70FA2018R00000010_Amendment_0003.pdf

(x)

70FA2018R00000010

x x copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted ; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. 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.

x

EMMITSBURG MD 21727

16825 SOUTH SETON AVENUE

NETC

BUILDING D - ACQUISITION

ACQUISITION PREPAREDNESS SECTION

DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY FEMA

NETC

07/30/20180003

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) is not extended.is extended, Items 8 and 15, and returning

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

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

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

FACILITY CODE CODE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

CODE

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

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

PAGE OF PAGES

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.3. EFFECTIVE DATE2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

06/22/2018

CHECK ONE 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 AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return __________________ copies to the issuing office.

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

Amendment 0003 updates Sections L and M of the solicitation in regards to Experience and

Past Performance. See the attached changes.

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

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 16C. DATE SIGNED

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

Gary Topper

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

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 .

Section L.3.B., Sections 5 and 6 is replaced with the following:

Section 5 – Experience (Volume 1)

The offeror shall describe its recent and relevant experience. Offerors shall submit at least three (3) but no more than five (5) examples of experience. Contractors shall provide the information listed below for prime contracts under which it performed relevant work similar in size, scope, and complexity to the subject requirement. [Size – contract dollar value and project duration. Scope – work that is same or similar to that identified in the PWS. Complexity – consideration of performance challenges or complicated tasks and processes.] This information may include the relative experience of predecessor company (resulting from mergers and acquisitions), major subcontractor(s) (defined as a subcontract with a total value greater than $750,000 over the life of the contract), Contractor Team Arrangement/Joint

Venture (FAR 9.6), or an offeror's parent or affiliated companies (where the offeror's proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliated company will affect the performance of the offeror).

A. Contracting Agency (Company), address and phone number.

B. Contract number and type of contract for work completed in last 5 years or currently in progress

C. Date of contract, period of performance (duration), and place of performance.

D. Address and phone number of contracting and technical officers.

E. Size of contract (average number full time full time equivalents provided per year) and dollar value.

F. Brief description of contract work and responsibilities.

G. Indicate relevance of each project to the immediate one. It is not sufficient to merely state that a project is similar in size, scope, and complexity. Rationale shall be provided to the Government that a project is indeed relevant.

Experience that cannot be verified may not be considered. Past and present customers may be randomly selected out of each offeror's proposal to verify experience. The point of contact for each of these customers may then be contacted by the source selection team and asked a standard set of predetermined questions regarding the offeror's experience. Contact with customers must be documented.

Section 6 - Past Performance (Volume 1)

The offerors shall submit at least three (3) but not more than five (5) past performance summaries. The offeror shall consider the following:

• Past performance summaries are for contractual work completed in the last five years or currently in process, which are of similar size, scope, and complexity.

• If the offeror has no similar corporate or organizational past performance, the offeror may substitute past performance of a predecessor company (resulting from mergers and acquisitions); major subcontractor(s) (defined as a subcontract with a total value greater than $750,000 over the life of the contract); Contractor Team Arrangement/Joint Venture (FAR 9.6); or an offeror's parent or affiliated companies (where the offeror's proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliated company will affect the performance of the offeror); or key personnel with relative past performance. If using past performance of key personnel, while they were employed for another company, it should be for the same key personnel role being proposed for this requirement and also verifiable.

• The offeror has provided a list of any contracts terminated for convenience or terminated for default within the last three years.

• Contracts listed include those entered into by the Federal Government, agencies of State and local governments, and commercial customers.

The Government will not restrict its consideration of the quality of past performance to the information provided by the offeror and, when evaluating past performance, the Government may consider any additional information available, such as the information available in Past Performance Information

Retrieval System (PPIRS). Proposed past performance that cannot be verified may not be considered.

Past and present customers may be randomly selected out of each offeror's proposal. The point of contact for each of these customers may then be contacted by the source selection team and asked a standard set of predetermined questions regarding the offeror's performance. Contact with past performance references must be documented. Offerors with no similar past performance will be rated “neutral” for past performance only.

Evaluation of past performance will be a subjective assessment based on consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances. It will not be based on absolute standards of acceptable performance. The

Government is seeking to determine whether the offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to customer satisfaction and timely delivery of services at fair and reasonable prices.

Section M.4 Proposal Evaluation Criteria, Factors 5 and 6 is replaced with the following:

Factor 5 - Experience

The technical evaluation will consider the merits of the offeror’s recent and relevant experience.

Consideration will be given to the information listed below for prime contracts under which it performed relevant work similar in size, scope, and complexity to the subject requirement. [Size – contract dollar value and project duration. Scope – work that is same or similar to that identified in the PWS. Complexity

– consideration of performance challenges or complicated tasks and processes.] This information may include the relative experience of predecessor company (resulting from mergers and acquisitions), major subcontractor(s) (defined as a subcontract with a total value greater than $750,000 over the life of the contract), Contractor Team Arrangement/Joint Venture (FAR 9.6), or an offeror's parent or affiliated companies (where the offeror's proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliated company will affect the performance of the offeror).

A. Contracting Agency (Company), address and phone number.

B. Contract number and type of contract for work completed in last 5 years or currently in progress

C. Date of contract, period of performance (duration), and place of performance.

D. Address and phone number of contracting and technical officers.

E. Size of contract (average number full time full time equivalents provided per year) and dollar value.

F. Brief description of contract work and responsibilities.

G. Indicate relevance of each project to the immediate one. It is not sufficient to merely state that a project is similar in size, scope, and complexity. Rationale shall be provided to the Government that a project is indeed relevant.

Experience that cannot be verified may not be considered. Past and present customers may be randomly selected out of each offeror's proposal to verify experience. The point of contact for each of these customers may then be contacted by the source selection team and asked a standard set of predetermined questions regarding the offeror's experience. Contact with customers must be documented.

Factor 6 - Past Performance

Past performance is how well the offeror has performed on previous projects and the technical evaluation will consider the merits of the offeror’s past performance. The following will be considered:

• Past performance summaries are for contractual work completed in the last five years or currently in process, which are of similar size, scope, and complexity.

• If the offeror has no similar corporate or organizational past performance, the offeror may substitute past performance of a predecessor company (resulting from mergers and acquisitions); major subcontractor(s) (defined as a subcontract with a total value greater than $750,000 over the life of the contract); Contractor Team Arrangement/Joint Venture (FAR 9.6); an offeror's parent or affiliated companies (where the offeror's proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliated company will affect the performance of the offeror); or key personnel with relative past performance. If using past performance of key personnel, while they were employed for another company, it should be for the same key personnel role being proposed for this requirement and also verifiable.

• The offeror has provided a list of any contracts terminated for convenience or terminated for default within the last three years.

• Contracts listed include those entered into by the Federal Government, agencies of State and local governments, and commercial customers.

The Government will not restrict its consideration of the quality of past performance to the information provided by the offeror and, when evaluating past performance, the Government may consider any additional information available, such as the information available in Past Performance Information

Retrieval System (PPIRS). Proposed past performance that cannot be verified may not be considered.

Past and present customers may be randomly selected out of each offeror's proposal. The point of contact for each of these customers may then be contacted by the source selection team and asked a standard set of predetermined questions regarding the offeror's performance. Contact with past performance references must be documented. Offerors with no similar past performance will be rated “neutral” for past performance only.

Evaluation of past performance will be a subjective assessment based on consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances. It will not be based on absolute standards of acceptable performance. The

Government is seeking to determine whether the offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to customer satisfaction and timely delivery of services at fair and reasonable prices.