Attachment 4 - Addenda to FAR 52.212-1 and 52.212-2.pdf

ADDENDA TO PROVISIONS FAR 52.212-1& FAR 52.212-2

Special Tactics Training Squadron (STTS) Instructor Services, FA44172QA065

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL

ITEMS (JUN 2020)

Electronic submission of quotes is required. All proposals and related documents will be submitted via e-mail to the 1st Special Operations Contracting Squadron, unless otherwise noted. The e-mail must arrive at the designated time specified in the solicitation to be considered responsive, and considered in the evaluation process.

1. Quotations shall contain the following information. Failure to meet a requirement may result in a quoter being ineligible for award:

RFQ Number;

Time Specified for Receipt of Quotations;

Name, Address, and Telephone Number of Quoter;

Name and Email address of Representative authorized to discuss quote;

Any Discount Terms;

Acknowledgement of all Solicitation Amendments (if applicable);

A completed copy of the representations and certifications at FAR 52.212-3

(see FAR 52.212-3(b) for those representations and certifications that the quoter shall complete electronically)

A completed copy of the representation at FAR 52.204-24. Refer to Attachment 5 for more information.

The vendor agrees to hold the prices in its quote firm for 60 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of quotes.

Note: .zip files are not an acceptable format for the Air Force Network and will not go through our email system

2. Quotations shall also include the following required documentation:

2.1. Price Submission: Quoted prices must be submitted using the Pricing List in Attachment 7.

Quoters shall insert unit prices in the attached pricing schedule, rounded to the nearest cent (for example 1.02 not $1.0231). Quoters rejecting the terms and conditions may be excluded from consideration. Note: Department of Labor (DOL) Wage Determination 2015- 4531, Rev. 13, dated 1 May 2020 at Attachment 2 and the estimated workload stated in the Performance Work Statement.

2.2. Technical Submission: The entire Technical Submission is limited to 20 pages. Quoter must provide the following technical documentation with their quote:

2.2.1. Subfactor 1 - Management Plan: Quoters shall submit a Management Plan that clearly demonstrates quoter’s understanding of the requirements of the Performance Work Statement

(PWS).

The Management Plan shall identify key personnel such as the contract manager and alternate contract manager(s).

The Management Plan shall also identify the number and labor category of personnel proposed, and a narrative description for each duty title.

The Management Plan shall detail how the quoter intends to recruit, retain, and replace sufficient personnel who have the knowledge, experience, and skills to perform PJ and SR Instructor services as required in the PWS.

The Management Plan shall identify how the quoter intends to continue uninterrupted services during personnel absences, such as sickness, vacations, etc.

without any degradation in services provided.

The Management Plan shall include the submission of DD Form 254 with valid and active Facility Clearance with at least a Secret clearance.

2.2.2. Subfactor 2 - Quality Control Plan. Quoter shall submit a Quality Control Plan that clearly demonstrates quoter’s understanding of the requirements of the PWS.

The Quality Control Plan shall outlines the quoter’s management structure; to include personnel authority and responsibility, quality policy, quality objectives and related documents needed to ensure effective planning, operation, and control of your processes.

The Quality Control Plan shall describe how you will notify the Government of issues affecting contract performance, contract impact, and proposed mitigation.

2.3. Past Performance Submission. The entire Past Performance Submission is limited to 20 pages. Quoter shall provide a list of no more than three (3) recent and relevant contracts performed for Federal agencies or commercial customers as a prime contractor that demonstrates the ability to successfully perform the scope and breadth of the requirements as described in the PWS for this solicitation. Recency and Relevancy is defined in Addendum to FAR 52.212-2. Any past performance references in excess of the first three submitted will not be evaluated. Submit the following information for each contract submitted for past performance evaluation or Attachment 6:

Company/Division name;

CAGE Code/DUNS Number;

Program Title;

Contracting Agency/Customer;

Contract Type;

Contract Number;

Contract Dollar Value;

Period of Performance;

Description of Effort (Prime, Joint Venture, Subcontractor, etc) Description of service provided under this contract.

Explanation of how the scope of the referenced contract is relevant in accordance with the relevancy definitions in Addendum to FAR 52.212-2.

Verified, up-to-date name, address, e-mail address, telephone number of the

Government evaluator, contracting officer or customer POC responsible for procuring your services;

2.4. Quoters are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical submission requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors; failure to meet a requirement of the solicitation may be excluded from consideration. Quoters must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale; and documents submitted in response to this solicitation must be fully responsive to and consistent with requirements of this solicitation, Government standards and regulations, this document.

(End of Addendum)

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2 - EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

1. Pursuant to FAR 12.602 contract award will be made using Simplified Acquisition Procedures in accordance with FAR 13.106. The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible quoter whose quote conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. Award shall be based on best value to the government.

2. The Government may award without interchanges; however, the Government reserves the right to conduct interchanges if deemed in the Government’s best interest.

3. Quoters submissions will be evaluated based upon the Evaluation below.

3.1 Evaluation Process:

3.1.1. STEP ONE: Evaluate all quotations for responsiveness defined as meeting the submission requirements in Addendum to 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items.

3.1.2. STEP TWO: Rank all responsive quotations based upon quoter's Total Evaluated Price (TEP) in ascending order from lowest price to highest price.

3.1.3. STEP THREE: The lowest priced responsive quote shall be evaluated for technical acceptability. In the event that the first evaluated quote does not yield a quote with an acceptable technical rating, the evaluation process will continue to the next lowest priced responsive quote until a technically acceptable quote is identified. If a quote is technically acceptable, move to step four. If the lowest price quote is not found to be technically acceptable, continue evaluating technical acceptability until a technically acceptable quote is found.

3.1.4. STEP FOUR: Evaluate lowest, technically acceptable quoter’s past performance. If past performance is acceptable, move to step five. If the lowest priced technically acceptable quoter is not judged to have an acceptable past performance, the next lowest priced technically acceptable quoter will be evaluated and the process will continue in order of price until a technically acceptable quoter is judged to have an acceptable past performance rating or until all technically acceptable quotes are evaluated.

3.1.5. STEP FIVE: Pursuant to FAR 12.602 contract award will be made using Simplified Acquisition Procedures in accordance with FAR 13.106. The government shall make a best value decision based on the Evaluation Criteria below to the responsible quoter whose quote conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

3.2. Evaluation Criteria:

3.2.1. PRICE. Price proposals conforming to all requirements of this solicitation will be listed based on the Total Evaluated Price (TEP).

Total Evaluated Price = (Total Evaluated Price for Base Period) + (Total Evaluated Price for Option Period 1) + (Total Evaluated Price for Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8):

Quantities identified will be multiplied by the unit price to confirm the extended price and then the extended price for all CLINS will be added together for a total for that specific period. Unit prices shall be used in the event that extended prices are calculated incorrectly.

Total Evaluated Price for Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8: Quoters shall not submit pricing for the Option to Extend Services CLINS. The Government will calculate the Total Evaluated Price for Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8 by multiplying a quantity of 6 months by the unit prices proposed for CLIN 1001. The prices are evaluated in the Total Evaluated Price for evaluation purposes only. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the government to exercise option(s). The Option to Extend Services is only not considered part of the contract period of performance until the clause is exercised and resultantly these totals will not be included in the contract value until the clause is exercised.

3.2.2. TECHNICAL: Evaluation of technical factors will consider the quoter's ability to perform the duties as outlined in the PWS. Quoters will be evaluated as either Acceptable or Unacceptable for Technical Factors. Quotes shall not simply rephrase or restate the PWS or contain general statements such the technical portion of the quoter meets solicitation requirements. Quoters shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of the quoter’s experience. The Government will base its evaluation on the information presented in the quote.

3.2.2.1. In order to be technically acceptable, the quote must meet all the following criteria:

Sub factor 1: Management Plan Sub factor 2: Quality Control Plan

3.2.2.2. The quote shall be evaluated to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable, using the ratings and descriptions outlined in the table below. One technical rating will be assigned to each technical sub factor. In order to be considered awardable, there must be an “acceptable” rating in every sub factor.

Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Quote meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Quote does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

3.2.2.3. Subfactor 1 - The Management Plan will be rated acceptable if it demonstrates a reasonable approach to managing the contract in regards to:

Identification of key personnel;

Identification of the number and labor category of personnel proposed, and a narrative description for each duty title;

How to recruit, retain, and replace sufficient personnel who have the knowledge, experience, and skills to perform Instructor services as required in the PWS;

How to continue uninterrupted services during personnel absences without any degradation in services provided;

Identification of valid and active Facility Clearance with at least a Secret Clearance.

3.2.2.4. Subfactor 2 - The Quality Control Plan will be rated acceptable if it demonstrates a reasonable approach to successfully comply with the PWS and at a minimum address:

Outlines the quoter’s management structure; to include personnel authority and responsibility, quality policy, quality objectives and related documents needed to ensure effective planning, operation, and control of your processes.

How you will notify the Government of issues affecting contract performance, contract impact, and proposed mitigation.

3.2.3. PAST PERFORMANCE: The Government will evaluate the recency, relevancy and quality of the quoters’ provided past performance information, and other past performance information data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources to include, but not limited to: Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS);

Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS); Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and other databases.

3.2.3.1. Past Performance will first be evaluated for recency; all performance prior to three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation or not yet performed on the date of issuance of this solicitation will not be evaluated;

3.2.3.2. Past Performance will then be evaluated for relevancy and rated as relevant, or not relevant; according to the table below.

RELEVANT. Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires;

Scope: Contractor has recruited and maintained as necessary at least two combat related subject matter expert instructors with security clearance of at least Secret.

Magnitude: Contractor has maintained instructors for at least two years with minimal turnover.

Complexities: Providing instructors with multiple combat related training.

NOT RELEVANT. Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Table: Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method Adjectival Rating Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude effort and complexities this solicitation requires Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little, less than or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires

3.2.3.3. Past Performance will finally be evaluated for quality and assigned one of the following performance assessment ratings.

Adjectival Rating

Description

Acceptable Based on the quoter's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the quoter will successfully perform the required effort, or the quoter's performance record is unknown.

Unacceptable Based on the quoter's recent/relevant performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the quoter will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown (Neutral)

In the case of a quoter without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the quoter may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

Therefore, the quoter shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

(End of Addendum)