Attachment 2 - Evaluation Factors for Award.docx

ATTACHMENT 2

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

BASIS FOR AWARD

1.0 GENERAL

This Combined Synopsis/Solicitation notice is a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SD-VOSB) Set-Aside under NAICS 327331. The Government intends to award a Single Award, Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) contract. The Government intends to award a contract to the offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government; considering price and non-price factors as described below. The Government shall evaluate each offeror’s proposal in accordance with the text herein and determine best overall value on the basis of the following evaluation factors as described below in paragraph 4.0 EVALUATION FACTORS.

2.0 OFFER

The following conditions must be met in order to be eligible for award:

(a) The proposal must comply in all material respects with the requirements of the law, regulation and conditions set forth in this solicitation and must meet all material solicitation requirements.

(b) Proposals must manifest the offeror’s assent, without exception or imposition of condition(s), to the terms and conditions of this solicitation, including attachments and documents incorporated by reference, and include material information required by the solicitation. Proposals that take exception to any of the terms and conditions of the solicitation, impose additional conditions, or omit material information required by this solicitation, will be considered unacceptable and therefore ineligible for contract award.

(c) The award decision will be based on the Government’s evaluation of each offeror’s complete proposal using the evaluation factors identified in Section 3.0 below. Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government after evaluation based on the factors described herein. Best value means the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement (FAR 2.101).

(d) Award will only be made to an offeror that has no organizational conflict of interest (OCI) as defined in FAR 9.5 or that the Government determines has provided a satisfactory mitigation plan in accordance with L-209-H009 herein. Offerors are advised that technical proposals may be evaluated without consideration of any proposed Subcontractor which is deemed to have an OCI and for which an unsatisfactory mitigation plan has been proposed. An offeror that fails to identify a potential OCI or does not submit an OCI mitigation plan with their proposal shall not be considered for award.

(e) Award will only be made to an offeror determined by the Contracting Officer to be responsible in accordance with the standards contained in FAR 9.104-1.

3.0 BASIS FOR AWARD

The evaluation of proposals submitted in response to the solicitation will be conducted utilizing the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Source Selection Procedures.

To be eligible for award, offeror shall meet the following criteria:

1) Obtain a Technical Approach proposal rating of Acceptable.

2) Obtain a Past Performance rating of Acceptable.

3) Offers a total evaluated price determined fair and reasonable by the Contracting Officer, and

4) Are determined responsible under FAR 9.104.

An unacceptable rating in any of the basis of award requirements listed above renders an offeror’s proposal not awardable.

The Government intends to award without discussions with offerors, but reserves the right to conduct discussions if they are determined to be in the best interest of the Government. Thus, offerors are encouraged to submit their most competitive proposals by the initial due date.

4.0 EVALUATION FACTORS

The purpose of the proposal evaluation is to ensure impartial and comprehensive examination of competitive proposals. Statements and representations made in the offeror’s proposal may be subject to verification by proposal evaluators. The evaluation factors are set forth below:

The proposal will be evaluated in accordance with the criteria set forth below:

ADJECTIVAL RATINGS FOR FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL APPROACH

ADJECTIVAL RATINGS FOR FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

4.1 DESCRIPTION OF EVALUATION FACTORS

4.1.1 TECHNICAL APPROACH. (FACTOR 1)

The offeror must demonstrate:

· The ability to manufacture, deliver, and install new 83 EA fixed concrete keel blocks (42” X 48” X 50”) in accordance with NAVSEA Drawing No. 845-5500948 Rev. No. B.

· The ability to install new white oak or red oak timbers (top and bottom) on the new 83 EA fixed concrete keel blocks. NOTE: There are 6 each total timbers per keel block in reference to with NAVSEA Drawing No. 845-5500948 Rev. No. B.

· The ability to remove and dispose all existing white oak timbers (top and bottom) on existing 80 EA fixed concrete keel blocks.

· The offeror’s ability to install new white oak or red oak timbers (top and bottom) on the existing 80 EA fixed concrete keel blocks. NOTE: There are 6 each total timbers per keel block.

· The ability to dispose existing 50 EA old fixed concrete keel blocks with their timbers (300 EA timbers). There are 6 each total timbers per keel block as vendor’s disposition.

· The ability to complete the Statement of Work no later than 20 May 2022.

4.1.2 PAST PERFORMANCE. (FACTOR 2)

A past performance evaluation will be conducted in accordance with FAR 13.106-2(b)(3)(ii)(C). The Government intends to utilize the Government Wide Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) for past performance evaluations as a basis for anticipating successful/unsuccessful performance on this required effort. To be considered acceptable for past performance, a search of the PPIRS must reveal no negative past performance information for the recent and relevant records. In the event there are no recent and/or relevant PPIRS records, the offeror may submit information on recent and relevant subcontracts and/or commercial contracts. If no recent and relevant contracts are available in PPIRS or submitted by the offeror, the offeror's past performance record shall be considered "unknown." In the context of acceptable or unacceptable, "unknown" past performance shall be considered "acceptable." To be considered recent, the effort must either still be in progress or have been completed within the previous three (3) years from date of this draft award notice. To be considered relevant the record should be similar in terms of complexity, scope, and magnitude. "Scope" is defined as experience in areas defined in the SOW. "Magnitude" is defined as the measure of similarity of the volume, dollar value, and/or duration of work actually performed under the offeror’s submitted contracts to the SOW. At the offeror's discretion, additional past performance information may be submitted with the quote as a supplement to PPIRS. If furnished, this submission will be evaluated in accordance with the procedures described above.

4.1.3 PRICE. (FACTOR 3)

The Government will evaluate the total proposed price of Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) 0001, 0002, 0003, and 0004 as the total evaluated price for reasonableness in accordance with FAR 13.106-3(a).

5.0 SOURCE SELECTION DECISION

The Government will make a source selection decision based on the LPTA process. Award shall be made to the offeror proposing the lowest price technically acceptable offer.