Attachment 4 Section L and M SP470226R0001.pdf

SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO

OFFERORS

DOCUMENTATION OF TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY. Proposals received in response to this solicitation will be evaluated in accordance with procedures outlined in Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 15.101-2 for the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Offer.

The following significant Evaluation Factors will be used as the basis for determining Technical Acceptability: Technical Approach; Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing; and Past Performance.

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL APPROACH

The offeror shall submit the following regarding its’ technical approach with its’ offer:

1. Trainers shall be qualified to instruct employees about the subject matter that is being presented in training. Such trainers shall have satisfactorily completed a training program for teaching the subjects they are expected to teach, or they shall have the academic credentials and instructional experience necessary for teaching the subjects. Instructors shall demonstrate competent instructional skills and knowledge of the applicable subject matter and demonstrate how it meets the requirements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Minimum of 1 page but no more than a maximum of 5 pages, Times New Roman font, 12 pitch, and single spaced. Additional pages may be considered.

2. The Contractor and key individuals indicated for this requirement must have demonstrated instructor experience.

3. The Contractor shall submit resumes for each instructor that demonstrates their competence and qualifications to provide the instructions outlined in the PWS.

FACTOR 2. TECHNICAL QUALIFICATIONS OF PROPOSED STAFFING.

The Offeror shall submit the following information regarding the technical qualifications of the proposed project staff with its offer:

1. PROGRAM MANAGER (PM)

Provide the resume of the PM. The minimum requirements for the PM:

a. Bachelor’s Degree preferred

b. 5 years of experience in Confined Space Entry Training.

2. KEY CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL

a. Resumes, as submitted with your technical proposal, shall list key personnel that will be utilized during the performance of this contract. In the event any of your key personnel change over the duration of this contract, please notify the COR, within three (3) business days upon your awareness of such change, as changes to key personnel, must be approved by the DLA Energy COR.

b. The contractor shall make no substitution of key personnel unless the substitution is necessary due to illness, death, or termination of employment.

The contractor shall notify the COR within three (3) business days after the occurrence of any of these events. The contractor must provide a detailed explanation of the circumstances necessitating the proposed substitutions, provide complete resumes for the proposed substitutes, and provide any additional information requested by the COR. Proposed substitutes shall have comparable qualifications to those of the person(s) being replaced.

The COR through the Contracting Officer (CO) will notify the contractor of the acceptability of the substitutes within three (3) business days after receipt of all required information.

c. If the CO determines that (1) suitable and timely replacement of key personnel who have been reassigned, terminated or have otherwise become unavailable for the task order work is not reasonably forthcoming , or (2) the resultant substitution would be so substantial to impair the successful completion of the contract or delivery order , the CO may (1) terminate the contract or delivery order for default or for convenience of the Government and re-procure the services, as appropriate, or (2) at his/her discretion, if he finds the contractor at fault for the condition, equitable adjustment the contract price downward to compensate the Government for any resultant delay, loss, or damage.

FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE

Past performance will be initially evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s present/past performance is recent, and relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. Second, the past performance evaluation will determine how well the offeror performed on the prior contracts. To be Technically Acceptable, the offer must meet all of the following requirements.

The Contractor shall submit with its offer at least three (3) previously awarded and completed contracts of similar size and scope that are deemed to meet recency, relevancy and quality requirements. For this acquisition, recency refers to contracts awarded and completed within the last three (3) years as of the closing date of the solicitation. Relevancy refers to contracts of similar size and scope to this acquisition as described in the PWS. Quality refers to contracts that were satisfactorily completed within their designated periods of performance. All submissions shall include the following information:

(1) The date of each contract award, and the contract award amount in dollars;

(2) The date of completion of each contract, and the final contract amount, in dollars;

(3) A brief description of each contract scope of work; and

(4) Identification of at least one recent point-of-contact (POC) at the organization that awarded each submitted contract, to include POC’s name, e-mail address and telephone number.

FACTOR 4: PRICE

Pricing for all five contract years for both in-person and virtual must be provided. This is the cost for the training only. The travel CLIN (0002) will not be priced as it must follow the Joint Travel Regulations.

BASIS OF AWARD

The Government will make the award based on the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-cost factors. Note that offers that are not technically acceptable cannot be selected, regardless of price.

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. Basis for Award and Summary of Evaluation Factors and Subfactors:

Lowest Priced: Proposals not technically acceptable will be removed from consideration and award will be made to the lowest priced, technically acceptable, responsible contractor. A price analysis will be used to determine the total evaluated price to support the selection of the lowest priced, technically acceptable offeror(s). Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through cost and price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404

a) This evaluation is following the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Source Selection Process (see FAR 15.101-2).

b) The evaluation factors for this solicitation are Technical Capability, Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing, Past Performance, and Price. All non-price evaluation factors must be acceptable to be considered for award.

c) Proposals will first be evaluated on the basis of technical acceptability, which will be determined by evaluating the non-price evaluation factors of Technical Capability, Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing, and Past Performance. These factors address the contractor’s capability and provide evidence that they can perform the requirements described in the PWS.

d) Past Performance information will be provided by the Contractors to show their history of successfully accomplishing PWS tasks and to determine the quality of their relevant past performance. Assessment for this area will be subjective based on consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances. Evaluation will investigate information furnished by the contractor to ensure they have consistently demonstrated a commitment to administration, customer satisfaction, timely delivery, and quality goods and services in prior contracts of similar scope and complexity. This is a matter of judgment and will be a subjective assessment based on investigative findings.

e) All price proposals will be initially evaluated for the criteria specified below. If a determination is made that discussions are required, then offerors retained in the competitive range will have price included in discussions if necessary. After discussions are completed and revised proposals have been evaluated, only the proposals found to be technically acceptable will be further evaluated for award. This means a proposal is “acceptable” for all factors.

f) Contract Award will be made to the responsible vendor that offers the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal.

The evaluation factors are Technical Capability, Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing, Past Performance, and Price. A detailed explanation is listed for each factor below. The proposal must address the following areas:

(1) Factor 1 – Technical Capability

(2) Factor 2 – Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing

(3) Factor 3 – Past Performance

(4) Factor 4 -- Price

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

Technical Capability factor will be evaluated in accordance with the following table:

In order to be technically acceptable, Contractor proposals shall demonstrate that they will meet all requirements of the PWS by providing a written performance plan stating how the objectives in PWS sections C1.2 , C3.1.1, C3.2.1, C3.2.2, will be met. Additionally, the contractor shall demonstrate how the instructors will meet the requirements contained in the PWS.

FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL QUALIFICATIONS OF PROPOSED STAFFING

To be Technically Acceptable, the Contractor shall submit the following with its offer:

Resumes of the Project Manager (PM).

a. A Bachelor’s Degree preferred

b. 5 Years of experience in training environment.

Resume of the Trainers. Minimum requirements.

a. Five years of specialized experience in Confined Space Entry Training.

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Contractor proposal clearly shows that the minimum technical requirements of the solicitation will be met Unacceptable Contractor proposal does not clearly show that the minimum technical requirements of the solicitation will be met

b. Demonstrated ability to conduct training sessions from remote locations online and utilize other technology venues.

c. Three years of instructional design and delivery of live and web-based mentor training.

d. Bachelor’s Degree preferred or equivalent in education, business administration, communication or related field.

Qualifications:

The curriculum provided shall be in accordance with the regulatory guidance and training requirements set forth in Title 29 Code of Federal Regulations and relevant industry standards.

The Contractor shall deliver a curriculum that provides the DLA Energy student with the requisite knowledge to perform their duties safely as they relate to Confined Spaces. The training must cover Confined Space Training for both shore-based facilities and aboard barges and tankers (maritime).

• Overview of OSHA's permit-required confined space entry standards

• Definitions of key confined space terms

• Health and safety hazards associated with confined space work

• Confined Space training for maritime vessels

• Identifying which confined spaces are permit-required

• Types of Confined Spaces

• OSHA requirements for reclassification of permit spaces to non-permit

• OSHA's alternate entry procedures for select permit-required confined spaces

• Signage requirements

• Elements of a written confined space entry program

• The entry permit. Both land-based and shipboard entry

• Duties of entrants, attendants and entry supervisors

• Confined rescue requirements

• Personal protective equipment requirements and use

• Identifying and measuring atmospheric hazards

• Ventilation techniques. Gas free procedures and Marine Chemist

“Safe Entry” posting requirements

• Interpreting gas free entry certificates established by Marine Chemists or other competent authority

• Explanation of monitoring for Benzene vice the differences between other gasses to be monitored in confined spaces including Oxygen, CO, LEL & H2S.

• Hands on exercise in measuring atmospheric hazards using a gas detection meter Current DLA Energy Confined Space Standard Operating Plan (SOP) requirements If any of the submitted individuals will perform more than one of the listed functions, this is acceptable as long as the submitted documentation identifies any and all functions the given individual will be performing.

Technical Qualifications of Proposed Staffing will be rated on an “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” basis using the ratings and descriptions outlined below:

FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE ACCEPTABILITY:

Past Performance Acceptability, will be rated in accordance with the following table:

Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note below)

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

The contractor shall identify its past performance information as requested in the solicitation. In rating the past performance, the following will be considered:

NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum past performance requirements for this solicitation.

The first aspect is to evaluate the recency of the Offeror’s past performance and whether it is relevant to the effort to be acquired. To be deemed recent, the effort must be currently ongoing or have completed within the last five (5) years from the solicitation issuance date.

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation Unacceptable Proposal clearly does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation

Relevancy will be evaluated to determine whether the Offeror’s vendor’s past performance is relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. The vendor shall identify its past performance information as requested herein. The second aspect is to determine how well the Offeror performed on past contracts.

The past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the Offeror performed those past contracts and includes history of successful completion of projects; history of producing high-quality reports and deliverables; commitment to customer satisfaction and history of staying on schedule and within budget. Past Performance information may be obtained from Past Performance Questionnaires, Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS), Contractor Performance / Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or other sources available to the Government.

NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

FACTOR 4: PRICE

Pricing will be evaluated by taking the total training cost for all 5 contract years and adding them together for a total training cost (Years, 1, 3 and 5: 3 classes, and Years 2, and 4: 10 classes) for either the in-person courses or virtual courses (whichever 5-year total is higher). On the current pricing spreadsheet Total In-Person 5 year Total in cell F7, will be compared to Total Virtual 5 Year total in cell I7, and whichever is higher becomes the evaluated price.