6973GH-19-R-00077-Amendment 0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ.NO.

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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: (a) By completing

Items 8 and 15, and returning is extended, is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required.)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

(x) A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

1 7

0001 02/07/2019

AAQ-722 DIVERSIFIED FRANCHISE ACQ

FAA AERONAUTICAL CENTER

PO BOX 25082

BLDG 014-AHQ, ROOM 233A

AAQ0722-AFN

OKLAHOMA CITY OK 73125

AAQ-722 DIVERSIFIED FRANCHISE ACQ

FAA AERONAUTICAL CENTER

PO BOX 25082

BLDG 014-AHQ, ROOM 233A

AAQ722-AFN

OKLAHOMA CITY OK 73125

x

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment number. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT

THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY 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 telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted ; or (c) By ___________ x x

6973GH-19-R-00077

copies to the issuing office.

02/07/2019

(x)

LEARJET 60 SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE CHECKS

a. List of changes is stated on pages 2 through 7.

b. The proposal response date is NOT EXTENDED.

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. CONTRACT AUTHORITY 15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 16C. DATE SIGNED

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

Nicholas J. Risi

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

LIST OF CHANGES:

Section E - Inspection and Acceptance was revised as follows.

Clause List was revised as follows.

Clause, AC1908, is incorporated as follows:

AC1908 INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE AT DESTINATION (JUN 2015)

(a) Final inspection and acceptance shall be at destination.

(b) Although source inspection by the Government is not anticipated under this contract, the provisions of this clause shall in no way be construed to limit the rights of the Government under the clause entitled 3.10.4-4

INSPECTION OF SERVICES - BOTH FIXED-PRICE & COST REIMBURSEMENT (APR 1996)

Section H - Special Contract Requirements was revised as follows.

Clause List was revised as follows.

Clause, 3.8.2-17, is incorporated as follows:

3.8.2-17 KEY PERSONNEL AND FACILITIES (MAY 1997)

(a) The personnel and/or facilities as specified below are considered essential to the work being performed hereunder and may, with the consent of the contracting parties, be changed from time to time during the course of the contract.

(b) Prior to removing, replacing, or diverting any of the specified personnel and/or facilities, the Contractor shall notify in writing, and receive consent from, the Contracting Officer reasonably in advance of the action and shall submit justification (including proposed substitutions) in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of the impact on this contract.

(c) No diversion shall be made by the Contractor without the written consent of the Contracting Officer.

(d) The key personnel and/or facilities under this contract are:

[ ] Contractor Facilities, FAA-approved Repair Station (IAW FAR Part 145)

(List key personnel and/or facilities)

(End of clause)

Section I - Contract Clauses was revised as follows.

Clause List was revised as follows.

Clause, 3.10.2-3, is incorporated by reference.

3.10.2-3 SUBCONTRACTS (TIME-AND-MATERIALS AND LABOR-HOUR CONTRACTS) (APR 1996)

Section J - List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments was revised as follows.

Attachment List was revised as follows.

Table has been revised and now reads as follows:

ATTACHMENT TITLE DATE NO. OF

PAGES

1 12,000 Hour Inspection Task Cards (Section 8.0 WORK CARDS /

DELIVERABLES) 01/11/2019 139

2 N55 ACM pictures and instructions 01/29/2019 13 3 Experience Information Form 01/29/2019 1

4 3000 LANDING INSPECTION 02/11/2019 47

5 MAJOR LANDING GEAR INSPECTION 02/11/2019 26

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award was revised as follows.

Clause List was revised as follows.

M.1 EVALUATION FOR AWARD

(a) Source Selection

(1) The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal. Award will be made to the Offeror proposing the lowest price, technically acceptable offer based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors. All Technical Evaluation Factors 1 through 4 must all obtain an “Acceptable” rating in order for the proposal to be considered for award. Award will be made to the acceptable offeror with the lowest evaluated price, which is deemed responsible and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements.

(2) Relevant past performance will be used to evaluate the responsibility of the lowest-price technically acceptable Contractor. Relevancy relates to a project of similar size, scope, and complexity. A Contractor with a record of unsatisfactory past performance will be screened out of the selection process. The Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) will be used to obtain information regarding the Contractor's past performance. The Government reserves the right to use other sources to obtain past performance information including previous FAA program and contracting personnel, other Federal agencies, state, and local government, and commerical contractors, Contractor references, and and the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS).

(3) The Government reserves the right to award without communications. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the Offeror's best terms from a price and experience standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct communications if later determined by the Contracting Officer (CO) to be necessary.

(4) The Government intends to award one (1) Firm-Fixed-Price contract to the Offeror whose proposal is the lowest price technically acceptable. However, the Government reserves the right not to award any contract at all, depending on the quality of the proposals and prices submitted and the availability of funds.

(b) Technical Documentation

FACTOR 1: Approach and Methodology

SUBFACTOR 1.1 CRITERIA: Provide Drawings: Provide Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) written confirmation from OEM with detailed capability, process, and time required to obtain all required drawings from the OEM with all applicable Supplemental Type Certificates (STC) required for work to be accomplished as listed in the

SOW.

ACCEPTABLE: An “acceptable” rating is rendered when the offerors technical proposal fully demonstrates the offeror can obtain all required drawings from OEM in accordance with the SOW.

SUBFACTOR 1.2 CRITERIA: Provide Original Equipment Manufacturer written confirmation from OEM and/or proof of alternative method, capability, process, and time required to obtain specialty tooling required as determined from the work to be accomplished as listed in the SOW. Provide a comprehensive specialty tool list along with written verification from outside resource as proof of capability and process to rent any specialty tooling required, or proof of current ownership and condition of specialty tooling. Fully describe tooling resource capability, process, and time required to obtain all tools required for work to be accomplished as listed in the SOW.

ACCEPTABLE: An “acceptable” rating is rendered when the offerors technical proposal fully demonstrates the offeror has access to or possession of ALL required specialty tooling as determined from the work to be accomplished as listed in the SOW.

FACTOR 2: Facilities-Maintenance, Repair, Overhaul

CRITERIA: The offeror must have an authorized maintenance facility(s) with the capability to provide maintenance, repair, overhaul, Non Destructive Testing (NDT) (to include x-ray, ultrasonic, fluorescent penetrant, and Eddy-Current), and back shop capabilities which complies with Part 145 of the Federal Aviation Regulation appropriate for the subject work requirements in accordance with the technical specifications.

ACCEPTABLE: The standard is met when the offeror provides a current and valid FAA Repair Station Certificate issued under Part 145 of the Federal Aviation Regulations, with appropriate ratings and NDT/back shop capabilities (to include x-ray, ultrasonic, fluorescent penetrant, and Eddy-Current) for the work to be performed.

FACTOR 3: Experience

CRITERIA: The offeror must demonstrate their experience in providing like or similar maintenance, repair, and overhaul as a certified FAA Repair Station under Part 145 in accordance with the SOW. A minimum of two (2) customer references are required to verify experience in maintenance, repair, and overhaul for like or similar work.

Customer information must include Contract Number and Customer Name; Aircraft type and work accomplished;

List of services provided by Non Destructive Testing (NDT) shop, Service Rendered and Dollar Value; Contract Specialist or Program Manager Name, Title, Telephone No., & Email.

ACCEPTABLE: An “acceptable” rating is rendered when the offerors technical proposal information fully demonstrates experience in providing like or similar maintenance, repair, and overhaul activities, within the last three (3) years (from the proposal due date), as a certified FAA Repair Station under Part 145 in accordance with the SOW.

The offeror shall use the "Experience Information" form, attached to the SIR (Section J), in response to this factor. All blocks must be filled in and all data should be accurate, current, and complete. If any of the information required is not included in the form then the Offeror will be considered non-responsive and evaluated as not acceptable. All projects submitted must have been underway or completed within the last 3 years through the closing date identified on the SIR. If the Offeror does not have prior prime contracts to cite, then the Offeror may cite instances on which it has served as a primary subcontractor.

Failure to demonstrate the minimally acceptability standards under this factor will result in an "NOT ACCEPTABLE" rating and possible elimination from further consideration for contract award. Offerors with no experience information will receive an “NOT ACCEPTABLE” rating for this factor.

FACTOR 4: Scheduling

CRITERIA: The offeror must demonstrate their ability to meet the required performance schedule of 45 calendar days after aircraft induction in accordance with the SOW.

ACCEPTABLE: The standard is met when the offeror’s submitted workload information (i.e. total number of on-going projects, percentage of completion, etc.), organization breakdown of trained, experienced and certified technical staff dedicated to this contact effort, teaming and subcontracting information, and examples of completed projects accompanied with timetables associated with their completion, indicate that the can accomplish the subject work requirement within the prescribed performance schedule.

M.2 SCORING

All vendors will receive an Acceptable or Not acceptable rating according to quality of their submission. All vendors will be rated according to the rating scheme outlined in this section. Each evaluator will use the following criteria to measure and score each proposal. Scoring will reflect the extent to which the vendor has met the overall factor requirements. Upon completion of the evaluation of each factor by a member of the evaluation team, the lead technical evaluator will summarize the proposals in a manner that determines which proposals are acceptable and which are not acceptable to support. Evaluation factors will be scored as outlined below to which the Offeror has met the overall factor requirements.

Rating Description Acceptable The proposal meets all the minimum mandatory requirements in the solicitation identified as technical evaluation factors. Only those proposals determined acceptable, either initially or as a result of communications, will be considered for award. Once deemed technically acceptable, all technical proposals are considered to be equal.

Not acceptable

Fails to meet all the minimum mandatory requirements in the solicitation identified as technical evaluation factors. Proposals with a “not acceptable” rating will not be considered for award.

M3. EVALUATION OF PRICE

(a) An evaluation of the price proposals submitted by those offerors that received an "ACCEPTABLE" rating in the technical evaluation will be accomplished. All CLINS, including the provided Over & Above (O&A) Not to Exceed (NTE) amounts, will be totaled to derive the final proposal cost. It is anticipated that the lowest evaluated price will be determined fair and reasonable based on adequate competition.(b) Proposals which are unreasonably low may be eliminated from further competition on the grounds of the offeror's failure to understand contract requirements.

(c) Award will be made to the technically acceptable offeror offering the lowest evaluated price.

M.4 CORRECTION OF POTENTIAL OF PROPOSALS

The Government will consider throughout the evaluation, the "correction potential" of any proposal aspect evaluated as " not acceptable." The judgment of such "correction potential" is within the sole discretion of the Government. If an aspect of an Offeror's proposal not meeting the Government's requirements is not considered correctable or if the amount of corrections needed to meet the Government requirement is impractical, the Offeror may be eliminated from the competition.

M.5 REJECTION OF UNREASONABLE OFFERS

The Government may reject any proposal that is evaluated to be unreasonable in terms of program commitments, to include failure to adequately address a significant portion of the requirements, contract terms and conditions, or unreasonable pricing when compared to Government estimates, such that the proposal is deemed to reflect an inherent lack of competence or failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the program.

M.6 ELIMINATION OF COMPETITION

During the evaluation process, the SSO may determine to eliminate one or more Offerors from the competition. This determination can be based on any single evaluation factor or a combination of factors. An Offeror may be eliminated from competition following initial proposal evaluation, after communications (if necessary), or prior to submission of any proposal revisions. Offerors eliminated from the competition may request a post-award debriefing in accordance with AMS 3.2.2.3.1.4.

M.7 COST/PRICE

Offerors may provide supporting pricing documentation that supports fair and reasonable, balanced pricing. A fair and reasonable price represents a price consistent with how a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business. Normally, a fair and reasonable price is established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through price analysis techniques as described in AMS Toolbox T3.2.3.A.1C.

Offerors are cautioned that unrealistic prices may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from the competition based upon an apparent lack of understanding of the requirement. A price realism analysis may be performed, at the Contracting Officer's discretion, to determine whether an offeror's proposed pricing is too low or indicates a misunderstanding of the agency's requirements.

Offerors are cautioned to propose pricing for all Contract Line Items (CLIN) as omission of any required pricing information constitutes incomplete pricing and therefore, a non-responsive proposal.

Offeror's proposals will be reviewed for unbalanced pricing. An offer is mathematically unbalanced if it is based on prices which are significantly less than the cost of some contract line items and significantly overstated in relation to cost for others. An offer is materially unbalanced if it is mathematically unbalanced and if there is reasonable doubt that the offer would result in the lowest overall cost to the Government (even through it may be the lowest evaluated offer); or the offer is so grossly unbalanced that its acceptance would be tantamount to allowing an advance payment. Offers that are materially unbalanced may be rejected. Price and/or cost analysis techniques will be used in determining whether offers are materially unbalanced.

In accordance with AMS 3.2.3.2, cost or pricing data may be required to support fair and reasonable pricing.

Therefore, the AMS does not preclude the requirement for obtaining cost or pricing data under certain circumstances and the Government reserves the right to obtain such data, at the Contracting Officer's discretion.

The remainder of this page has been intentionally left blank.