CRxFlex II PM - Instructions and Evaluation Criteria.pdf

Addendum to FAR 52.212-1: Instructions to Offerors—Commercial Products and Commercial Services

Submission Requirements

Offerors shall submit their quotes in three (3) distinct sections. Quotes must be clearly organized to allow the Government to evaluate each factor independently and must address all requirements outlined in the Statement of Work (SOW).

Factor 1: Technical Capability

Offerors must submit documentation addressing the following:

• Preventative Maintenance Plan: A detailed plan describing the offeror's approach to performing the required preventive maintenance on the two (2) CRxFlex II NDI systems. The plan must, at a minimum, detail the methodology for performing the mechanical, electrical, optical, and calibration tasks outlined in the SOW. It must also describe the approach to providing the detailed post-service report and managing required replacement parts, including the roller kit, to ensure optimal system performance and availability.

• Technician Qualifications: Documentation proving that technicians are certified by Baker Hughes to service CRxFlex II systems. The offeror must also provide evidence that technicians have a minimum of three (3) years of experience maintaining similar Nondestructive Inspection (NDI) or computed radiography systems. The offeror must explicitly confirm they possess all necessary proprietary tooling and diagnostic equipment to perform the required work without Government assistance.

Factor 2: Past Performance

Offerors must submit up to three (3) references for recent and relevant contracts.

• Recency: Contracts must have been performed within the last three (3) years.

• Relevancy: Defined as providing preventative maintenance for Nondestructive Inspection (NDI) systems. Contracts for GEIT / Baker Hughes CRxFlex II or similar computed radiography systems will be considered most relevant.

• Required Details: For each reference, include the contract number, agency/company name, a point of contact (name, phone, email), and a brief description of the work performed (including the specific equipment models serviced).

Factor 3: Price

A completed pricing schedule detailing the firm-fixed price for the total requirement, including the base period and all option years. Pricing must be broken down by period of performance (Base Year and each individual Option Year) in addition to providing a cumulative total for the entire contract duration. Pricing must be inclusive of all labor, travel, parts, and any consumables required to fulfill the requirements of the SOW, including biannual PA/S and service calls.

52.212-2 Evaluation—Commercial Products and Commercial Services.

As prescribed in 12.205(a)(2), insert a provision substantially as follows:

EVALUATION—COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES (DEVIATION DATE)

(a) Evaluation factors. The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors will be used to evaluate offers:

(1) Technical Capability

(2) Past Performance

(3) Price

Evaluation Process

Factor 1: Technical Capability (Acceptable / Unacceptable)

The Government will evaluate the offeror's technical capability to determine if their approach demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the Statement of Work (SOW) requirements for the CRxFlex II systems. Specifically, the Government will assess the submitted maintenance plan and technician qualifications.

TECHNICAL FACTOR - Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Description:

• Acceptable: The quote meets the requirements of the solicitation. A rating of "Acceptable" will be assigned if the quote demonstrates that technicians are certified by Baker Hughes, have a minimum of three years of relevant experience, and the offeror possesses all necessary proprietary tooling and diagnostic equipment.

• Unacceptable: The quote does not meet the requirements of the solicitation. A rating of "Unacceptable" will be assigned if the quote fails to meet any of the minimum requirements for the maintenance plan or technician qualifications.

Factor 2: Past Performance (Confidence Assessment)

Past performance will be evaluated for all responsive offerors using data including, but not limited to, FAPIIS, SPRS, and CPARS ratings, as well as information submitted in response to this solicitation.

The Government will conduct an evaluation process assessing Recency, Relevancy, Quality, and Performance Confidence to assign an integrated ranking IAW the chart below.

• Substantial Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent and 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 and relevant performance record, the Government has reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

• Limited Confidence: Based on the offeror’s recent and relevant performance record, the Government has low expectations that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

• No Confidence (Unsatisfactory): 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.

Factor 3: Price

The Government will evaluate the proposed total price for fairness, reasonableness, balance, completeness, and realism. The total evaluated price will be the sum of the base period and all option periods. An analysis will be performed to ensure the price is consistent with the technical approach, that the offeror has a clear understanding of the work required, and that the pricing does not present an unacceptable risk due to unbalanced or unrealistic pricing.

(b) Basis for Award

Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose quote is evaluated as technically acceptable, demonstrates Satisfactory or higher past performance, and offers a fair and reasonable price that is balanced, complete, and realistic. The Government will make a best value determination in which a contract may be awarded to an offeror with a higher past performance ranking, even if it carries a higher price.

Evaluation of Options (if applicable)

For award purposes, the Government will evaluate quotes by adding the total price for all option periods to the base requirement. The Government may determine a quote to be unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. The evaluation of options does not obligate the Government to exercise them.

(c) Notice of award. A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer furnished to the successful Offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of Provision)

52.212-2 Evaluation—Commercial Products and Commercial Services.