally, if performance deficiencies are identified, describe the deficiency and the corrective action taken.

5. PRICE

i. Each company must submit one (1) original Price Schedule (Attachment #8). The pricing schedule will be provided in Microsoft Excel. Once the unit price is entered for a line item, an automatic calculation will occur for the total price of the line item.

The total amount for each year will also be automatically calculated, as well as, the total price of the contract. There are five (5) tabs at the bottom of the pricing schedule that require pricing entry. The sixth tab on the Pricing Schedule will automatically populate on the Base and Option Year tabs. Pricing shall be completed on the excel spreadsheet only. FAR 52.217-8 will be calculated by using 50% of Option Year 4.

The price must be found to be both fair and reasonable and within a fair market price.