Attachment M-1 Section M Provisions 06.23.2025 5 pages.pdf

89233125RNA000262

Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award

Attachment M-1

52.217-5 Evaluation of Options. (JUL 1990)

Except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the Government's best interests, the Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(End of provision)

NNS-M-1001 - EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

(a) This acquisition will be conducted pursuant to the policies and procedures in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15 and Department of Energy Acquisition Regulation (DEAR) Part 915. NNSA has established an Integrated Project Team (IPT) to evaluate the proposals submitted for this acquisition.

(b) The instructions set forth in Attachment L-1 Solicitation Instructions to Offerors are designed to provide guidance to the Offeror concerning the documentation that will be evaluated by the IPT. The Offeror must furnish adequate and specific information in its response. Simply repeating the PWS requirements or merely offering to perform the work may result in a lower evaluation or the offer being determined technically unacceptable.

(c) A proposal will be eliminated from further consideration if the proposal is so grossly and obviously deficient as to be totally unacceptable on its face. For example, a proposal will be deemed unacceptable if it does not represent a reasonable initial effort to address itself to the essential requirements of the RFP, or if it clearly demonstrates that the Offeror does not understand the requirements of the RFP. Therefore, if a proposal is determined to be technically unacceptable, no further evaluation of the proposal (technical, cost, or management) will be performed. In the event that a proposal is eliminated, a notice will be sent to the Offeror stating the reasons that the proposal will not be considered for further evaluation under this solicitation.

(d) Prior to an award, a determination shall be made by the Source Selection Authority whether any possible organizational conflict of interest exists with respect to the apparent successful Offeror or whether there is little or no likelihood that such conflict exists. In making this determination, NNSA will consider the representation required by Part IV Section K of this solicitation. An award will be made if there is no organizational conflict of interest or if any potential organizational conflict of interest can be appropriately avoided or mitigated.

(e) For the purpose of evaluating information on an Offeror's experience and past performance, NNSA will consider information on all of those companies comprising the Offeror's "Contractor team arrangement" that will perform major or critical aspects of the PWS/SOW as well as on the single legal entity submitting the offer. NNSA may contact some or all of the references provided by the Offeror, and may solicit past performance information from other available sources.

javascript:void(0)

Attachment M-1

(f) The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the Offeror's initial proposal should contain the Offeror's best terms for both a technical and cost standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. To the extent the contract officer deems it necessary pursuant to FAR 15.306(c), the Contracting Officer's determination of competitive range for proposals submitted as a result of this solicitation will consider such factors as technical evaluation/ranking of the proposal, initial cost/price proposed and other items set forth in this section. Offerors are hereby advised that only those proposals deemed to have a reasonable chance for award of a contract will be included in the competitive range. Offerors who are not included in the competitive range will be promptly notified.

(g) Exceptions or deviations to any terms and conditions alone will not render the proposal unacceptable; however, any exceptions or deviations to the terms of the solicitation may make the offer unacceptable for award without discussions. If an Offeror proposes exceptions to the terms and conditions of the contract, the Government may make an award without discussions to another Offeror that did not take exception to the terms and conditions of the solicitation.

(h) An overall rating of unsatisfactory in one evaluation criterion may result in elimination of the proposal from further consideration regardless of the rating of the other criteria or subcriteria. An overall criterion rating of unsatisfactory may result from one subcriterion within a criterion being rated unsatisfactory, or from more than one subcriterion within a criterion being rated marginal.

(End of provision)

NNS-M-1002 BASIS OF CONTRACT AWARD AND EVALUATION FACTORS

The Government intends to award one contract to the responsible Offeror whose proposal is responsive to the solicitation and is determined to be the best value to the Government.

Selection of the best value to the Government will be achieved through a process of evaluating each Offeror's proposal against the evaluation factors described below. In determining best value, the technical evaluation factors are listed in descending order of importance as follows:

Factor 1 Mission Suitability and Factor 2 Past Performance. Factors 1 and 2, when combined, are significantly more important than Factor 3 - Price. Mission Suitability is composed of two elements, Technical Approach and Staffing Approach, which are equal in importance. The Government is more concerned with obtaining a superior proposal than making an award at the lowest evaluated total price. However, the Government will not make an award at a price premium it considers disproportionate to the benefits associated with the evaluated technical superiority of one proposal over another proposal. Thus, to the extent that Offerors' proposals are evaluated as close or similar in merit, the evaluated price is more likely to be a determining factor.

Attachment M-1

EVALUATION FACTORS

Factor 1 - Mission Suitability

Mission Suitability is composed of two elements (a) Technical Approach and (b) Staffing Approach, which are equal in importance.

a. Technical Approach. The Government will evaluate the proposed Technical Approach, to assess the Offeror’s understanding of the technical requirements identified in the PWS Sections 3.0, 4.0, 8.0, and 10.0.

b. Staffing Approach. The Government will evaluate the proposed staffing approach which is composed of two sub elements, Key Personnel and a Staffing Plan. Each sub element is identified under PWS Section 2.0.

i. Key Personnel. The Government will validate the Letter of Intent submittal to ensure that it contains the required information confirming the key person’s acceptance of the position. If the Letter of Intent is missing from the proposal or does not contain the required information this will be evaluated as performance risk and will negatively impact the Offeror’s evaluation under this sub element. The Government will also evaluate and assess the degree to which the proposed Key Person’s resume demonstrates experience that is likely to result in the effective management of the technical requirements of this solicitation.

Proposals that fail to meet Key Personnel minimum qualifications may result in elimination without further consideration. .

ii. Staffing Plan. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s approach for attracting and retaining qualified personnel to meet the required staffing levels and plans for staffing flexibility to accommodate workload fluctuations, to determine the degree to which the approach and plans are likely to result in continuity and successful accomplishment of the PWS. The Government will also evaluate the proposed Staffing Plan to ensure the minimum required positions (see PWS Section 2.0) are proposed to perform the technical requirements of this solicitation. Proposals that fail to meet minimum required positions may result in elimination without further consideration.

Factor 2- Past Performance The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s recent and relevant past performance to assess the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform the contract requirements.

Attachment M-1

Relevant Past Performance: Present/past performance effort involved is similar in scope, magnitude of effort and complexities as the work required by this solicitation.

Recent Past Performance: Only contract period of performances within five years from the date of the solicitation will be considered in the past performance evaluation. If the contract is still ongoing, it must have a documented performance history. The Government will not consider performance on a newly awarded contract that has no documented performance history (in other words, projects that are less than six months under contract). In accordance with FAR 15.305, an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, will be assigned a rating of neutral.

The Government will use past performance information from Offeror’s L-6 Past Performance Project Sheet attachments and L-7 Past Performance Questionnaires received by the Government. The Government may also use information from other sources, such as information obtained from communications with listed references, data independently obtained from other government and commercial sources, such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval System, Contract Performance and Rating System (CPARS), and similar systems of other governmental departments and agencies, Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) channels, interviews with client Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and other sources known to the Government, including commercial sources.

The Government will consider past performance of a parent or affiliate provided that the Offeror has provided adequate information in the Past Performance Project Sheet to demonstrate that the affiliate’s resources will have meaningful involvement in performance of this contract.

(End of provision)

Factor 3 – Price

The Offeror’s price proposal will be evaluated but not rated and will be used in determining the best value to the Government. The Government may use any of the price analysis techniques specified in FAR 15.404-1 to determine reasonableness. In accordance with FAR Part 15.404- 1(g), the Government will analyze the proposed CLIN and annual pricing for balance and may reject an offer if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government. Significant omissions and/or errors in a price proposal may result in its elimination without further consideration. An Offeror’s price proposal will be evaluated for reasonableness and balance, as defined below:

Attachment M-1

1. Reasonableness: Price is fully justified and supported and is considered fair and reasonable under current market conditions. Reasonableness may be determined by one or more of the proposal analysis techniques identified in FAR 15.404-1(b)(2).

2. Balance: In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g), the Government will analyze the proposed CLINs and annual pricing for balance and may reject an offer if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

Total Evaluated Contract Price: The total Evaluated Contract Price is the sum of all CLINs (inclusive of the Government baselined CLINs) for all contract periods (base and all option years to include the 6-month Option to Extend Services) as identified in Attachment L-3.

The Offeror’s total proposed price will not be rated but will be used in determining the best value to the Government. The total evaluated price includes:

a. The transition period price (if applicable)

b. The total base-period price (including all Government provided ODCs/Travel amounts, if applicable)

c. All option-period prices (including all Government provided ODCs/Travel amounts, if applicable)

d. The six-month Option to Extend Services, if FAR 52.217-8 is included in the solicitation

(including all Government provided ODCs/Travel amounts, if applicable). For evaluation purposes only, the six-month Option to Extend Services (if FAR 52.217-8 is included in the solicitation) will be calculated by applying the proposed final period rates/prices to the same types of proposed labor including a proportionate amount of other direct costs, if appropriate, for an additional six-month period.

An incomplete price proposal may result in a determination of an Offeror being non-responsive to the solicitation instructions and consequently result in the removal of the Offeror from the competition.