Attachment 4 - Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award.pdf

SECTION M: EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1.0 BASIS FOR AWARD

1.1 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1.1 Award will be made to the responsible Offeror whose proposal meets all requirements of the solicitation (technically acceptable) and presents the lowest Total Evaluated Price (TEP).

1.1.2 The Government intends to award a contract without discussions (except for clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)), as permitted by FAR 15.305(a) (3) and FAR 52.215-1. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions to permit Offerors to revise proposals. Each initial offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a technical and price standpoint. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals, at his or her discretion.

1.2 EVALUATION FACTORS

The following table establishes all significant factors that will be considered in awarding the Contract:

FACTORS

Technical Capability (Factor 1) Past Performance (Factor 2) Price (Factor 3)

The source selection will be made on a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) basis, to include Past Performance. Award will be made to the lowest priced offeror that is technically acceptable.

2.0 PASS/FAIL EVALUATION

Offerors will be evaluated based on a Pass/Fail rating on the requirement listed below. Offerors must receive a Pass rating for the Pass/Fail Requirement to be eligible for award. A fail may result in no further consideration for award.

The Pass/Fail rating criteria is as follows:

2.1 WELDING CERTIFICATION PLAN

If the Offeror does not have Government approved Welding Certifications and time of proposal submittal, the Government will evaluate the Offeror’s plan to obtain the required Welding Certification qualification within six (6) months of contract award.

3.0 NON-PRICE FACTORS

The Government will evaluate offers and assign one of the adjectival ratings indicated in Section 5.0 (see below) for each of the following non-price factors:

3.1 TECHNICAL CAPABILITY – Factor 1

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of its facilities, tooling and equipment with respect to successfully manufacturing, testing, and handling the Capsule Tube Assemblies. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s technical proposal to determine it can meet the following facility requirements and capabilities as stated below:

1. If the Offeror does not have a lathe capable of supporting minimum of 3000 lbs, machining/turning a 27" Outer Diameter (OD) diameter stainless steel flange, turning 24" OD over a length of approximately 22 feet, the Government will evaluate the Offeror’s approach to meeting this requirement.

2. The Offeror will evaluate the Offeror’s approach and provided OQE that demonstrates the Offeror’s capability of handling the drawing specified tolerances.

3. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s response to determine if the Offeror is capable of performing Non-Destructive testing methods (Visual Inspection (VT) / Liquid Penetrant Inspection (PT), and Radiographic Inspection (RT) in accordance with T9074-AS-GIB-010/271.

4. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s response to developing inspection methods to accurately report true positioning, clocking, GD&T for capsule components, threaded holes, and features per drawings requirements (through CMM, FARO arms or other means).

5. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s response to straighten 24-inch API pipe to within 0.120” over 18ft.

6. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s recommended alternate tube for use in production (if applicable).

7. The Government will review the submitted photographs of the Offeror’s manufacturing facilities and equipment.

3.2 PAST PERFORMANCE – Factor 2

The past performance evaluation assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an Offeror’s ability to supply products and services that meet users’ needs, based on a demonstrated record of performance. The Government may consider past performance information contained in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) and the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). The Government may also use other information such as Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or other data available from Government sources to evaluate an Offeror’s past performance. The Government reserves the right to limit or expand the number of references it decides to contact, and contact references other than those provided by the Offeror. The Government may consider past performance information obtained from sources other than those identified by the Offeror, including Federal, State, and local Government agencies, Better Business Bureaus, published media and electronic databases. In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

4.0 PRICE – Factor 3

The Government will evaluate proposed prices by performing a price analysis in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b) procedures.

The following is an example of how price will be evaluated:

Contract line item numbers (CLINs) with a single quantity:

The Government will multiply the quantity by the unit price to derive the total line amount.

The following is an example:

CLIN SUPPLIES/SERVICES QTY UNIT U/PRICE AMOUNT

0001 Capsule Tube Assembly 25 EA $1,000.00 $25,000.00

The total line item amount for CLIN 0001 is $25,000.00.

TOTAL EVALUATED PRICE:

The Government will add up all CLIN amounts to arrive at the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) for the contract.

In evaluating offers, the Contracting Officer will review the prices submitted in the Offeror's proposal to determine that they are fair and reasonable. See FAR 15.404.

* The above prices are examples only and do not obligate the Government to purchase these quantities.

Offerors shall completely fill in the Section B - CLIN Structure Attachment, including First Article CLINs. If a First Article waiver is granted, the Offeror will be evaluated on the total sum of the CLINs without First Article. If a waiver is not granted, the Offeror will be evaluated on the total sum of the CLINs including First Article.

5.0 ADJECTIVAL RATINGS

The Government will perform an evaluation of the non-price evaluation factors based on the Offeror’s proposal.

This evaluation will result in the assignment of an adjectival rating of acceptable or unacceptable for each factor.

Price will not be assigned an adjectival rating.

5.1 Technical Rating

The following will be used for the Factor 1 Technical Capability evaluation.

Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus is unawardable.

5.2 Past Performance Rating

5.2 Past Performance Ratings

The past performance evaluation is an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the Offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertains to the products and/or services outlined in the solicitation requirements.

The Government will initially evaluate whether the Offeror’s past performance is recent, and relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired, using the table below.

Rating Description Relevant Present/Past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant

Present/Past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Second, the Government will conduct a past performance assessment by determining how well the Offeror performed on prior relevant contracts. Based on this evaluation, the Government will determine whether the Offeror’s relevant past performance record is Acceptable or Unacceptable, using the ratings in the table below.

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.*

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.

*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.”