47QSWC23K0079 Acquisition Plan_Final.pdf

CUI//SP-SSEL

General Services Administration (GSA)

Federal Acquisition Services (FAS)

Office of General Supplies and Services (GSS)

Large Special Order Program (LSOP)

Acquisition Plan

Acquisition PIID

47QSWC23K0079

Solicitation PIID

47QSWC23Q0106

Client Agency

Marine Depot Maintenance Command (MDMC)

Description of Procurement

Conveyorized and Batch Powder Coating System with Ovens

August 8, 2023

Table of Contents

Acquisition Summary

FAR 7.105(a) Acquisition Background and Objectives

1. Statement of need

2. Applicable conditions

3. Cost

4. Capability or performance conditions

5. Delivery or performance period requirements

6. Trade-offs

7. Risks

8. Acquisition Streamlining

FAR 7.105(b) Plan of Action:

1. Sources

2. Competition

3. Contract Type Selection

4. Source Selection Procedures

5. Acquisition Considerations

6. Budgeting and Funding

7. Product or Service Descriptions

8. Priorities, Allocations, and Allotments

9. Contractor vs. Government Performance

10. Inherently Governmental Functions

11. Management Information Requirements

12. Make or Buy

13. Test and Evaluation

14. Logistics Considerations

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR): It is not required nor anticipated that a COR will be needed for this procurement. Any COR duties are retained by the Contracting Officer

15. Government-Furnished Property

16. Government-Furnished Information

17. Environmental and Energy Conservation Objectives

18. Security Considerations

19. Contract Administration and Surveillance

20. Other Considerations

21. Acquisition Plan Annual Review per FAR 7.104(a)

22. Milestones

Acquisition Summary

Name Value

Acquisition PIID 47QSWC23K0079

Project Title Conveyorized and Batch Powder Coating System with

Ovens

Solicitation PIID 47QSWC23Q0106

Estimated Dollar Value $1,339,300.00

Nature of Action Purchase Order

Region 22: Great Southwest Large SOP

Service Federal Acquisition Service

Office Office of General Supplies and Services

Requiring Agency United States Marine Corps

Bureau Marine Corps Logistics Command, Marine Depot

Maintenance Command

Place of Performance: State GA

Place of Performance: City or

Cities Albany

High Risk? No

GSA Form 2689

Required?

Yes

General Counsel Participation

Needed?

No

Competitive? Yes

FAR 7.105(a) Acquisition Background and Objectives

1. Statement of need.

Background: This acquisition is being conducted for the United States Marine Corps (USMC), Marine Corps Logistics Command (MARCORLOGCOM), Marine Depot Maintenance

Command (MDMC). Prior to the customer requesting GSA assistance to conduct an acquisition on its behalf, the Requesting Agency is required to make an internal determination that the use of an interagency acquisition represents the best procurement approach. As part of the best procurement approach determination, the Requesting Agency is required to obtain the concurrence of the Requesting Agency's responsible contracting office in accordance with internal agency procedures.

The customer is Marine Depot Maintenance Command (MDMC) located at Albany, Georgia.

The contracting activity is the GSA Southwest Supply Acquisitions Center (Large SOP).

MDMC has a one-time requirement for the supply of a Conveyorized and Batch Powder Coating

System with Ovens. MDMC’s mission is to provide the Fleet Marine Force (FMF) with worldwide, organic field-level and depot-level maintenance support for rebuild, repairs, engineering solutions, modifications, calibrations, manufacturing, and technical services to maximize the operational readiness, lethality, and sustainability of ground combat and combat support weapons systems and equipment. MDMC has two production plants that are multi-commodity depot maintenance complexes. These production plants provide worldwide expeditionary logistics support to the FMF, other forces, and agencies.

Technical and Contractual History: This is a new, one-time purchase for the Region 7 Large

Special Order Program (LSOP) group. MDMC informed GSA that a need exists for the purchase of a Conveyorized and Batch Powder Coating System with Ovens. The Powder Coating System will coat and cure miscellaneous components to protect and improve the quality of the components. MDMC has obtained the proper approvals by Interagency Agreement (IA) Part A

47QSWC20S0032. By signing this document and the Military Interdepartmental Purchase

Request (MIPR) and/or Requisition, the Requesting Agency confirms that a bona fide need exists in the year in which these funds will be obligated, and that funds are for the designated purpose, meet time limitations, and are legally available for the acquisition described in this document;

that all unique funding and procurement requirements, including all statutory and regulatory requirements applicable to the funding being provided, have been disclosed to the Servicing

Agency; and that all internal reviews and approvals required prior to transferring funds to the

Servicing Agency have been completed. The Servicing Agency’s acceptance of this document and the MIPR and/or Requisition creates an obligation on the part of the Requesting Agency. A copy of the IA can be found in the official contract file, Tab 01. The IA Part A between MDMC and GSA was signed on January 07, 2021, and it expires on September 30, 2025.

The Powder Coating System is considered a commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) item as defined in FAR 2.101. This item is of a type that is customarily used by the general public and has been sold to the general public.

Acquisition Alternatives -

Mandatory Sources: In accordance with FAR 8.002(a)(1)(i) through (v), the Contracting Officer has determined that the required products and/or services are not available from other priority

Government supply sources such as Federal Prison Industries (also known as UNICOR) and

AbilityOne. Additionally, these required products and/or services were not found in the

Interagency Contract Directory (ICD) database or identified on the Green Procurement

Compilation.

In accordance with FAR 8.003(a) through (e), the Contracting Officer also confirms that this requirement does not pertain to public utility services, printing, and related services, leased motor vehicles, strategic and critical materials (e.g., metals and ores) or helium.

Open Market: This alternative requires extensive administrative lead time because it would be considered a “stand-alone" contract that must comply with all applicable Federal Acquisition

Regulation (FAR) requirements, and any supplemental agency requirements, for a contract award. This contracting solution is considered Tier 1 under category management practices – a solution that is neither Best-In-Class nor necessarily demonstrates strong contract management practices. Although this is the least desirable option, this course of action may be pursued when other acquisition alternatives or avenues are not available.

Government-wide Acquisition Contract (GWACs): GWACs pre-qualify contractors for capability and provide for solution-based contracts. The flexibility of the GWAC benefits the

Government by allowing for the addition of Other Direct Costs (ODCs) as well as options regarding contract type (i.e., fixed-price, cost reimbursement, time-and-materials, and labor-hour). GWACs are a suitable alternative when the requirement includes an information technology (IT) element. A multitude of existing GWACs are considered Tier 3 under category management practices – a solution that has been identified as Best-In-Class by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB).

GSA Schedules: The GSA Schedules program provides a streamlined approach to providing commercial products and labor/skills services as they are IDIQ contracts that have been awarded in compliance with applicable FAR requirements. Other Direct Costs (ODCs) are managed through the utilization of open-market items or the inclusion of Order Level Materials (OLMs) under specific designated subcategories. This contracting solution is considered Tier 2 under category management practices – a solution that is not Best-In-Class (BIC) but reflects strong contract management practices including data and information sharing across agencies, and use of cross-agency metrics

Strategic Sourcing Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs): Strategic source BPAs, both multiple-award and single-award, are a result of a structured and collaborative process of critically analyzing an organization’s spending pattern to better leverage its purchasing power, reduce costs, and improve overall performance. Strategic source BPAs streamline the acquisition process for those identified commercial products and services that are commonly utilized across all federal customers. While all strategic source BPAs are automatically considered Tier 2 under category management practices, several are considered Tier 3 as they have received a Best-In-

Class designation.

Selected Acquisition Alternative: The best acquisition alternative for the Government is to award a firm-fixed price, single-award purchase order utilizing the prescription authorized under

FAR Part 13, Simplified Acquisition Procedures, under NAICS Code 325510 – Painting and

Coating Manufacturing with a small business size standard of 1,000 employees. PSC 4910, Motor Vehicle Maintenance and Repair Shop Specialized Equipment will be used for this acquisition.

2. Applicable conditions.

Award will be in the form of a firm-fixed price contract with an estimated delivery date of 180 days after receipt of order (ARO).

Furthermore, a Senior Level Review (SLR) is required as the estimated value is above

$750,000.00 threshold for a one-time open market order. The SLR was completed on August 1, 2023.

This acquisition exceeds the Simplified Acquisition Threshold, will be performed within the

United States, and exceeds a period of performance of 180 days. However, E-verify and FAR clause 52.222-54, Employment Eligibility Verification (MAY 2022) do not apply to this acquisition as the requirement is considered to be a commercially available off the shelf (COTS) item in accordance with FAR 22.1803(c).

There are not any requirements for compatibility with existing or future systems or programs as the Powder Coating System is a standalone COTS item. There are not currently any known cost, capability and performance constraints.

3. Cost.

This contract will consist of a period of performance no longer than 180 days with an overall estimated price of $1,339,300.00 based upon a vendor provided budgetary quote, excluding

GSA’s procurement fee. This procurement represents a firm-fixed price for the purchase of products. Therefore, a separate labor or travel component is not anticipated for this requirement.

An Independent Government Estimate (IGE) was provided by the Client estimating the price of the Powder Coating System as $1,478,880.00 and was based upon the market research conducted by MDMC and MDMC engineering estimates. This IGE estimates the product cost as

$1,250,000.00 and the installation and training as $228,880.00.

Life Cycle Cost (LCC) or Total Ownership Cost (TOC) was evaluated at the program level for this requirement as part of the Major Program Review. The estimated life-cycle costs for this procurement are as follows: $1,339,300.00.

Design-To-Cost: Design-to-cost objectives were not considered because they are not applicable due to the nature of the requirement. The products required do not involve any design effort.

Should Cost: Should-cost analysis was not performed because it is not applicable due to the nature of the requirement. Any should-cost analysis will be performed by the customer agency at the program level.

4. Capability or performance conditions.

The powder coating system shall conform to the current commercial characteristics and standards for this industry. The product shall also be provided to the Government in accordance with the terms and conditions noticeably acceptable within the commercial marketplace.

5. Delivery or performance period requirements.

The client requires the delivery of the powder coating system within 180 days upon receipt of order (ARO). Quoters are encouraged to provide their best delivery terms. The Government is seeking FOB Destination.

6. Trade-offs.

The expected consequences of trade-offs among the various cost, capability or performance, and schedule goals is minimal given this is a commercial buy and adequate competition is expected.

7. Risks.

A certain level of minimal risk is inherent in any acquisition whereby the Government supply requirements is defined. However, these risks are considered to be low when procuring commercially available supplies and having a firm fixed price contract type.

Technical/Quality Risks: Technical and quality risks are also considered low as the powder coating system is commercial in nature and readily available in commercial markets. The

Government currently utilizes a powder coating system, and it is the only acceptable product that will meet the Government's need at this time. Remedies for non-compliance to contractual terms such as issuance of cure notices, show cause notices, stop work notices, and terminations may be used.

Cost Risks: Cost risks are considered to be low due to this requirement being awarded under full and open competition under simplified acquisition procedures. To further mitigate risk, prices received from the successful Quoter will be evaluated to determine if the proposed price is reasonable and to assess their understanding of the requirement. Prices must be fair and reasonable in relation to the performance requirements and quantities. The Contracting Officer may also request the successful Quoter to submit any price data and/or relevant sales/invoice history to further substantiate the price reasonableness of their quote. Should only one response be received, the Government will utilize two methods by which to determine pricing submitted to be fair and reasonable. The Government will compare quoted pricing to current published lists

IAW FAR 13.106-3(a)(2)(iii) and market research IAW FAR 13.106-3(a)(2)(i) to determine price fair and reasonableness. Other methods may be used to ensure pricing is fair and reasonable.

Schedule Risks: Schedule risks are considered to be low as the client agency is already aware of industry standards and the potential lead time (180 days ARO). If delinquent or unsatisfactory performance is observed, the appropriate contractual action will be taken. Proactive contract administration will correct problems at the lowest level to decrease schedule risks.

Supply Chain Risks: Supply chain risks are considered to be low as the client agency is aware of material delays and increased chemical pricing resulting from the current economic environment.

8. Acquisition Streamlining.

Not applicable as this procurement has not been designated by the Requiring Agency as a program subject to acquisition streamlining.

FAR 7.105(b) Plan of Action:

1. Sources.

Under FAR Part 19, contracting personnel are highly encouraged to set-aside procurements for small businesses. At a minimum, ordering activities should consider, if available, at least one small business, veteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, women-owned small business, or small disadvantaged business contractor(s).

Market Research indicates there is not a reasonable expectation of receiving at least two (2) technically acceptable quotes from small business concerns. Therefore, this requirement will not be set-aside for small business.

In accordance with GSAM 519.502-70(e), a GSA Form 2689 is required as this requirement is above the simplified acquisition threshold and is considered an open market procurement.

Small Business Considerations (Including Bundling): This acquisition is not bundled nor consolidated. The Small Business Administration (SBA)’s Non-Manufacturer Rule (NMR) does not apply to this acquisition as this requirement will not be set-aside for small business. NMR only applies under a set aside order. If the Ordering Activity does not restrict the order to small business (or any of the sub-categories), the NMR does not apply even when an award is made to a small business. However, the Ordering Activity will receive small business credit when awarding to a small business, just as they would for a small business set-aside.

In accordance with FAR 19.702(a), since this requirement is over $750,000 a small business subcontracting plan is required for any large business that submits a quote.

Consideration for sources identifiable through the Interagency Contract Directory

(https://www.contractdirectory.gov/contractdirectory/) were reviewed and it was determined that there are no other procurement instruments that could be utilized for this requirement.

2. Competition.

This acquisition will be solicited under a full and open basis on the open market.

https://www.contractdirectory.gov/contractdirectory/

A formal request for quotation (RFQ) will be posted on SAM.gov with a suspense date of thirty

(30) days to submit a quote to maximize competition. DFARS 213.500-70 does apply.

Major Component Competition – The Powder Coating System is made up of the following major components: powder paint system, four pass powder cure oven, safety and control equipment, booth canopy/booth base and capture system, automatic powder spray system, reclaim color module/powder feed hopper, environmentally controlled powder room, overhead enclosed track conveyor system, batch powder coating system, powder collection system, and batch powder process oven. The salient characteristics for each component have been stated in the statement of work (SOW) to promote competition.

Spares and Repair Parts Competition – Spares and repair parts are not included in this procurement. Competition will not be sought, promoted, and sustained for spares and repair parts.

Subcontracting Competition – IAW FAR 19.702(a), a subcontracting plan will be required.

There are not any known barriers to subcontracting competition.

3. Contract Type Selection

This acquisition will result in the award of a Firm-Fixed Price Open Market Purchase Order. A firm-fixed price (FFP) contract type is the preferred method used in Government contracts for several reasons. A FFP contract provides stability and reduces administrative costs for all parties.

It also affords the Contractor flexibility for the use of their resources while simultaneously minimizing cost risk to the Government. In situations where the requirement is of low to moderate complexity and well defined, an FFP type contract is suitable.

4. Source Selection Procedures.

The Government will award the contract from this solicitation to the responsible Quoter whose quotation conforms to the solicitation will be most advantageous, or best value, to the

Government based upon the following evaluation factors listed in their descending order of importance: technical conformance, prior experience, and price. For evaluation purposes, there are two (2) equally important subfactors withing the technical conformance factor: Powder

Coating System Total Solution and Installation/Quality Control Plan. These subfactors will not be assigned individual adjectival ratings. Technical conformance is the most important factor.

When the non-price factors of technical conformance and prior experience are combined, they are more important than price. As quotes become more equal in non-price factors, price becomes more important. The objective of the Government is selection of a Contractor whose quotation demonstrates the best value to the Government based upon the evaluation factors with possible tradeoffs.

Factor #1: Technical Conformance

Subfactor #1.1: Powder Coating System Total Solution

The Technical Conformance Statement shall be a separate attachment provided on the Quoter’s official letterhead and will be used to evaluate an Quoter's technical quote. The format of the

Technical Conformance Statement is at the discretion of the Quoter, but it is limited to 15 pages.

Any pages beyond the 15 page limit will not be evaluated. The Technical Conformance

Statement must address the Government’s salient characteristics for the required powder coating system along with the remaining technical requirements detailed in the SOW of the RFQ.

Quoters must also complete and submit Attachment 1, Section 2 - Component & Technical

Compliance Matrix which will be evaluated as part of Technical Conformance to determine if a

Quoter meets, does not meet, or exceeds specification requirements.

Quoter’s must provide a quote that contains all components listed in the solicitation.

Components must meet the salient physical, functional, and performance characteristics listed in the solicitation. Each item must be clearly identified by brand name, if any, and make or model number. Quoter shall include descriptive literature such illustrations, drawing, or a clear reference to previously furnished data or information available to the Contracting Officer. If any modification is made, the Quoter must clearly describe the modification the Quoter plans to make in a product to conform to the solicitation requirements, and the Quoter must mark any descriptive material to clearly show the modification.

Subfactor #1.2: Installation/Quality Control Plan

Also included in the Technical Conformance Statement and page count should be a preliminary installation/quality control plan. Once again, the format may be determined by the Quoter. The

Installation/Quality Control Plan shall include how installation of the powder coating system will be managed, how that management process will mitigate risk, ensure quality work, and result in successful contract performance. Additionally, what is submitted here should be treated as the baseline for project schedule/implementation plan for the required equipment within this RFQ.

The government estimates the powder coating system will be located in Building 2211 and should be installed no longer than 180 days after contract award. Any plans submitted that exceed that timeframe should contain an explanation as to why additional time is required. The

Installation/Quality Control Plan should also include information with regard to Quoter’s equipment warranty for materials and workmanship, the length of time the equipment is warranted and what the warranty covers.

It is a Quoter's responsibility to submit an adequately written technical discussion that incorporates the two (2) subfactors under factor 1. Additionally, unsupported promises to comply with RFQ requirements will not be considered sufficient. A Quoter parroting or copying the technical requirements of the RFQ with a statement of intent to perform will not adequately reflect an understanding of the requirements or a Quoter’s capability to successfully provide the required items.

Technical Conformance shall be evaluated through an adjectival rating. Rating will not be assigned to subfactors.

Factor #2: Prior Experience

Prior experience will be evaluated by reviewing a Quoter’s responses to the Prior Experience questions and provided references listed in Attachment 1, Sections 3A and 3B - Prior Experience

Worksheet. Quoters are required to provide at least one and up to three references in which they have completed projects of similar size and scope to the requirements stated by this RFQ. The prior experience projects must have been performed within the last three (3) years by the time the

RFQ closes and show the extent of the Quoter’s prior experience. Required information consists of (1) Customer Company Name; (2) Equipment Provided; (3) Dollar value of contract/purchase order; (4) Delivery Date of Equipment Provided; and (5) Name, Telephone Number, email address of Customer Contact. The format to list the three (3) Prior Experience references has been provided in Attachment 3, Sections 3A and 3B, Prior Experience Worksheet.

RATING SCHEME FOR TECHNICAL CONFORMATION FACTOR 1 AND PRIOR

EXPERIENCE FACTOR 2:

Technical Conformation:

The standard is met when the Quoter has demonstrated understanding of the Technical

Requirements stated in the SOW and solicitation, the adequacy of the solution approach, the quality and completeness of their technical solutions to these objectives, and the overall qualifications and skill mix of the contractor workforce proposed to address work objectives.

Based on this standard each vendor will be assigned a TC rating factor based on the definitions in Table 1.

Table 1:

Excellent (E) The quote significantly exceeds the minimum SOW requirements.

Evaluation of the factor presents a very low risk of unsuccessful contract performance. Very little to no Government oversight is expected in achieving the required level of contract performance.

Very Good (VG) The quote exceeds, to varying degrees, one or more of the minimum SOW requirements. Evaluation of the factor presents a low risk of unsuccessful contract performance. Little to very little Government oversight is expected in achieving the required level of contract performance.

Acceptable (A) The quote meets the minimum SOW requirements. Evaluation of the factor presents a low to moderate risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Little to moderate Government oversight is expected in achieving the required level of contract performance.

Marginal (M) The quote does not meet, to varying degrees, one or more of the minimum

SOW requirements. Evaluation of the factor presents a high risk of unsuccessful contract performance. Moderate Government oversight is expected in achieving the required level of contract performance.

Unacceptable (U) The quote does not meet a majority or any of the minimum SOW requirements. Evaluation of the factor presents a very high risk of unsuccessful contract performance. Substantial Government oversight is expected achieving the required level of contract performance.

Prior Experience:

The standard is met when the Quoter has performed work in the key areas identified in the solicitation/SOW. Based on this standard each vendor will be assigned a PE rating factor based on the definitions and criteria in Table 2.

When describing a strength/weakness/deficiency (SS/S/W/SW/D) include the following elements:

• Identification of the SS/S/W/SW/D referencing the page and paragraph in the Quotation and

SOW.

• Describe why it is considered an SS/S/W/SW/D with reference to the requirement in the SOW.

• Describe the impact on the task. Explain how/why it increases/decreases the risk associated with the vendor successfully performing the task.

Here are definitions for the above SS/S/W/SW/D:

Significant Strength (SS) A significant strength appreciably enhances the merit of a quote or appreciably increases the probability of successful contract performance. (Precede comments with an (S) if identifying a significant strength.)

Strength (S) Any aspect of a quote that, when judged against a stated evaluation criterion, enhances the merit of the quote, or increases the probability of successful performance of the contract

Weakness (W) A flaw in the quote that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness (SW) A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. (Precede comments with an (S) if identifying a significant weakness.)

Deficiency (D) A material failure of a quote to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a quote that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Table 2:

Exceptional Confidence (EC) The quote demonstrates the same or closely similar prior experience relevant to the product required by the RFQ.

Prior Experience submissions met and exceeded many contract requirements and had few problems, if any. Overall, based on the Quoter’s Prior

Experience submissions, no doubt exists that the Quoter will successfully perform the required effort.

Very Good Confidence (VGC) The quote demonstrates closely similar prior experience relevant to the product required by the RFQ. Prior

Experience submissions met and exceeded some contract requirements and had few minor problems. Overall, based on the Quoter’s Prior Experience submissions, little doubt exists that the Quoter will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence (SC) The quote demonstrates relevant prior experience compared to the product required by the RFQ. Prior

Experience submissions met contract requirements and contains some minor problems. Overall, based on the

Quoter’s Prior Experience submissions, some doubt exists that the Quoter will successfully perform the required effort.

Marginal Confidence (MC) The quote shows very limited relevant prior experience compared to the product required by the RFQ. Prior

Experience submissions did not meet some contract requirements and reflects problems. Overall, based on the

Quoter’s Prior Experience submissions, substantial doubt exists that the Quoter will successfully perform the required effort.

Unsatisfactory Confidence (UC) The quote fails to demonstrate relevant prior experience compared to the product required by the RFQ (there is an identifiable prior experience in the quote from which to draw this conclusion). Prior Experience submissions did not meet most contract requirements and contains serious problems. Overall, based on the Quoter’s Prior

Experience submissions, extreme doubt exists that the

Quoter will successfully perform the required effort.

Factor #3: Price

The Government will consider the Quoter’s total extended aggregate price for price reasonableness when making the award. In order for GSA to make a fair and reasonable price determination, additional market research will be conducted even if competitive quotes are received. The Contracting Officer may also request Quoters to submit any available pricing data and/or relevant sales/invoice history in order to further substantive the price reasonableness of the quote submitted to the Government. The Government will also examine pricing outliers to ensure that no Quoter is attempting to submit unbalanced pricing. A cost realism analysis will not be conducted. Quoters shall complete Attachment 1 – Pricing Worksheet.

Pricing does not have an assessment rating assigned to it.

Past Performance will not be an evaluation factor for this requirement; however, the Government will review the Exclusions available within the System for Award Management (SAM)

(https://sam.gov/SAM/). Additionally, the Government reserves the right to review information contained in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) and Federal Awardee

Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), available within the Contractor

Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) (https://www.cpars.gov/). Any findings of exclusions or less than Satisfactory ratings may deem the vendor's quote as ineligible for award.

5. Acquisition Considerations.

Contract Type: A single, firm-fixed price contract will be awarded in accordance with FAR

13.500(a) as long as the successful Quoter represents the best value to the Government and their quote conforms to the terms and conditions of the request for quote.

Applicable regulations are:

Part 5- Publicizing Contract Actions

Part 13- Simplified Acquisition Procedures

Part 12- Acquisition of Commercial Products and Commercial Services

Purchase or Lease: The powder coating system will be acquired by purchase due to the

Government's estimated length and extent of use the equipment will be used. It is most advantageous for the Government to purchase the powder coating system to minimize maintenance, repair, service costs, and potential obsolescence of equipment within the period of use.

Other Considerations: LSOP shall coordinate the Acquisition Plan for this procurement through the required approval authorities via this Acquisition Plan in accordance with FAR 7.104(c).

Performance Based Elements: Performance based elements are not applicable to this requirement as this is for a COTS item.

Buy American Act: The Buy American Act was considered. However, in accordance with FAR

25.1101 (c)(1), this acquisition is for supplies valued at more than $183,000.00, therefore Buy

American Act does not apply.

Trade Agreements Act: The Trade Agreements Act was considered and does apply.

Berry Amendment: The Berry Amendment was considered. However, in accordance with the restrictions listed at DFARS 225.7002-1, the Berry Amendment does not apply as the powder coating system is not clothing, fabrics, food, or hand or measuring tools.

Information Technology Acquisition: FAR 7.105(b)(5)(ii)-(v) are not applicable to this acquisition as this is not an information technology purchase.

Other Information

All solicitations for contracts must include the FAR provisions 52.204-24, Representation

Regarding Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment and FAR

52.204-26, Covered Telecommunications Equipment or Services-Representation and all contracts are required to include FAR clause 52.204-25, Prohibition on Contracting for Certain

Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment. These requirements implement restrictions mandated in the NDAA 2019 Section 889. These provisions and clause have been included in the RFQ and the Quoter will be required to submit signed representations with their quote in order to eligible for award.

Monitoring Office (or Individual)

The Client Agency POC is responsible for ensuring inspection and acceptance is conducted at the final destination and that the GSA Contracting Officer is notified that all items were received.

The individual responsible is:

Christopher Tipper

MDMC Supervisory Engineer

Phone: 229-639-6952/229-344-4432

Email: christopher.tipper@usmc.mil

6. Budgeting and Funding.

Budgeting: Based upon preliminary pricing obtained by the requiring activity, the overall estimated cost for the procurement is $1,339,300.00 for the supply requested. With the GSA 5% fee ($66,965.00), the total cost to the customer is estimated to be $1,406,265.00.

Funding: This requirement is being fully funded by the requesting agency through submission of one (1) MIPR. The Client has provided funding, under MIPR: M6710023MP00067 -

$1,406,265.00, inclusive of GSA's 5% fee. Funding will be confirmed with GSA's financial division after quotes have been received and prior to award. If additional funds are required, the

GSA Contracting Officer will collaborate with the client for next steps.

7. Product or Service Descriptions.

The Contractor shall provide all labor, tools, materials, equipment, safety measures, supervision and all associated permits and services to complete the work to furnish, install, and start-up of fully functional conveyorized and batch powder coating system with curing ovens at Building

2211, Marine Corps Logistics Base (MCLB) Albany, GA. The Contractor is responsible for the purchase of the system and all miscellaneous materials needed to install a fully functional system.

8. Priorities, Allocations, and Allotments.

For this procurement, there is currently no priority rating assigned for performance. If the priority changes during the course of performance, GSA will obtain the appropriate rating and modify the resultant contract accordingly.

9. Contractor vs. Government Performance.

This acquisition is not related to an A-76 effort and does not compare Government versus contractor performance of the requirements. As such, this requirement does not fall under Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-76 as the Government intends to contract with the private sector.

10. Inherently Governmental Functions.

Not applicable as this procurement is not related to an inherently government function as defined in Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) Policy Letter 11-01 effective October 12, 2011.

11. Management Information Requirements.

The Government will use the following to monitor the contractor's efforts:

• Status Reports

• Schedules and/or timetables

• Industry standardized processes and procedures

• Invoices

• Observation by client

• Customer surveys

• Government Inspection

• Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARS)

This contract will be monitored by the GSA Contracting Officer by performing contract administration duties such as issuing modifications, monitoring funds, reviewing/approving invoices, reviewing status reports, working with the client and contractor to resolve any outstanding issues, and identifying critical milestones.

12. Make or Buy.

Make or buy considerations were not considered because they were not applicable due to the size and nature of this requirement.

13. Test and Evaluation.

Not applicable as the requirement is not a major phase of a major system. Thus, no test program provided by either the contractor or the Government is required.

14. Logistics Considerations.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR): It is not required nor anticipated that a COR will be needed for this procurement. Any COR duties are retained by the Contracting Officer.

QASP: It is not anticipated that a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) will be needed for this procurement.

Warranty: Contractor will provide standard commercial warranty for all items.

Delivery Terms: The client requires the delivery of the Powder Coating System within 180 days upon receipt of order (ARO). Quoters will be encouraged to provide their best delivery terms that meet or exceed the required delivery schedule.

Shipping and Handling Terms: F.O.B. Destination. The Contractor shall coordinate delivery of all items with the Client’s designated point of contact (POC) for consolidation, storage, and shipping. The Contractor shall notify the POC when the equipment is shipped from either the

Manufacturer’s facility or Contractor’s facility. The Contractor is to notify the POC prior to special delivery if special material handling equipment (MHE) is required to offload the equipment once it arrives at the Government destination.

Inspection and acceptance will occur at destination for all supplies delivered under this contract to the following shipping address:

Mark For: John Hinkle, john.w.hinkle@usmc.mil, 229-639-5362

Ship To Address: MDMC PPA

B2200 Storeroom 8

814 Radford Blvd.

Albany, GA 31704

ALL PACKAGES AND SHIPMENTS MUST ALSO COMPLY WITH THE

FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS:

Marking: Shipments to the Department of Defense (DOD) shall be marked in accordance with

MIL-STD-129.

mailto:john.w.hinkle@usmc.mil

Special Marking: In addition to markings required by MIL-STD-129, shipments shall be marked with the requisition number, part number, SUPPAD and item name (will be shown on individual orders).

Preparation for Delivery: The item(s) shall be packaged and packed to afford adequate protection against physical damage during shipment from the supplier to the first receiving activity. The pack shall comply with the rules and regulations applicable to the mode of transportation. The package shall be the same as that normally provided by the supplier. In the event a pallet or skid is used for shipping, the following notice shall apply:

Notice of special requirements for shipment to all countries that have endorsed the IPPC

Guidelines for treatment on nonmanufactured wood packaging: The International Plant

Protection Convention (IPPC) has approved and published on March 15, 2002; “Guidelines for

Regulating Wood Packaging Material in International Trade” are found at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/swp/. Clause D-FSS-468 requires non-manufactured wood pallets and other nonmanufactured wood packaging material used in shipments destined to IPPC compliant countries require the appropriate wood treatment. Additionally, shipments delivered to

DOD distribution facilities or freight consolidation points for eventual delivery to or through

EU/IPPC countries shall comply with applicable DLA Regulations and Procurement Letter

PROCLTR 02-17.

15. Government-Furnished Property.

Not applicable as government-furnished property will not be provided to the contractor.

16. Government-Furnished Information

Not applicable as government-furnished information will not be provided to the contractor.

17. Environmental and Energy Conservation Objectives.

The Contracting Officer reviewed the Green Products Compilation located within the

Sustainable Facilities (SF) tool at https://sftool.gov/ in accordance with GSAM 523.104(a)(1).

The identified items being procured are not listed in the Compilation. As such, the Contracting

Officer determined that the intended contract action will not include sustainable requirements in accordance with FAR 23.

Proposed Environmental Assessment Statement Issue Resolution: Since there are no environmental and energy conservation objectives associated with the acquisition as defined in https://sftool.gov/

FAR Part 23, 40 CFR 1502, and NEPA, an Environmental Assessment Statement was not prepared.

Proposed Environmental Impact Statement Issue Resolution: Since there are no environmental and energy conservation objectives associated with the acquisition as defined in FAR Part 23, 40

CFR 1502, and NEPA, an Environmental Impact Statement was not prepared.

18. Security Considerations.

Not applicable as the acquisition does not require any of the following:

• For classified information to be accessed by the Contractor.

• For classified information to be accessed/stored at the contractor facility.

• For work to be performed at a controlled access facility belonging to the Government or another vendor.

19. Contract Administration and Surveillance

The contract will be managed by reviewing the Contractor’s invoices and, if needed, meeting with the Client and Contractor. The GSA CO will ensure that the Contractor is fulfilling the requirement of the purchase order in a productive manner. The GSA CO will award official modifications to the purchase order, to include but not limited to, working with the Contractor to resolve any outstanding issues and contract close-out.

Administrative POC:

April McNellie

Contracting Officer

GSA, Federal Acquisition Service

819 Taylor Street, Room 13A33

Fort Worth, Texas 76102

Office: 817-850-8192 april.mcnellie@gsa.gov

Requesting Agency Program Office POC:

Christopher Tipper

MDMC Supervisory Engineer

814 Radford Blvd.

Albany, GA 31704

Phone: 229-639-6952/229-344-4432

Email: christopher.tipper@usmc.mil mailto:april.mcnellie@gsa.gov

20. Other Considerations.

These provisions and clause have been included in the RFQ and the Quoter will be required to submit signed representations with their quote in order to eligible for award.

Electronic and Information Technology: This requirement does not include electronic and

Information Technology (EIT). Therefore, Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29

U.S.C. 794d) does NOT apply to this procurement.

GSA INFORM Procedures (515.3702-1): This acquisition is not at or above the $10M required threshold, therefore, GSA INFORM procedures are not applicable.

21. Acquisition Plan Annual Review per FAR 7.104(a)

Not applicable as performance of the contract will not exceed 12 months.

22. Milestones.

Milestone Description Planned Completion Date

Package Completion 07/26/2023

MIPR/Purchase Request 07/06/2023

Justification and Approval for Sole Source Not applicable

Acquisition Plan Approval 08/11/2023

Issuance of Solicitation 08/11/2023

Proposal Evaluation 09/18/2023

Contract Award 09/30/2023

23. Coordination/Approval

Date Contracting Officer

April McNellie

Signature

Date One Level Above Contracting Officer

Phil Cleveland

Date SBA/OSDBU

Albert Garza

Date AAS Director

Alan Searsy