Combined Synopsis Solicitation - AFJROTC MLIPER BPA (004).pdf

GENERAL INFORMATION

The 42nd Contracting Squadron, 50 LeMay Plaza, Bldg. 804, Maxwell AFB, AL has a requirement for the establishment of multiple Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs) for the Air Force Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFJROTC) in accordance with the Statement of Work (SOW) (Attachment 1). The Government is obligated only to the extent of authorized purchases actually made under the BPA. The dollar limit for each call shall be $250,000.00 for contracting officers. For contracting officer representatives, the dollar limit for each call shall be $25,000.00.

This announcement constitutes the only notice. A written solicitation will not be issued. This requirement is issued as a Request for Proposal (RFP). The solicitation document and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect the Federal Acquisition Circular 2024-05 (effective 22 May 2024) and DPN change notice 20240729 effective 29 July 2024.

Multiple Firm Fixed Priced (FFP) BPAs will be made in accordance with the following:

NAICS Code: The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code for this acquisition is 314999, All Other Miscellaneous Textile Product Mills with a size standard of 550 employees.

This requirement will be set aside for 100% small businesses. Responsible offers will only be received and evaluated from small businesses.

Proposal (to include Price list(s)) must be received by 23 Sep 24, 1:00 p.m., CST. Please respond to this RFP by emailing response to 1LT Nathan Kercher at e-Mail: nathan.kercher.1@us.af.mil and Mr. Mark Restad at e-Mail: mark.restad.1@us.af.mil. Late price lists/quotes will be processed in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(f) “Late submission, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers.”

THE GOVERNMENT IS SOLICITING FOR “OPEN MARKET” PRICESONLY. GENERAL SERVICES

ADMINISTRATION (GSA) QUOTES WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.

LOCATION: See SOW Appendix A

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/SERVICES: All products are to be offered in accordance with (IAW) the attached SOW.

Ordering period: 30 Sep 2024 – 29 Sep 2029.

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS - COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND

COMMERCIAL SERVICES.

The following is inserted as new paragraph (m) of the provision:

(m) Proposal Preparation Instructions.

A. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors. The response shall consist of three (3) separate parts; Volume I - Technical Proposal, Volume II - Past Performance Information and Volume III - Price Proposal.

B. Specific Instructions:

1. Volume I - Technical Proposal: The offeror must demonstrate how they will satisfy the requirements mailto:nathan.kercher.1@us.af.mil mailto:mark.restad.1@us.af.mil in SOW, paragraph 2. At a minimum, the contractor must outline each of the items listed in SOW, paragraph 2 and clearly explain their ability to supply all the items. This volume is limited to five pages.

2. Volume II - Past Performance Information: Each offeror shall submit a Past Performance Volume (PPV) with its proposal that describes the offeror’s experience and capability in the completion of similar work in the past five (5) years. This volume is limited to five pages.

It is understood that a significant number of sales may have occurred through micro transactions (e.g.

individual sales through web sites). The offeror may include information such as: historical contracts (federal, state, local government or private industry for the prime contractor and significant subcontractors), historical purchase volumes, mechanism of sales (websites, order forms, direct sales, etc.) major acquisitions/sales and points of contact as applicable, customer satisfaction ratings, or any other information the offeror determines to be pertinent to the execution of this acquisition.

The exact format and content of the PPV is left to the discretion of the offeror. However, two pieces of information the offeror must include are:

a) How many of the items from paragraph 2.0 of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) have been offered for sale in the last five years.

b) Total estimated dollar value in cumulative sales of the items from paragraph 2.0 of the PWS over the last five years.

3. Volume III - Price Proposal: Complete Attachment 3 – Price List.

(End of Addendum)

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2, EVALUATION - COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL

SERVICES.

The following is inserted as new paragraph (d) of the provision:

(d) Basis for Contract Award.

A. The Government contemplates awarding multiple BPAs under this procurement. Although the Government estimates that between two (2) and five (5) BPAs may be awarded, the Government reserves the right to change this number based on the evaluation of the offers.

B. This is a competitive Performance Price Tradeoff (PPT) best value source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Parts 12 and 15; and Air Force FAR Supplement (AFFARS) Mandatory Procedure (MP) 5315.3 in which competing offerors’ combined past performance information and technical acceptability will be approximately equal to price. By submission of its offer, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors.

All technically acceptable offers will be treated equally except for their prices and performance records.

Any proposal with an unacceptable technical rating will not receive further evaluation. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined unacceptable. The evaluation process will include the following:

1. Technical Acceptability Factor: The Government will evaluate technical proposals on a pass/fail basis and assign an Acceptable or Unacceptable rating as described in Table 1 below.

Table 1 - Technical Acceptability Ratings, Defined Rating Definition

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

To be found acceptable, the offeror must have outlined each of the items listed in SOW, paragraph 2 and clearly explained their ability to supply all the items.

2. Past Performance Factor: The Government will evaluate recent and relevant performance information on all offerors based on (i) the past performance information provided by the offeror and

(ii) any data independently obtained by the Government.

a) Recent past performance information includes work performed and/or being performed for any customer within the last five (5) years from the issuance date of the solicitation.

b) The Government will assess relevancy of the entirety of past performance information and assign a rating as described in Table 2 below.

Table 2 - Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Rating Definition

Very Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this Solicitation requires. To qualify, the offeror must:

• Have offered for sale most (at least 90%) of the items from paragraph 2.0 of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) in the last five years.

• Have at least $1,000,000 in cumulative sales of the items from paragraph

2.0 of the SOW over the last five years.

Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved a similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this Solicitation requires. To qualify, the performance may fail to meet all the requirements for “Very Relevant” but meets all the following:

• Have offered for sale many (at least 70%) of the items from paragraph 2.0 of the PWS in the last five years.

• Have at least $300,000 in cumulative sales of the items from paragraph 2.0 of the SOW over the last five years.

Somewhat Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this Solicitation requires. To qualify, the performance fails to meet all the requirements for “Very Relevant” or “Relevant” performance but meets all the following:

• Have offered for sale some (at least 50%) of the items from paragraph 2.0 of the PWS in the last five years.

• Have any sales of the items from paragraph 2.0 of the SOW in the last five years.

c) The assessment will consider things such as: the offeror’s history of adhering to schedules, the administrative aspects of performance, reasonable and cooperative behavior, and commitment to customer satisfaction. When a relevant and recent performance record indicates performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the suitability and effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised). The Government may review more recent projects or performance evaluations to review the corrective actions and evaluate their effectiveness.

d) The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to assess the degree of confidence the Government has in the offeror’s ability to meet the solicitation requirements based on the offeror’s demonstrated record of performance. The Government will combine the recency, relevancy and performance evaluations of all of the efforts considered for the offeror to assign a Performance Confidence Assessment of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Neutral Confidence, Limited Confidence or No Confidence as described below in Table 3.

Table 3 - Past Performance Confidence Assessment Ratings

Rating Description

Substantial Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has an expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can reasonably be assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence

Based on the offeror’s recent and relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent and relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

3. Price Evaluation Factor: The Government will evaluate the prices submitted by each technically acceptable offeror. The Government may use any price analysis techniques contained in FAR 15.404-1 such as competition, comparison to Independent Government Estimate (IGE) and comparison to historical prices to determine price reasonableness.

C. Price Performance Trade-off: The Government will evaluate the proposals as follows:

1. The Government will evaluate all offers for technical acceptability. Any offeror with an unacceptable technical rating will be eliminated from further consideration.

Not Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude and of effort and complexities this Solicitation requires. All performance fails to meet one of the three relevancy ratings: “Very Relevant”, “Relevant” or “Somewhat Relevant”.

2. The Government will assign a past performance confidence rating for all technically acceptable offerors.

3. The Government will make an integrated assessment, best value award decision based on the past performance confidence rating and price. The Government contemplates the award of multiple BPAs based on this assessment.

4. The Government intends to award BPAs without discussions with respective offerors; however, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

(End of Addendum)

List of Attachments:

1. Attachment 1 – Statement of Work (SOW)

• Appendix A – Unit Delivery Addresses

• Appendix B – Item Examples

• Appendix C – Chapter 7, Uniform and Awards

2. Attachment 2 – Clauses and Provisions

3. Attachment 3 – Price List