CSC-24502 Section L and M Final.pdf

SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

The offeror’s proposal must be submitted in two parts: a technical proposal and a price proposal. Each of the parts shall be separate and complete so that evaluation of each may be accomplished independently.

1 GENERAL INFORMATION

The Offeror is required to submit sufficient information concerning the following areas to enable Government personnel to fully ascertain the capabilities of the Offeror to perform the requirements. The proposal must be sufficient in detail and scope to permit evaluation and provide the evaluators a clear understanding of the Offeror’s capability to meet or exceed the defined elements as required by the solicitation. All proposals must clearly and convincingly demonstrate that the Offeror has a thorough understanding of the requirements and associated risks, the Offeror is able, willing, and competent to devote the resources necessary to meet the requirements and has valid and practical solutions for all requirements and potential risk areas. The Offeror must respond to all requirements of the solicitation and not alter or rearrange the solicitation. The Offeror has the burden of proof to demonstrate compliance with all the evaluation factors identified in this solicitation. The Offeror is advised that the Government may incorporate into the final contract any portions of the Offeror’s proposal deemed beneficial to the Government. With the exception of the Price Evaluation Factor, no price or pricing information should appear in any other section of the proposal. Alternate proposals are not acceptable.

In presenting material in the proposal, the Offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization should be emphasized during proposal preparation. The Offeror is responsible for presenting enough information to allow the Government to evaluate the proposed work effort, support, and approach, and the price proposal without opening discussions. Statements that the prospective Offeror understands, or can and/or will comply with, the specifications, and paraphrasing the requirements or parts thereof without supporting information are considered inadequate by the Government and may result in a rating of unacceptable.

The Offeror must include any data that illustrates the adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems. Failure to address a specific factor clearly may be considered a deficiency.

Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation materials beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

The Offeror is expected to comply with all requirements of the solicitation. The Government advises the Offeror that taking exception or deviating from any term or condition of the solicitation may make an offer unacceptable, and the proposal un-awardable, unless the solicitation expressly authorizes such an exception or deviation with regard to that specific term or condition. The Government may consider any exception or deviation to any term or condition of the solicitation that is not expressly authorized by the solicitation to be a deficiency.

1.1 QUESTIONS

Offerors may submit questions requesting clarification of solicitation requirements by emailing the Contracting Office, Mitchell Hatfield, at Mitchell.Hatfield@dla.mil. NO PHONE CALLS WILL BE

ACCEPTED.

1.1.1 Question Format

List of questions are required to be on MS Excel spreadsheet in format below including document name, page number, paragraph or section number, context, and question or comment.

SAMPLE:

Document Name Page # Paragraph, Section # or Context Question/Comment RFP (1449) 7 Paragraph 6 or last paragraph: Contract

Maximum Dollar Value Typo

1.1.2 Open Question Period

It is requested that all contract/administrative and all technical related questions be received within 14 days after the solicitation open date.

1.1.3 Responses

Responses to the questions will be provided to all of the Offerors at least 7 days prior to solicitation close date.

2 PROPOSAL SUMBMISSION

The submission date for all volumes shall be no later than the date and time specified in the solicitation.

Please refer to paragraph 2.6.5 for the proposal content and structure requirements. All times shall be in Eastern Standard Time (EST).

2.1 Electronic Submission Only

The Offeror shall use electronic means (Email) of sending the proposal. No mailed copies accepted. The electronic documents should be clearly marked with the solicitation number and appropriate volume number.

If any documents submitted are considered Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI), they must be provided in a secure manner in compliance with DFARS 252.204-7012.

2.2 Late Submissions

Proposals submitted after the closing date and time specified for receipt of offers are “late” and will not be considered for award. The Government will process late submissions of proposals in accordance with

FAR 52.212-1. If the electronic proposal is received late; it is not eligible for consideration in accordance with FAR 52.212-1, the Government will reject that proposal without evaluation.

2.3 Proposal Submission Information

Solicitation No: SP4702-24-R-0008

Opening / Closing Date and Time: July 30, 2024 / August 29, 2024 Eastern Daylight Time.

NOTE: Proposals will be accepted any time before the closing date.

The Offeror shall submit one (1) electronic copy of the proposal as shown in paragraph 2.6.5 and must be emailed to the Contracting Officer, Mitchell Hatfield, at Mitchell.Hatfield@dla.mil no later than the solicitation close date.

2.4 Classified Data

All proposals must be UNCLASSIFIED.

2.5 Document Requirement

The proposal shall be delivered to the email addresses provided prior to the closing date/time stated in this solicitation. There shall be no reference to pricing in the non-Price portion of the proposal or in the cover letter or executive summary.

The Offeror shall mark each page of its proposal with the legend “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.” This includes the cover page and EVERY page that may contain source selection information. Note that the Offeror has an independent requirement to mark anything deemed to be bid or proposal information, protected proprietary information, or other information that is to be protected from disclosure to ensure that the information is protected.

The proposal shall be no longer than 25 pages.

2.6 Proposal Content

2.6.1 Cover Page

Each proposal shall contain the following items in addition to the non-price and price proposal data required by the solicitation.

The cover should indicate the following:

Company Name Proposal Title Solicitation Number

Offeror Name and Address Principal Point of Contact Name and Phone Number

CAGE / Unique Entity ID (UEI)

2.6.2 Table of Contents

The table of contents shall provide sufficient detail as to allow the important elements to be easily located.

2.6.3 Cover Letter and Executive Summary

The cover letter should be on company letterhead and must contain a statement committing the Offeror to the proposal and stating its validity for a period of at least 180 days. This letter should also include the name, title, phone number, and e-mail address for the persons authorized to negotiate with the Government in connection with the solicitation. The letter must be signed by a responsible officer or partner/principal of the Offeror who is authorized to bind the firm contractually. The letter must also contain a statement that the proposal meets the specifications of each section of the solicitation. An Executive Summary of the Offeror’s entire proposal is required. This summary will not be evaluated but will be used to gain an understanding of the overall proposal contents. It should identify and highlight significant features of the proposal and include the salient points contained in the various sections of the solicitation. The Executive Summary shall not include any price-related information.

The following format should be followed in developing the summary:

a) General Information (see Note 1)

b) An overview of Technical Capability

c) Solicitation Qualifications/Deviations (see Note 2)

Note 1: The General Information section of the Executive Summary should include the following information:

a) Company name and address

b) Company Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN)

c) Unique Entity Identification (UEI)

d) CAGE code

e) The name, phone number, and e-mail address for the authorized company negotiator relative to the proposal

Note 2: Solicitation exceptions and deviations are proposals that differ from the requirements contained in the Request for Proposal, Task Order PWS, and resultant contract terms and conditions. Exceptions, deviations, qualifications (also known as ground rules and assumptions), or requests to tailor a term may cause proposals to be considered non-responsive and unacceptable. Offerors must address such exceptions, deviations, qualifications (also known as ground rules and assumptions), or requests to tailor a term in the Cover Letter and provide a detailed description of any form of exception, deviation, qualification, or request to tailor and indicate the firm’s difficulty with the applicable requirement in addition to the firm’s proposed approach. Exceptions, deviations, qualifications (also known as ground rules and assumptions), or requests to tailor a term that appear in the proposal, but are not identified in the

Cover Letter, will be ignored and will not be included in any resultant award. Exceptions, deviations, qualifications (also known as ground rules and assumptions), or requests to tailor a term will be addressed during discussions, but note the Government reserves the right to award without discussion and bids with exception will render proposals un-awardable.

2.6.4 Additional Information and Solicitation Amendments (if Applicable)

If you need information to complete your proposal and it was not contained in the Solicitation, attachments, or other data provided by the Government, you must request this information during the open question period of this solicitation. If any amendments are issued to the solicitation, proposals shall include an acknowledgment of the amendments.

2.6.5 Proposal Evaluation Factors

Evaluation factors are listed as follows:

FACTOR A: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

FACTOR B: PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING

FACTOR C: EXPERIENCE

FACTOR D: PRICE

2.6.6 Proposal Structure

Proposals submitted shall contain separate documents for each factor, as outlined in the proposals table of contents. Each individual factor document shall be complete in its response to the requested information.

Information provided in one factor response will not be considered in a differing factor response.

List of factor requirements are as follows:

Document Deliverable(s) Copies Format INTRODUCTION Signed Cover Letter, Table of Contents and

Executive Summary

1 PDF

FACTOR A:

TECHNICAL

PROPOSAL

Project Execution Plan

• The plan shall describe the Contractor’s methodology of compliance with the Deliverables and Performance Requirements Summary outlined in the

PWS.

Project Management Plan

• Submit a management plan that briefly explains how the team is organized to respond to the needs described in the PWS.

Management structure proposed shall clearly describe systems, procedures, 1 PDF techniques, and tracking systems that will support management of the contract.

FACTOR B:

PROJECT

ORGANIZATION

AND STAFFING

Project Organization and Staffing Plan

• Submit a Project Organization and Staffing

Plan that briefly explains how the work to be performed under the contract will be organized and staffed to perform task requirements, safety requirements and quality control requirements as described in the PWS. The plan shall describe the required qualified personnel with the necessary management expertise, training, and certifications to assure the performance of the work in accordance with sound and efficient management practices.

• Provide an organizational chart/table specifying, job classifications, roles, responsibilities, and communication networks proposed for execution of the required tasks for this PWS.

• Provide written qualification statement and resume for the individual who will be functioning as the project manager, demonstrating 5 years of project management experience for projects similar in nature to work described in the Performance Work Statement.

FACTOR C:

EXPERIENCE

Experience Statement

• Provide an experience statement that lists work that your organization normally performs with its own staff. Identify qualities, accreditations, services, skills, or personnel that you believe differentiate your organization from other offerors.

• List up to 5 projects similar in nature to this PWS that your organization has completed in the past five years. Provide the name of project, owner, architect, contract amount, date of completion and percentage of the cost of the work performed with your own staff.

FACTOR D:

PRICE

• The Contractor shall submit a completed

TECH EXHIBIT F – CLIN BID FORM

containing all pricing for this requirement.

This technical exhibit is part of the requirement package what will be sent to interested parties as per Section A instructions.

3 EVAULATION FACTORS

3.1 FACTOR A: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

Offerors are required to submit a comprehensive and complete technical proposal that demonstrates their ability to perform the work as described in this solicitation. Offerors are cautioned to be responsive to all of the requirements of the PWS and provide sufficient information to allow evaluation of the proposals per Section M (Evaluation Factors for Award). The technical proposal must be succinct, well written and presented in a clear straightforward manner.

3.1.1 Project Execution Plan

The offeror must submit a project execution plan as part of their technical proposal that demonstrates a sound approach to service, environmental compliance, mobilization, safety, and quality control requirements of this PWS. The narrative shall include an understanding of the various efforts, permits, codes and disciplines required to execute the requirements of the PWS. The plan shall list any special tools or test equipment that will be required.

The plan must identify partners and subcontractors, their roles in this project, their applicable qualifications, certifications, specialized experience, and how they will ensure the requirements within the RFP, PWS, and attachments are met.

The plan must clearly state the methodology that contractor will use to perform the following tasks:

a) Site Assessments

b) Preventative Maintenance

c) Corrective Maintenance

3.1.2 Project Management Plan

The offeror must submit a management plan as part of their technical proposal that describes the planning and control system that the offeror will use for this PWS. The management structure proposed shall clearly describe systems, procedures, techniques, and tracking systems that will support management of the contract. The plan shall include:

a) A description of the procedures to be used for measuring and reporting progress.

b) A brief contract schedule showing major milestone events.

c) A description of the approach to control, schedule, communicate, and monitor the efforts of subcontractors.

3.2 FACTOR B: PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING

3.2.1 Project Organization and Staffing Plan

Submit a Project Organization and Staffing Plan that briefly explains how the contract will be organized and staffed to perform task requirements, safety requirements and quality control requirements as described in the PWS. The plan shall describe the required qualified personnel with the necessary management expertise, training, and certifications to assure the performance of the work in accordance with sound and efficient management practices.

The plan shall describe the overall structure of the offerors project organization. Provide an organizational chart/table specifying, job classifications, roles, responsibilities, and communication networks proposed for execution of the required tasks for this PWS. Indicate by each major functional task area, the present level of employment, by contractor personnel or subcontractor personnel, and describe the ability of the workforce to accomplish PWS requirements.

To be Technically Acceptable, qualified offerors must provide information regarding the technical qualifications of the proposed project staff, to include the individuals who will be responsible for the following functions:

a) Project Manager

Offerors must provide a written qualification statement for an individual who will be functioning as the project manager, demonstrating 5 years of project management experience for projects similar in nature to work described in the Performance Work Statement.

The Offeror’s team must include current licenses and certifications in the in the following discipline areas:

a) Electrical License (State of Ohio)

b) Safety (30 hours of OSHA)

3.3 FACTOR C: EXPERIENCE

Provide an experience statement that lists work that your organization normally performs with its own staff. Identify qualities, accreditations, services, skills, or personnel that you believe differentiate your organization from other offerors.

List up to 5 projects similar in nature of this PWS that your organization has completed in the past five years. Provide the name of project, owner, architect, contract amount, date of completion and percentage of the cost of the work performed with your own staff.

3.4 FACTOR C: PRICE

A Firm Fixed Price (FFP) proposal shall be submitted in a separate file/document in accordance with the base contract for the base and option years for the required tasks identified in the PWS. The price proposal shall be submitted in sufficient detail to allow the Government to verify the pricing to be fair and reasonable. The Contractor is urged to detail the technical approach being proposed with options that would increase reliability.

3.4.1 Base and option years shall be priced separately with technical narratives. The Contractor shall provide itemized equipment and labor costs of all work to be performed in this PWS.

3.4.2 The offeror shall ensure that a complete breakdown of costs is provided by major subcontractors.

Major subcontractors are defined as members of an offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform ten (10) percent or more of the proposed effort.

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1 BASIS FOR AWARD:

1.1 This is a best value tradeoff source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3, Source Selection, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS). Award will be made based on the best overall proposal that is determined to provide the greatest assessed value to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four (4) evaluation factors: (A) Technical Proposal, (B) Project Organization and Staffing, (C) Experience and (D) Price.

1.2 The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government. The factors in order of importance are: 1. Technical Proposal, 2. Project Organization and Staffing, 3. Experience, and 4. Price. However, as the difference between ratings diminish the relative importance of the price increases. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for the Technical Proposal Factor and Project Organization and Staffing Factor. Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offered. NOTE: THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING, and EXPERICENCE FACTORS, WHEN COMBINED, ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PRICE.

1.3 All offerors will be evaluated using the evaluation criteria identified below. This is necessary in order to provide the best possible solution for the Government. To be eligible for award, offerors must have submitted a fully responsive proposal and be selected based upon the evaluation criteria and the terms and conditions of this Solicitation.

2 FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal. Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal provides the greatest assessed value to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors. The evaluation factors are:

a) TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

b) PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING

c) EXPERIENCE

d) PRICE

The offeror will be required to submit complete and accurate information as requested within Section L – Instruction to Offerors.

2.1 FACTOR A: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

The purpose of the Technical Proposal Factor is to assess whether the offeror’s proposal will satisfy the Government’s minimum technical requirements. The evaluation team will evaluate the offeror’s proposal against the minimum requirements established by the PWS to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable.

2.2 FACTOR B: PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING

The purpose of the Project Organization and Staffing Factor is to assess whether the offeror’s proposed project organization and staffing will satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements. The evaluation team will evaluate the offeror’s proposal against the minimum requirements established by the PWS to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable.

2.3 FACTOR C: EXPERIENCE

The purpose of the Experience Factor is to assess whether the offeror has the necessary experience to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements. The offeror's background, experience, and qualifications will be assessed to determine the likelihood that that offeror can successfully perform the contract requirements and the degree of the risk of non-performance. The evaluation team will evaluate the offeror’s proposal against the requirements established in the PWS to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable.

2.4 FACTOR D: PRICE

The purpose of the Cost factor is to determine the offeror’s pricing is fair and reasonable and the offeror has a sound understanding of the PWS requirements.

3 EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Source Selection Board (SSB).

The overarching evaluation approach for all factors is as follows:

a) Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP and the PWS. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the RFP.

b) Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

3.1 FACTORS

The SSB will conduct a structured evaluation that examines an offeror’s ability to understand and perform the Government’s requirement; there are four (4) Evaluation factors: (A) TECHNICAL PROPOSAL; (B) PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING; (C) EXPERIENCE; and (C) PRICE. Evaluation of the offeror’s proposal shall address each factor as it applies to the PWS. All Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price proposed or the highest technically rated proposal due to the tradeoff determination. At the Source Selection Authority’s discretion, award may be made to a technically superior proposal that is higher-rated and higher-priced. The factors in order of importance are: 1. Technical Proposal, 2. Project Organization and Staffing, 3. Experience, and 4. Price. As the difference between ratings diminish the relative importance of price increases. At the Source Selection Authority’s discretion, a competitive range may be established comprised of all of the most highly rated proposals based on the evaluation criteria, unless the range is further reduced for purposes of efficiency pursuant to FAR 15.306(c)(2). The final award determination will be based on the greatest assessed value to the Government. The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal.

3.2 EVALUATION FACTOR A: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

3.2.1 Project Execution Plan

The Government will review this plan for the following:

a) Completeness and Accuracy - The plan indicates an adequate understanding of the technical areas and contractor responsibilities set forth in the PWS. The plan reflects the Contractor’s required actions to successfully complete all areas of the PWS.

b) Clarity – The plan is clearly worded and unambiguous.

c) Soundness of Approach – The plan describes accepted practices and demonstrates processes and procedures used to meet the requirements of the PWS.

3.2.2 Management Plan

The Government will review this plan for the following:

a) Completeness and Accuracy - Management structure proposed clearly describe systems, procedures, techniques, and tracking systems that will support management of the contract.

b) Clarity – The plan is clearly worded and unambiguous.

c) Soundness of Approach – The plan describes accepted practices and demonstrates processes and procedures used to meet the requirements of the PWS.

3.2.3 Technical Proposal Factor Rating

The Technical Factor Rating will be expressed as an adjectival assessment of Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Unacceptable. The Technical Proposal Factor Ratings focus on the strengths, deficiencies, weaknesses, risks and uncertainties of the offeror's proposal. The color rating depicts how the offeror’s proposal meets the Technical Proposal requirements.

TABLE 1 –TECHNICAL PROPOSAL RATINGS

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL RATINGS

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable.

Proposal is un-awardable.

3.3 EVALUATION FACTOR B: PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING

Qualifications of proposed project organization and staffing will be evaluated to determine if the appropriate organizational structure, technical training, certifications and staffing experience to meet the technical requirements of a project of this nature. 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. The Government will review the Project Organization and Staffing plan and it will be evaluated using the three (3) following elements which are of equal importance:

a) Completeness and Accuracy – Project organization and staffing plan proposed explains how the contract will be organized and staffed to perform requirements as described in the PWS.

A written qualification statement was proposed regarding who will be functioning as the project manager. The qualification statements demonstrate at least 5 years of project management experience for projects similar in nature to work described in the statement of work.

b) Clarity – The plan is clearly worded and unambiguous.

c) Soundness of Approach – The plan describes accepted practices and demonstrates processes and procedures used to meet the requirements of the PWS. Offeror clearly shows an organizational structure and staffing that will lead to a successful completion of the tasks in the PWS. Offeror provides required certifications/licensing for safety and electric.

3.3.1 Project Organization and Staffing Rating

The Project Organization and Staffing Rating Factor will be rated on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis as described in Table 2.

TABLE 2 – PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING

PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING RATINGS

Rating Description Acceptable Project Organization and Staffing Plan and

Project Manager Qualification Statement clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Project Organization and Staffing Plan and Project Manager Qualification Statement does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

3.4 EVALUATION FACTOR C: EXPERIENCE

The Experience evaluation results in an assessment of the offeror’s ability to meet the solicitation requirements. The Experience evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered.

These shall be combined to establish a performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror.

3.4.1 Experience Rating

The Experience Evaluation Team will review all experience information collected and determine the offeror’s experience, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate these into the performance confidence assessment. The experience rating, using the Acceptable or Unacceptable assessment ratings (Table 3), is based on the offeror’s overall record of experience. This evaluation is based off the SSB’s confidence in the ability of the offeror to perform per the PWS and RFQ requirements.

TABLE 3 - EXPERIENCE

EXPERIENCE RATINGS

Rating Description Acceptable The proposed experience clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable The proposed experience does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

3.5 EVALUATION FACTOR D: PRICE

A price analysis will be conducted to determine if the total evaluated price is fair, reasonable and complete. Total evaluated price will be calculated by adding the individual total of all 12 CLINs from Tech Exhibit F together. The total evaluated price will include all base year and option year pricing. The Government will not award a contract to an offeror whose proposed rates are determined to be unreasonable. The Government will evaluate the price reasonableness for this effort on the basis of the competitive offers received in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b)(2).

3.5 EVALUATION FACTOR D: PRICE