06 - Instructions_Evaluation Factors.pdf

PART IV REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION L– INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

SECTION L

Instructions to Offerors and Instructions for Preparation of Proposals

1.0 OVERVIEW

The offer shall be compliant with the requirements within this solicitation as well as all associated documents, i.e. Specifications/Drawings/Statement of Work (SOW). In accordance with (IAW) the SOW dated 14 November 2024, the intent of this solicitation is to award a single discipline Demolition (DEMO) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), Eglin AFB, FL consists of furnishing all plant, labor, materials, and equipment and performing all operations necessary to perform Demolition on Eglin Air Force Base (AFB) and surrounding Eglin AFB Reservation.

Demolition work includes removal, transportation and disposal of all items to be demolished. The above general description of work does not in any way limit the responsibility of the contractor to perform all work and furnish all labor, materials, and equipment in accordance with the specifications. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this section may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation or rejection of an offer. This acquisition is a 100% Small Business 8(a) Set-Aside. Proposals may only be submitted by Small Business firms registered in the North American Industrial Classification System Code (NAICS) of 238910. This is a competitive best value source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3, Source Selection, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Department of the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DAFFARS). These regulations are available electronically at https://www.acquisition.gov/content/regulations. At time of award, each business must be registered at SAM.gov with a Unique Entity ID (UEI) and all Representations and Certifications completed. The anticipated Period of Performance for the contract is five (5) year ordering period from date of award.

1.1 General Instructions: This section provides general guidance, as well as specific instructions on format and content, for preparing proposals. To ensure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. The Offeror's proposal must include all information required and must be submitted IAW these instructions. Compliance with these instructions is mandatory and failure to furnish a complete proposal, at the time of proposal submission, may result in the proposal being unacceptable to the Government and may eliminate the Offeror from further consideration for award. It is the Offeror's responsibility to ensure the completeness of the proposal submitted. An evaluation of a proposal will be conducted solely on the information contained within the submittal and the Government will not assume that an Offeror possesses any capabilities not specified.

Inconsistencies among the parts of each proposal shall be explained. Any unexplained inconsistency may raise a fundamental question of the Offeror's understanding of the requirement and/or ability to perform.

Offerors are advised that their proposals are presumed to represent their best efforts and most complete responses to this solicitation. Proposals that simply reiterate the contents of this solicitation, or contain only superficial responses, may be considered unacceptable. Evidence of experience, capability, and qualifications that clearly demonstrate and support the Offeror’s claims are essential. The absence of such evidence will adversely influence the evaluation of the proposal. Offerors must clearly identify any exceptions to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete supporting rationale. Non-conformance with these instructions may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

https://www.acquisition.gov/content/regulations

1.2 Electronic Reference Documents: All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the official U.S. Government website for making, receiving, and managing federal awards, System for Award Management web site at https://SAM.gov. Potential Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

1.3 Proposal Presentation and Preparations: The Government will not accept oral presentations in response to this solicitation. Email submissions will not be accepted. All proposals shall follow the proposal preparation instructions. Proposals are due via electronic submission no later than the solicitation end date - 25 June 2025 at 1200 Central Time.

All Offerors must submit their proposal through the Solicitation Tool in PIEE (https://piee.eb.mil).

Email submissions of proposals SHALL NOT BE accepted. Proposals shall not include any classified information. Note: Late submittal will be handled in accordance with (IAW) FAR 15.208. The Government is not responsible for any costs incurred or associated with preparation and submission of a proposal in response to this solicitation, or attendance at the pre-proposal conference. The Government will retain one digital copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the Offeror requests otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals.

1.4 Points of Contact (POC): The POCs for this acquisition are listed below. Written requests for clarification shall be sent to the CO/CS prior to the due date of the proposal. All communication must be coordinated through the CO/CS using the following contact information (email is the preferred communication method due to teleworking schedules):

Kristine Wright Shaun Williams Contracting Officer (CO) Contract Specialist (CS) Kristine.wright.2@us.af.mil Shaun.williams.8@us.af.mil

AFMC AFTC/PZIOC AFMC AFTC/PZIOC

308 West D Ave 308 West D Ave Bldg. 260 Suite 130 Bldg. 260 Suite 130 Eglin AFB, FL 32542 Eglin AFB, FL 32542

1.5 Reserved

1.6 Discrepancies and Ambiguities in the Solicitation: If an Offeror believes the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, ambiguity, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer (CO) in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the Offeror is asking the CO to consider as related to the omission or error NO LATER THAN

FIVE (5) CALENDAR DAYS AFTER THE FORMAL RFP RELEASE.

1.7 Discovery of Mistakes: Mistakes in an Offeror’s proposal that are disclosed after receipt of proposals shall be processed substantially in accordance with the procedures for mistakes in bids at FAR 14.407-

4. The Offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion. This reservation includes matters of additional or substitute pages of the initial proposal.

1.8 Joint Venture (JV): A Joint Venture (JV) will be considered a sole business entity. Offerors who propose as a Joint Venture (JV) are not permitted to submit a separate proposal independent of the JV.

The written JV agreement must be provided in the proposal and must follow SBA requirements. The JV must be separately identified with its own name, Unique Entity ID (UEI) number, and Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) number in the System for Award Management (SAM).

Mentor-Protégé (M-P) is a relationship; M-Ps require formal JV, TAs, or Letters of Intent (LOIs) to qualify for consideration as a team.

1.9 Questions and Answers Period: All questions regarding this solicitation must be submitted in writing. All questions and subsequent answers will be posted to the SAM.gov website. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to continuously monitor the site for updates. All questions shall be submitted electronically to the individual(s) listed above no later than ten (10) days after release of the RFP at Close of Business. Information provided as a result of these questions and answers shall not qualify the terms and conditions of the solicitation and specifications. Terms of the solicitation and specifications remain unchanged unless the solicitation is amended in writing. If an amendment is issued, normal procedures relating to the acknowledgment and receipt of solicitation amendments shall apply.

1.10 Communications: Exchanges of source selection information before and after submission of the initial proposal packages between the Government and Offerors will be controlled by the Contracting Officer. Email will be used to transmit such information and will be sent encrypted and must include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104” in the subject line of the email.

1.11 Debriefings: The Contracting Officer (CO) will promptly notify Offerors of any decision to exclude them from the evaluation process; whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors excluded may request a pre-award debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a post-award debriefing. However, Offerors excluded from the evaluation are entitled to no more than one debriefing. The CO will notify unsuccessful Offerors in accordance with FAR

15.503. Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

1.12 Amendments: The Government reserves the right to revise or amend the specifications, drawings, or the solicitation prior to the proposal closing time. Such revisions or amendments will be communicated on the SAM.gov website by issuance of an amendment to the solicitation. If such amendment requires material changes in quantities or prices, the proposal closing date may be postponed by enough days to enable Offerors to revise their proposals. In such cases, the amendment will include an announcement of the new closing date and time. Offerors MUST acknowledge all amendments in their proposal, either by completing Block 18 of the SF 1442, providing signed copies of the amendments with their proposal, or by separate letter which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. Amendments to the solicitation after proposals are received will be issued only to the Offerors who have submitted proposals unless the Government determines that the change to the solicitation likely would have increased competition if the change had occurred prior to the proposal due date. In that case, the amendment will be posted on SAM.gov, and a revised proposal due date and time will be established.

1.13 Adequate Price Competition: The Contracting Officer (CO) has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the CO will review this determination and if, in the CO's opinion, adequate price competition exists, certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition the CO determines that adequate price competition does not exist, Offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the CO to determine the reasonableness of the Cost/Price.

Additionally, although adequate price competition is expected, if only one offer is received in response to this solicitation the responding Offeror will be required to provide certified cost or pricing data in accordance with Table 15-2, at FAR 15.408.

2.0 PROPOSAL PREPARTION

Proposals must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this solicitation.

Alternate proposals will not be accepted. The Government will perform a proposal review for completeness in accordance with the instructions provided. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to verify the completeness of the proposal submitted and to ensure the executed contract documentation and supporting documentation meet the requirements of Sections L & M of this solicitation. Failure to provide a complete proposal may be grounds for elimination. Proposals shall consist of three (3) separate volumes:

Volume I – Price Volume II – Past Performance Volume III – Contract Documentation

Proposals shall be complete, clearly presented, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation as detailed in Section M of this solicitation and for substantiating validity of stated claims. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but rather provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the Offeror’s facilities and/or experience and will rely heavily on the information presented in the Offeror's proposal. Proposals shall be neat, indexed (cross-indexed as appropriate), and assembled in an orderly manner. Elaborate artwork and expensive visual and other presentation aids are neither necessary nor desired. Include only information that is relevant to this source selection.

2.1 Proposal Submission: Offerors are responsible for submitting proposals to reach the Government POCs identified in paragraph 1.4 above by the time specified in this solicitation; only electronic proposals will be required (no hard copies – uploads submissions only). Email submissions of proposals SHALL

NOT BE accepted.

The electronic copy will be submitted using the Solicitation tool in the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) website https://piee.eb.mil. Offerors are cautioned to upload files to the Solicitation Tool with plenty of time to ensure upload of files and submission is accomplished before the due date and time. Proposals will be deemed to be timely if the timestamp in the Solicitation Tool is NLT the proposal due date and time.

The electronic copy will be submitted using the PIEE Solicitation Module. The electronic proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by portable document format (PDF), Microsoft (MS) Office Word 97- 2003, 2010, or 2016, MS Office Excel 97-2003, 2010, or 2016, and MS Office Power Point 97-2003, 2010, or 2016, as applicable. Do not embed files into the proposal documents. Embedded files will not be evaluated.

Title of the documents should state the corresponding proposal volume/title and include the Offeror’s CAGE code (i.e. “Vol 1 Price for XXXXX). *Note – “XXXXX” refers to the Offeror’s CAGE Code

Any proposal, bond, amendment, or revision that is received at the designated Government Office after the exact time specified for receipt of proposals will be “late” and will not be considered unless the Contracting Officer determines the criteria set forth in FAR 15.208 exists.

2.2 Format and Content: Each of the volumes specified in Section L shall be prepared as a single volume. A cover sheet should be included in each electronic volume and should be clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification, and the Offeror's name. To the greatest extent possible, each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with a minimum of cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity.

2.3 Page Size, Format, and Limit: The proposals will be on 8 1/2” x 11” pages. Legible tables, charts, graphs, and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11” x 17”. Typeface shall not be less than 12-point, with 1” margins on all sides. Smaller, legible font size, no smaller than 6-point, may be used for charts and tables.

A page is defined as one face of a sheet of paper containing information. This includes all appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, etc., unless placed on 11” x 17” sheets, in which case they will be counted as two (2) pages. All pages of each part shall be appropriately numbered and identified with the Request for Proposal (RFP) number (FA2823-25-R-0020). Page limitations (shown below) shall be treated as maximum. The page should be a standard “white page” format so that when printed the output page background is “white”.

2.4 Indexing: Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections. Indexing is not included in the page limitations.

Covers for volumes, tables of contents, indices, title pages, cross reference indices, and section dividers/tables will not be included in the page count if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating volumes/sections of the proposal. They will be counted if they contain any other information, (e.g. diagrams, extraneous data, etc.). Pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” will not be counted. Pages in excess of the page count stated in the table below will not be evaluated. An electronic page is defined as each face of an 8 ½” X 11” electronic sheet of paper containing information.

Page limits apply to all electronic files and resulting printed output files, as applicable.

Volume Volume Title Copies (Electronic) Page Limit

I Price

Line-Item Pricing Matrix (L01) Any Pricing Justification Financial Questionnaire (L02)

One (1) Electronic

No Limit

II Past Performance

Past Performance Information (L03) Past Performance Questionnaires (L04) Consent Form (L05)

One (1) Electronic

30 pages total for Past Performance Information Sheets, 4 Pages per Information Sheet No limit for Consent Forms or Past Performance Questionnaires 10 pages for additional information

III Contract Documentation

One (1)

Electronic No Limit

3.0 VOLUME I – PRICE PROPOSAL - Submit one (1) electronic copy.

3.1 General Instructions: The offer shall provide pricing by utilizing the Line-Item Pricing Matrix Spreadsheet (Attachment L01): All unit prices shall be inserted into the Line-Item Pricing Matrix spreadsheet. No unit prices may be left blank. Evaluation quantities have been established for all line items and are not to be modified by the Offeror in the submission of its proposal.

The Offeror’s Price proposal shall fully and clearly demonstrate reasonableness, balanced pricing, as well as document the Total Evaluated Price (TEP). The TEP will be the sum total of all five (5) Firm- Fixed Priced years plus the six (6) month option to extend services Firm-Fixed Priced. An Offeror shall address an increase or decrease in any line-item unit price of 5% or more per calendar/fiscal year. Below is an example of how the TEP will be calculated.

Year Period of Performance Total 1 12 Months $0.00 2 12 Months $0.00 3 12 Months $0.00 4 12 Months $0.00 5 12 Months $0.00 6 Month Extension 6 Months $0.00 Total Evaluated Price $0.00

3.1.1 Reasonableness: This section is to assist you in submitting other than certified cost or pricing data that are required to evaluate the reasonableness of your proposed cost/price. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in the rejection of your proposal. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed costs/prices rests with the Offeror.

3.1.2 Materially Unbalanced Pricing: Materially unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be a reason to reject an Offeror’s proposal. Materially unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable TEP, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. Offerors should explain significant fluctuations between unit prices in the same categories over various years.

3.1.3 Price Realism: Note that unrealistically low proposed costs or prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition either on the basis that the Offeror does not understand the requirement or has made an unrealistic proposal. The Offeror’s proposal should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate realism. price realism analysis will consist of independently reviewing and evaluating specific elements of each Offeror’s proposed Line Item Pricing Matrix worksheet(s) to determine whether the estimated proposed elements are realistic for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirements, and are consistent with the unique methods of performance described in the offeror’s technical proposal in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(d)(1).

3.1.4 Price Information: Data beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless the Offeror considers it essential to document or support their cost/price position. All data relating to the proposed price, including all required supporting documentation, must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Cost/Price Volume. Additionally, although adequate price competition is expected, if only one offer is received in response to this solicitation the responding Offeror will be required to provide certified cost or pricing data in accordance with Table 15-2, at FAR 15.408.

3.1.5 Rounding: All calculated monetary amounts provided shall be rounded to the nearest cent.

3.1.6 Volume Organization: The Price Volume shall consist of the following sections:

3.1.6.1: Line-Item Pricing Matrix Spreadsheet (Attachment L01): All unit prices shall be inserted into the Line-Item Pricing Matrix spreadsheet for all years and the six months. No unit prices may be left blank. Evaluation quantities have been established for all line items and are not to be modified by the Offeror in the submission of its proposal.

3.1.6.2 Financial Responsibility Questionnaire (Attachment L02): Offerors shall submit the fully executed Financial Responsibility Questionnaire (Attachment L02) provided back from their financial institution.

4.0 VOLUME II – PAST PERFORMANCE - Submit one (1) electronic copy.

4.1 Recency and Relevancy of Past Performance Information

Offerors shall complete Attachment L03 “Past Performance Information,” on contracts and/or task orders you consider most recent and most relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort. Attachment L03 is limited to 4 pages per Information Sheet. Offerors shall only submit contracts for evaluation that are both recent and relevant. You may submit up to five (5) Past Performance Information sheets identifying active or completed contracts and/or task orders, either

Government or commercial, for prime, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner (within the same division or cost center).

Recent past performance is defined as projects that have been completed within the last five (5) years (from the date of issuance on this solicitation). In lieu of a complete project, the Offeror may submit projects that are ongoing as long as, (a) the project is at least 80% complete by this solicitation’s issuance date, and (b) the Offeror can validate completion percentage with a government approved progress report. For commercial contracts, an equivalent customer validation of progress completion report (signed) may be used in lieu of a government approved progress report.

Relevant Contract is a contract that meets the definitions for one of the Relevancy Factors as set forth in Section M, Table M2.

If past performance information is submitted under an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), the service provider must identify the delivery/task order relevant to this effort. Use one Past Performance Information Sheet for each delivery/task order cited. If submitting a Past Performance Information Sheet for the entire IDIQ effort the Offeror must identify the delivery/task order relevant to this effort. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use data provided by each Offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past and present performance.

4.2 Teaming Arrangements/Joint Ventures: If the Offeror intends to submit past performance information of a teaming arrangement member or a joint venture partner, then the Offeror shall provide sufficient information to clearly convey the roles and responsibilities that each member or partner performed. Past Performance information of team members or joint venture partners shall be consistent with the proposed roles and responsibilities that each member or partner will perform for this requirement. Identify each member's share of the prospective contract, 50/50, 51/49, etc. Clearly establish roles of each party (who is prime and who is subcontractor, who is responsible for what tasks, contract administration, proposals, work management, etc.). Provide for protection of competition-sensitive proprietary information (subcontractor past performance cannot be disclosed to the prime Offeror without the subcontractor’s consent). Provide a letter (Consent Form, Attachment L05) from all subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, consenting to the release of their past performance information to the prime Contractor, only if it is being used as part of the past performance evaluation. If a under a teaming arrangement, include a Statement of Assurance that the team member will not be replaced for the duration of the contract, and any exceptions should be identified. The Prime Contractor is obligated to negotiate in good faith and is responsible for conveying mandatory Government terms and conditions to subcontractors. The prime Contractor shall remain fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any teaming agreement between the prime Contractor and its subcontractors.

4.3 Organizational Structure Change History: Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant past efforts or between conclusion of two recent past efforts and this source selection. To facilitate the Government’s relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your company. A pamphlet or other commercial document describing such reorganizations may suffice. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment. Since the Government intends to consider past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the Offeror(s), your "roadmap" shall be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

4.4 Questionnaires: The submissions to the following sub-paragraphs do NOT count towards the page limit for the Offeror’s Past Performance Volume.

4.4.1 Questionnaire Submissions: For each submission, the Government requires the Offeror to send out the Past Performance Customer Questionnaire, (Attachments L4) to each of the Government or Commercial Points of Contact. Existing CPARS or previously completed PPQs will be accepted in lieu of Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment L4) forms.

ONE (1) COPY OF THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRES SHALL BE SUBMITTED

DIRECTLY TO EITHER OF THE POINTS OF CONTACT IDENTIFIED IN PARAGRAPH 1.4

NOT LATER THAN THE DATE PROPOSALS ARE DUE AND ONE (1) COPY WILL BE

SUBMITTED WITH YOUR PROPOSAL

Additional information may be obtained by the Past Performance Team by direct contact through the Contracting Officer or Contracting Specialist.

While the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of providing adequate, factual data to determine performance confidence rests with the Offeror. The Government does not assume the duty to search for data to cure problems it finds in proposals.

Proposals that do not contain the required information are subject to rejection by the Government.

The Offeror shall provide a summary of all prime Offeror and subservice provider/team member performance history submissions, in columnar format, with the following information: Service Provider Name, Contract Number, Performance Period, CO Name/Phone Number, Contracting Officer Representative Name/Phone Number. Completed questionnaires that are submitted by the respondents and copies of the respondents provide with the Offeror proposal shall not count against any page limitations established for this volume.

Each of the Offeror’s identified Government POCs can either send an encrypted email with the completed Past Performance Customer Questionnaire directly shaun.williams.8@us.af.mil and kristine.wright.2@us.af.mil Attention: Shaun Williams and Kristine Wright. Please mark the subject line as Source Selection Information - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

5.0 VOLUME III – CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION: - Submit one (1) electronic copy.

The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file. The volume shall be prepared in the following format and contain the following contract files. The Offeror's proposal shall include a signed copy of the Solicitation and Sections A through K with applicable information within each section properly filled in by the Offeror.

mailto:shaun.williams.8@us.af.mil mailto:kristine.wright.2@us.af.mil

Cover Page: Offeror shall provide a cover page containing the company/division CAGE code, Unique Entity ID number (UEI), TIN, business size, small business category, and the name, title, telephone number, and e-mail address of the Point of Contact.

Section A: Complete blocks 14 through 20c of the SF 1442. These sections constitute the model contract.

An authorized official of the firm submitting the offer must sign and date the SF 1442 in block 20a-c. In doing so, the Offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP, Sections A through M.

Section B: Offerors are required to complete this section

Section C – H: Offerors are not required to complete these sections.

Section I: Complete the Offeror supplied fill-in information for applicable clauses. All Offerors submitting a proposal to this solicitation shall comply with FAR 52.204-7 System for Award Management. Should the awardee not be located within the registry, the Contractor may be deemed unawardable.

Section K: Complete the representations and certifications in Section K or the System for Award Management (SAM).

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors.

5.1 Exceptions to the Solicitation: Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Offerors shall provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. As award without discussions is contemplated, Offerors are cautioned that if the Government does not agree with the Offeror’s exception to the solicitation, the Offeror could be deemed non-responsive and therefore unawardable. This information shall be provided in the format and content of the following table.

Reference

Page/Paragraph

Requirement/Portion

Rationale

SOW, SPEC,

Model Contract, etc.

Applicable Page and Paragraph Numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Describe why the requirement can/will not be met

Provide the following required information:

5.2 Authorized Offeror Personnel: Offeror shall provide the name, title, telephone number, and e-mail address of the company/division Point of Contact regarding decisions made with respect to the

Offeror’s proposal and who can obligate the Offeror contractually. Offerors shall also identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

5.3 Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations: Offerors shall provide the company/division's street address, county and facility code; CAGE code; Unique Entity ID number (UEI); TIN; size of business (large or small). This same information must be provided if the work for this contract will be performed at any other location(s). List all locations where work is to be performed and indicate whether such facility is a division, affiliate, or subContractor, and the percentage of work to be performed at each location.

SECTION L ATTACHMENTS:

1. Line-Item Pricing Matrix Worksheet (L01)

2. Financial Responsibility Questionnaire (L02)

3. Past Performance Information (L03)

4. Past Performance Customer Questionnaire (L04)

5. Consent Form (L05)

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Page M - 2

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1.0 BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

This is a competitive best value source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3, Source Selection, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Department of the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DAFFARS). These regulations are available electronically at https://www.acquisition.gov/content/regulations.

By submission of an 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. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer’s proposal being un-awardable. While the Government intends to award a contract without discussions, discussions or negotiations may be conducted. Offerors may be required to participate in telephone discussions or in face-to-face, oral discussions at a facility on Eglin AFB, FL. Offerors are cautioned to follow the detailed instructions fully and carefully, as the Government reserves the right to make an award based on initial offers received, without discussion of such offers. The Offeror's initial proposal should reflect their best effort. The Government intends to award one contract but reserves the right to award none.

While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the evaluation process, by its nature, is subjective; therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the selection process. Award will be made to the responsible Offeror whose proposal conforms to all required terms and conditions, includes all required representations and certifications, meets all requirements set forth in the RFP, and also provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation as described below. The Government reserves the right to award without discussions; therefore, each initial offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary.

1.1 Evaluation Factors

Factor 1: Price Factor 2: Past Performance

Note: Factor 2, Past Performance, is approximately equal to Factor 1, Price.

1.2 Process (Stepped Approach)

a. Step 1 – Proposals will be ranked from lowest total evaluated price (TEP) to highest TEP.

Then, the Government will evaluate the two (2) lowest proposals under Factor 1 Price.

b. Step 2 – If either of the two (2) lowest proposals are found to be unreasonable or unbalanced under Factor 1 then the Government will review the next lowest TEP proposal until two (2) lowest TEP proposals are found to be reasonable and have balanced pricing under Factor 1 OR all offers have been evaluated.

c. Step 3 - Then, the lowest TEP proposal with reasonable and balanced pricing for Factor 1 will be evaluated for past performance confidence under Factor 2. If the lowest TEP proposal https://www.acquisition.gov/content/regulations

Page M - 3 with reasonable and balanced pricing for Factor 1 is found to have a Substantial Confidence performance assessment under Factor 2, this proposal represents the best value for the Government, and the evaluation process stops at this point. Award shall be made to that Offeror without further consideration of any other Offerors.

d. Step 4 - If the lowest TEP with reasonable and balanced pricing for Factor 1 does not receive a “Substantial Confidence” performance assessment rating under Factor 2, then the second lowest TEP proposal with reasonable and balanced pricing for Factor 1 will be evaluated for past performance confidence under Factor 2. If the second lowest TEP with reasonable and balanced pricing for Factor 1 proposal does not receive a “Substantial Confidence” performance assessment rating under Factor, then this evaluation process will continue from Step 1 until an Offeror is found to have a “Substantial Confidence” performance assessment rating under Factor 2 OR all offers have been evaluated.

e. Step 5 - The Source Selection Authority shall then make an integrated assessment best value award decision by determining if the best value to the Government is to pay a higher price for a higher past performance assessment rating. The Government reserves the following rights: to award a contract to the lowest price Offeror who has Substantial Confidence Rating, to award to higher priced Offeror who has Substantial Confidence Rating; award a contract to the lowest price Offeror who has at least a Satisfactory Confidence Rating or award a contract to the lowest price Offeror who has a Neutral Confidence Rating.

f. Step 6 - If the Government chooses to enter into discussions at any point during the evaluation process, discussions will be conducted with those Offerors whose proposals are in the competitive range. After discussions are closed and Final Proposal Revisions received, the process will begin again at Step 1.

1.3 Reserved

1.4 Factor 1: Price

1.4.1 Price Evaluation. The Government shall rank, all offers by TEP from lowest to highest, including any option prices (if applicable). The Total Evaluated Price will be the sum total of all Firm-Fixed Priced.

The price evaluation will document reasonableness and balance pricing of the proposed TEP. An offeror shall address in its Price Proposal Narrative any increase or decrease in any line-item unit price of 5% or more per calendar/fiscal year.

Note that unrealistically low proposed costs or prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition either on the basis that the Offeror does not understand the requirement or has made an unrealistic proposal. The Offeror’s proposal should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate realism. price realism analysis will consist of independently reviewing and evaluating each unit price inserted into the Line Item Pricing Matrix spreadsheet for each year and the six-month option to determine whether the estimated proposed Line Items are realistic for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the requirements, and are consistent with the unique methods of performance described in the Statement of Work in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(d)(1).

Page M - 4

1.4.2 The Offeror's Volume I - Price portion of the proposal will not be rated or scored but will be evaluated for reasonable (in accordance with FAR 15.404), and balanced pricing (in accordance with FAR 15.404-1). Offerors whose price is determined to be unreasonable or unbalanced may not be considered for award. Price will be evaluated for the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) on the basic effort and all options (if applicable).

The evaluated price may include adjustments to offset any competitive advantage from the use of additional Government Furnished Equipment, Government Furnished Property, Government Furnished Facilities (not furnished to all Offerors) or other Government costs associated with the proposed approach. To facilitate the evaluation of proposal information requested in Section L of this solicitation, information may be obtained from other sources including, but not limited to, Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), U.S. Department of Labor, Global Insight Indices and any other resource available to the Government.

1.4.3 If applicable, evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options.

1.4.4 The Offeror's Price Volume of the proposal will be evaluated, using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404, in order to determine if it is reasonable. Normally, price reasonableness is established through one of the price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404. For a price to be reasonable, it must represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business.

Additionally, although adequate price competition is expected, if only one offer is received in response to this solicitation the responding Offeror will be required to provide certified cost or pricing data in accordance with Table 15-2, at FAR 15.408 and DFARs Clause 252.215-7009.

The Offeror’s Cost/Price Volume of the proposal not found to be reasonable or balanced will render the Offeror’s proposal un-awardable and that Offeror’s proposal will be removed from any further considerations.

1.5 Factor 2: Past Performance

1.5.1 The Contracting Officer shall seek recent and relevant performance information on all Offerors based on the information provided by the Offeror and data independently obtained from other Government sources.

1.5.2 The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to allow the Government to assess the Offeror’s likelihood of meeting the solicitation requirements based on the Offeror’s demonstrated past performance. The assessment process will result in an overall performance confidence assessment of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Neutral Confidence, Limited Confidence or No Confidence as defined in Table M3. For additional information see FAR 15.304.

1.5.3 The Government reserves the right to give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in this Request for Proposal.

1.5.4 Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and, in the format, specified in Section L Offeror’s may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (for example, the relevance of past

Page M - 5 performance information) or respond to adverse past performance information to which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element (within the Past Performance Information Sheets (Attachment L3) or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Clarification conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the Contracting Officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

1.5.5 Recent past performance is defined as projects that have been completed within the last five (5) years (from the date of issuance on this solicitation). In lieu of a complete project, the Offeror may submit projects that are ongoing as long as, (a) the project is at least 80% complete by this solicitation’s issuance date, and (b) the Offeror can validate completion percentage with a government approved progress report. For commercial contracts, an equivalent customer validation of progress completion report (signed) may be used in lieu of a government approved progress report. Past Performance information submitted that does not meet the definition of recent SHALL NOT be evaluated.

1.5.6 In determining relevancy for individual past performance submissions, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the Offeror, joint venture partner, or Major Subcontractor, as defined in DFARS 209.571-1, whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. The past performance information forms and information obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance. The Government will determine relevancy when assessing recent contracts According to Table M2 below:

Page M - 6

TABLE M2 – RELEVANCY RATINGS

Adjectival Rating Description Scope Magnitude Complexities

Very Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Have provided personnel, equipment, tools, materials, vehicles, supervision, and logistics to perform work projects involving ALL the type of construction and work elements described in the attached associated requirement documents as the Prime.

Greater than $2,000,000

Scope included for buildings, horizontal and vertical infrastructure, and/or other structures: demolish, remove, and properly dispose of all debris and any hazardous materials in accordance with applicable State/Federal regulatory standards and NESHAP regulations/guidelines.

Restoration of demolition sites to a natural condition.

Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires

Have provided personnel, equipment, tools, materials, vehicles, supervision, and logistics to perform work projects involving MOST of construction and work elements described in the attached associated requirement documents as the at minimum a Major

SubContractor.

Between $750,000 to $2,000,000

Scope included for buildings, horizontal and vertical infrastructure, and/or other structures: demolish, remove, and properly dispose of all debris and any hazardous materials in accordance with applicable State/Federal regulatory standards and NESHAP regulations/guidelines.

Restoration of demolition sites to a natural condition.

Somewhat Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires

Have provided personnel, equipment, tools, materials, vehicles, supervision, and logistics to perform work projects involving SOME of construction and work elements described in the attached associated requirement documents as the Subcontractor.

Between $750,000 to

$500,000

Scope included for buildings and vertical infrastructure, and/or other structures: demolish, remove, and properly dispose of all debris and any hazardous materials in accordance with applicable

State/Federal regulatory standards and NESHAP regulations/guidelines.

Restoration of demolition sites to a natural condition.

Not Relevant

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

Have provided personnel, equipment, tools, materials, vehicles, supervision, and logistics to perform work projects involving NONE of construction and work elements described in the attached associated requirement documents as the Subcontractor.

Less than $500,000 No experience.

Page M - 7

1.5.7 Quality Assessment: The Past Performance Evaluation Team will review past performance information collected for efforts found to be recent and relevant and determine the quality of the offeror’s past performance and incorporate these findings into the performance confidence assessment.

1.5.8 Performance Confidence Assessment

The assessment process will result in an overall performance confidence assessment of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Neutral Confidence, Limited Confidence and No Confidence, as defined in Table M3 below. Offerors with no recent and relevant past performance history, or if the Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned, shall receive the rating "Neutral Confidence.”

2.0 SOLICITATIONS REQUIREMENTS, TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale to any exceptions taken.

2.1 Number of Contracts to be awarded

The Government intends to award one contract; however, the Government reserves the right to make no award at all, depending on the quality of the proposals, the prices submitted and the availability of funds.

2.2 Correction Potential of Proposals

Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and, in the format, specified in Section L.

Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal. Clarification conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions.

TABLE M3 - PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

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 a reasonable 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 be reasonably assigned. The Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

LIMITED

CONFIDENCE

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

Page M - 8

2.3 Discussions with…