FA301616R00410002.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this Amendment is to extend the Solicitation due date to April 27, 2017 at 12:00pm.

Update Solicitation (Attachment 1) PWS March 14, 2017

Update Solicitation (Attachment 4) Schedule B

Update Solicitation (Attachment 5) PPIS

Update PWS (Attachment 2) Technical Exhibit 5B GFE

Update PWS (Attachment 4) Technical Exhibit 5D Supplies

Include Solicitation (Attachment 8) CBA Addendum

Upload Questions & Answ ers on FBO

Upload Air Force Operational Standards on FBO

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 16

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 29-Mar-2017

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X FA3016-16-R-0041

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

27-Feb-2017

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE

RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

29-Mar-2017

CODE

502D CONTRACTING SQUADRON

1655 SELFRIDGE AVE

JBSA LACKLAND TX 78236-5253

FA3016 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA3016-16-R-0041

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 03-Apr-2017 12:00 PM to 27-Apr-

2017 12:00 PM.

ADDENDUM FAR 52.212-1

Addendum to 52.212-1

Proposal Preparation Instructions

The following have been modified:

General Instructions

A. General. To ensure 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 and subfactors.

Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award in the absence of discussions. Taking exception to any provision in the solicitation without addressing the exception with the contracting office before the cutoff time listed in paragraph B. below will render the proposal ineligible for award.

The offeror agrees to hold the prices 180 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

The proposal in response to this solicitation shall consist of three separate volumes: Volume I – Technical Proposal, Volume II – Price Proposal, and Volume III – Past Performance Information. All documents submitted in response to this request for proposal (RFP) must be fully responsive to and consistent with the requirements of the RFP.

1.

The contracting officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition.

Upon examination of the initial offers, the contracting officer will review this determination, and if adequate price competition exists, no additional cost information will be requested. However, if at any time during this competition the contracting officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the contracting officer to determine the reasonableness of the proposed price.

B. Due Date/Time. To be considered, the complete proposal must be received no later than 12:00 PM local San

Antonio, TX time on __27 Apr 17_____ at the following address:

502 CONS/JBKAB

Attn: Ms. Lauren Macias

1655 Selfridge Avenue

JBSA Lackland AFB TX 78236

Proposals received after 12:00 PM on 27 Apr 17 will be handled in accordance with FAR provision 52.212-1(f).

All proposals must be in English. Fax and email proposals will not be accepted or considered.

C. Proposal Format. The proposals will be on 8 1/2" x 11” paper except for fold-outs used for charts, tables, or diagrams, which may not exceed 11” x 17.” A page is defined as one face or a sheet of paper containing information. Double sided printing will be counted as two pages. All documents submitted should be printed double-sided, as practical. Typing font size shall not be less than 12 pitch. Elaborate formats, bindings, paper, or color presentations will not enhance the rating of the proposal. Page dividers and tabs will not be included in the page count.

D. Solicitation Questions. Solicitation information and amendments will be posted to the Federal Business

Opportunities (FBO) website at http://www.fbo.gov. Offerors may e-mail written questions requesting clarification of the solicitation to the procuring contract specialist Ms. Lauren Macias at lauren.macias.1@us.af.mil and Ms. Erin

Mehaffie at erin.mehaffie.2@us.af.mil, contracting officer. The Government will answer questions received up until

12:00 PM NOON local San Antonio, TX time on 17 Mar 17 and provide responses to interested parties via FBO.

Questions received after these dates may not be answered.

E. Site Visit. A site visit for prospective offerors will be conducted on 14 Mar 17 from 8:00 AM to 3:00 PM local

San Antonio, TX time. The site visit will allow access to the various facilities where the service is to be performed.

All attendees must bring a hair net or hat to enter the kitchen areas of all facilities. Transportation will be provided to the facilities being visited. Lunch will not be provided but site visit attendees are welcome to bring a bag lunch or snacks to eat in between facilities. Offerors are encouraged to attend to view general and local conditions that may affect the cost of contract performance. Not attending the site visit will not relieve offeror from the responsibility of properly estimating the cost of successfully performing the work. In no event shall not attending the site visit constitute grounds for a claim after contract award.

Offerors wishing to attend the site visit shall provide the name, date of birth, driver’s license number (with state), email address, and contact phone number of all attendees to the contract specialist and the contracting officer at lauren.macias.1@us.af.mil and erin.mehaffie.2@us.af.mil by 4:00 PM local San Antonio, TX time on 8 Mar 17.

Further instructions will be provided to all attendees.

F. Subcontracting Plan for Responsible State Licensing Agency. In accordance with FAR 19.702(a)(1), the State

Licensing Agency shall submit a subcontracting plan following procedures in FAR 19.704 with their proposal. The subcontracting plan shall be Acceptable to the contracting officer prior to contract award, if the State Licensing

Agency is found to be the awardee following evaluation procedures in the Addendum to FAR Provision 52.212-2.

G. Notice of Continuation of Essential Contractor Service. In accordance with DFARS 252.237-7024(b), The offeror shall provide with its offer a written plan demonstrating the technical knowledge and the ability to perform contingency operations and activities in a logical and effective manner that facilitates the continuation of performance without disruption to the usual operation of facility and meals. The government will review the plan to http://www.fbo.gov/ mailto:guadalupe.murphy@us.af.mil mailto:audra.novatnak.1@us.af.mil determine if the offeror clearly demonstrates how it will meet the requirements of the PWS during emergencies, crisis, or, natural disaster situations (i.e. strike, ice storm, epidemic, lights or gas outage, surge in unplanned customers, unexpected new unit arrival) that could possibly hinder production and serving of a meal. In making this assessment, the government will review the proposed management capabilities to ensure a smooth transition with no loss of services. The plan must approved by the contracting officer no later than 10 days after contract award.

2. Volume Instructions

A. VOLUME I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

a. Contents. The offeror shall submit a Technical Proposal Volume containing the following:

(1) Table of Contents

(2) Completed Manning Matrix Sheets

(3) Quality Control Plan

b. Technical Subfactors.

(1) Technical Subfactor 1: Manning Matrix

Description: provide a manning matrix showing scheduling of number and types of personnel proposed to meet the estimated quantities of the requirements of the performance work statement. This matrix shall be based on the estimated quantities in the contract line item numbers (CLINs) even though actual quantities may vary in accordance with DFARS Clause

252.216-7006, “Ordering,” and FAR Clause 52.216-19, “Order Limitations.” The manning matrix template attached to the solicitation shall be populated and returned as part of the technical proposal.

(2) Technical Subfactor 2: Quality Control

Description: provide a quality control plan that demonstrates how the offeror will meet all quality control requirements of the Performance Work Statement. The plan shall include offeror’s proposed inspection system and quality control management process.

c. Proposal Limitation. The maximum of allowable pages for Volume I shall be no more than 80 pages total, with the exception of the completed manning matrix sheets. If any proposal exceeds 80 pages total for Volume

I excluding the completed manning matrix sheets, the Government will only evaluate the first 80 pages. If the page limits are exceeded, the pages in excess of the limit shall not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal.

Submit one original hard copy and four redacted hard copies. Submit one original CD ROM digital copy and one redacted CD ROM digital copy. The four redacted hard copies and one redacted digital copy shall be redacted to remove all company names, logos, personnel names. Additionally, all language that would identify an Offeror as the incumbent contractor shall be removed. In the event there are inconsistencies between the hard copy proposal and the digital copy of the proposal, the hard copy proposal shall take precedence.

B. VOLUME II – PRICE PROPOSAL – Submit one original hard copy and one original digital copy. Do not submit additional hard/digital copies.

Contents. The offeror shall submit a Price Proposal Volume containing the following:

(1) Table of Contents

(2) Complete blocks 12, 17a, 30a, 30b, and 30c of the SF1449. In doing so, the offeror agrees to the contract terms and conditions.

(3) Insert proposed unit and extended prices for each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) including all option periods. All unit prices must be rounded to the nearest penny. Pricing on two reimbursable “not to exceed”

CLINs for each performance period are provided by the Government in the CLIN description and shall be included in the proposed price.

(4) Complete Schedule B of the SF1449, in electronic format (CD ROM) and hard copy. If there are discrepancies between the electronic format and the paper proposal, the electronic copy shall prevail.

Note: The Schedule B and the Price Proposal may be submitted on the same CD ROM.

C. VOLUME III – PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

a. Contents. The offeror shall submit a Past and Present Performance Volume as 1 original and 3 hard copies containing the following:

(1) Table of Contents

(2) Summary Page describing the role of the offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner that the offeror is required to provide Past Performance Information on - see paragraph b. below.

(3) Past Performance Information Sheets in accordance with Attachment 5– see paragraph b. below.

(4) Relevant Contract information - see paragraph c. below.

(5) Consent Letters executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing the release of past performance information so the offeror can respond to such information. A sample consent letter is in Attachment 7.

(6) Client Authorization Letters for each identified effort for a commercial customer authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the offeror’s performance.

(7) Organization Structure Change History – See paragraph e. below.

(8) Teaming arrangement or subcontractor letter of intent.

b. Past Performance Information Sheets. Submit information on contracts you consider most relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort. The offeror shall submit

Performance Information Sheets in accordance with the format contained in Attachment 5.

This information is required on the offeror and subcontractor, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners proposed to perform major or critical aspects of the proposed effort to the overall successful performance. The offeror shall submit a maximum of three Performance Information

Sheets identifying active or completed contracts, either Government or commercial, for each prime, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner (within the same division or cost center) and two Performance Information Sheets for each major or critical subcontractor. Each relevant contract shall have been performed during the past three years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Each Performance Information Sheet for each contract is limited to three pages.

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 performance.

c. Relevant Contracts. Submit information on contracts that you consider relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort. Include rationale supporting your assertion of relevancy. For a description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in determining relevancy, see the Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, paragraph 2.C. Note that the

Government will not consider performance on an effort that concluded more than three years prior to the issuance date of this solicitation. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. To clearly link the past performance information to the mission capability subfactors, the offeror should identify which contracts are relevant indictors of performance against a mission capability subfactor. Categorize the relevancy information into the specific evaluation subfactors used to evaluate the proposal:

(1) Subfactor 1 – Manning Matrix

(2) Subfactor 2 – Quality Control

d. Specific Content. Offerors may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk. Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a Limited or a No Confidence rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The offeror is required to clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified.

This may allow the offeror to be considered a Substantial Confidence or Satisfactory Confidence candidate.

e. 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 recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a “roadmap” describing all such changes in the organization of your company. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevancy of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment. Since the government intends to consider present and past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the offeror(s), your “roadmap” should 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.

f. Questionnaires. The Government requests the offeror send out Past Performance Questionnaires to each of the Points of Contact (POC) identified in the Past Performance Volume. POCs submit completed questionnaires directly to the Government. Once the Past Performance Questionnaires are completed by the POCs, the information contained therein shall be considered sensitive and shall not be released to you, the Offeror. A cover letter for transmitting the questionnaire to each POC is provided.

g. Representations and Certifications. Submit required reps and certs with this Volume.

h. Notice of Continuation of Essential Contractor Service. IAW paragraph G above, and shall not exceed 5 pages in length.

i. Phase-In Plan. IAW PWS, contractor shall submit a phase-in plan of no more than 6 pages.

j. Maximum Allowable Pages. The maximum of allowable pages for Volume III shall be no more than 25 pages total, with the exception of the competed Past Performance Questionnaires completed by the offeror’s points of contact, representations and certifications and the Notice of Continuation of Essential Contractor Service. If any proposal exceeds 25 pages total for Volume III excluding the completed questionnaires, the Government will only evaluate the first 25 pages. The pages in excess of the limit shall not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal.

(End of Provision)

ADDENDUM FAR 52.212-2

FAR 52.212-2

Evaluation Instructions

1. General. This procurement will be conducted pursuant to the Randolph-Sheppard Act (RSA), 20 U.S.C. 107 et seq.- Operation of Vending Facilities and 34 CFR 395.33- Operation of Cafeterias by Blind which establish priority for blind persons recognized and represented by the State Licensing Agency (SLA), in the award of contracts for the operation of cafeterias on federal facilities. Accordingly, although the solicitation is set aside 100% for small business, the Texas State Licensing Agency will also be permitted to submit a proposal in accordance with 34 CFR

395.33(b). The Government will award a single contract resulting from this solicitation to the technically

Acceptable, responsible offeror whose proposal, conforming to the solicitation, offers the best value to the

Government, or to the SLA under the Randolph-Sheppard Act priority pursuant to the procedures outlined below in this provision. For purposes of this evaluation, the Best Value Assessment will be used. Past performance is approximately equal in importance to price considerations. Trade-off considerations may result in the determination that it is in the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest priced offeror.

By submission of its offer, the offeror agrees to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements to include those identified specifically as evaluation factors and subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined unawardable.

A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise 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 discussions after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

Evaluations will be conducted in the following manner:

a. The Government evaluation team will evaluate all proposals against all factors in the solicitation using the same evaluation criteria in the FAR 52.212-2 Addendum applied to each proposal. After the evaluation of each proposal is complete, each proposal will receive a technical rating and a performance confidence rating. Based on these ratings and the total evaluated price (TEP) the Government will then establish the competitive range comprised of the most highly rated proposals which provide food service at a fair and reasonable price. It is the Government’s intent to evaluate proposals and award contracts without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms from a price, and technical standpoint. Even if it is determined discussions are not required to address specific evaluation issues, a competitive range determination will be completed. In the absence of discussions, if the SLA is within the competitive range, is found to be technically Acceptable with a performance confidence rating of no less than satisfactory and demonstrates through its proposal that it can provide such an operation at a fair and reasonable price as determined by the government after applying its source selection criteria contained in the solicitation and provide food of high quality comparable to what is currently provided to service members, then priority/award will be given/made to the SLA subject to a determination of contractor responsibility.

b. If the Contracting Officer determines that discussions are required, the Government will hold discussions with all offerors in the competitive range and Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs) will be requested. If, after discussions have begun, the Government determines that an offeror’s proposal should no longer be included in the competitive range, the proposal will be eliminated from consideration for award. Written notice of exclusion from the competitive range will be provided to unsuccessful offerors.

c. After completion of the evaluation in accordance with paragraph b above, a best value determination of the remaining proposals within the CR will be accomplished in accordance with the source selection criteria. If the technically Acceptable offeror with the lowest evaluated reasonable price has an overall Substantial Confidence performance rating, that offer represents the best value for the Government and the best value evaluation process stops at this point. Subject to a determination of contractor responsibility, that offeror will receive award unless preempted by application of the SLA priority in accordance with paragraph f below.

d. If the technically Acceptable offeror with the lowest evaluated reasonable price does not have an overall

Substantial Confidence performance rating, the technically Acceptable reasonably priced proposal with the next lowest TEP will be considered and the process will continue (in order by TEP) until the Government reaches a technically Acceptable, , reasonably priced offer with a Substantial Confidence performance rating or until all technically Acceptable reasonably priced offers remaining in the competitive range are considered, whichever occurs first. If all offers within the competitive range have been considered and no offers have a rating of Substantial

Confidence, the lowest evaluated reasonable price with the highest performance rating, Satisfactory or above, will be reconsidered.

e. At this point, the Government will conduct an integrated best value assessment of all offerors remaining in the competitive range that were considered. The offeror who is then selected is the offeror who represents the best value. Subject to a determination of contractor responsibility, that offeror will receive award unless preempted by application of the SLA priority in accordance with paragraph f below.

f. If the best value offeror as determined under paragraph c or d is not the SLA, the Government will determine if award to the SLA shall preempt the best value offeror using the following criteria in accordance with the Randolph-

Sheppard Act:

1) If the SLA is within the competitive range, is found to be technically Acceptable with a performance confidence rating of no less than satisfactory, demonstrates through its proposal that it can provide such an operation at a fair and reasonable price as determined by the government after applying its source selection criteria contained in the solicitation and provide food of high quality comparable to what is currently provided to service members, then priority/award will be given/made to the SLA subject to a determination of contractor responsibility. If the

SLA proposal does not meet all criteria listed in the RFP, SLA priority does not apply and award will be made to the best value offeror subject to a determination of contractor responsibility. If the SLA is dissatisfied with an action taken relative to its proposal, it may file a complaint with the Secretary of Education under the provisions of 34 CFR

395.37.

2. Evaluation Criteria.

A. Technical Acceptability. The Government will evaluate the technical acceptability of all offers. To be eligible for award, an offer must be technically Acceptable. To be Acceptable, all technical subfactors must be rated technically Acceptable. The overall technical proposal will receive the rating of the lowest rated technical subfactor.

If award is to be made without discussions, the agency will not further evaluate or consider for award any proposal not receiving an overall rating of technically Acceptable.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposal against the requirements of the technical subfactors to determine whether the proposal is Acceptable or Unacceptable, using the ratings and descriptions in the following table:

Technical Acceptable/ Unacceptable Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation

The following technical subfactors will be evaluated:

(1) Technical Evaluation Subfactor 1: Manning Matrix

The government will evaluate the manning matrix proposed by the offeror to determine if it is sufficient to meet all requirements of the Performance Work Statement. In making this assessment, the government will evaluate the numbers, types, and skills of the personnel proposed in the supplied manning matrix template against the requirements of the Performance Work Statement. The government will measure the proposed manning matrix against the estimated quantities in the schedule of supplies/services as the projected level of work.

Standard: a proposed manning matrix has sufficient numbers, types, and skills of personnel to demonstrate capability to successfully perform the estimated workload in the bid schedule in accordance with the Performance

Work Statement.

(2) Technical Evaluation Subfactor 2: Quality Control

The government will evaluate the quality control plan proposed by the offeror to determine if it is sufficient to ensure compliance with all requirements of the Performance Work Statement. In making this assessment, the government will evaluate the proposed inspection system, inspection process, and quality control management structure to determine if it will ensure compliance with all requirements of the Performance Work Statement.

The standard has been met when: The offeror adequately demonstrates a sound, comprehensive, realistic, effective, and efficient quality control approach to correct deficiencies and degradation of services to achieve consistent, efficient, and acceptable performance service levels in accordance with the requirements of the PWS. The strategies outlined in the plan are realistic to minimize the effects of deficiencies/complaints and designed to efficiently and effectively correct and prevent reoccurrence.

B. Price evaluation. Price will be evaluated for fair and reasonableness in accordance with one or more of the proposal analysis techniques described under FAR 15.404-1, which includes, but is not limited to, price analysis and unbalanced pricing. Adequate price competition in accordance with FAR 15.403-1(c)(1)(i) is anticipated to determine price reasonableness and the contracting officer has determined that this requirement meets the definition of a commercial item per FAR 2.101; therefore, certified cost or pricing data are not required per FAR 15.403-

1(b)(1) and (3). However, if at any time during this competition the CO determines that adequate price competition no longer exists or that price reasonableness cannot be determined, offerors may be required to submit data other than certified cost or pricing data, as appropriate, for the CO to determine price reasonableness.

Prices will be evaluated based on the TEP, which will be calculated by multiplying the quantities for each CLIN by the CLIN’s unit price for all contract periods indentified in the SF1449 (Schedule of Supplies/Services). The amounts for the two “Not to Exceed” CLIN’s will be provided.

The contract will include FAR clause 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, with the potential to extend the contract an additional 6 months beyond the awarded contract performance period. In the event the government requires continued performance, the Government's evaluation of prices proposed for the base and all option periods will suffice to be the government's evaluation of prices under the extension of services (ref. FAR 52.217-8). Should an extension of services be required, rates will be adjusted only as result of revisions to applicable Collective

Bargaining Agreement rates.

C. Past Performance Evaluation. Using past performance information (maximum of three will be evaluated) provided by the offeror, past performance questionnaires, and data independently obtained from other government and commercial sources, the contracting officer will evaluate recent and relevant past performance information, and using this information, will develop a performance confidence assessment.

a. The past performance evaluation factor assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an offeror's ability to supply products and services that meet user's needs, based on a demonstrated record of performance. The government will evaluate the offeror's demonstrated record of contract compliance in supplying products and services that meet user's needs, including price and schedule. The past performance evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing aspects of an offeror's recent and relevant past performance, focusing on and targeting performance which is relevant to technical factors and the price factor. Each contract shall be evaluated for recency by determining that performance will have occurred during the past three years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. A relevancy determination of the offeror's past performance, including joint ventures, subcontractors and/or teaming partners, will be made. In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror, teaming partner, or subcontractor whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. Higher relevancy will be assessed for contracts that are most similar to the effort, or portion of the effort, for which that contractor is being proposed. The government is not bound by the offeror's opinion of relevancy. The following relevancy definitions apply:

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings:

Rating Definition:

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

Very Relevant: Performance must meet all of the following criteria: (1) The annual value for the contract must meet or exceed $7 million dollars (2) performance must be in a Department of Defense dining facility environment and (3) performance must have the following seven performance elements: (a) food preparation (b) food serving (c) food ordering (d) menu posting (e) cashier service (f) compliance with sanitation requirements.

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

Relevant: Performance does not meet all requirements for Very Relevant performance but meets all of the following criteria: (1) The annual value for the contract must meet or exceed $4 million dollars (2) performance must have been in a Department of Defense or federal agency dining facility or civilian cafeteria and (3)

Performance must include (a) food preparation (b) food serving (c) food ordering (f) cashier service (g) compliance with sanitation requirements for Relevant.

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

Somewhat Relevant performance: Does not meet all requirements for Very Relevant or Relevant but meets all of the following criteria: (1) The annual value of the contract must meet or exceed $3 million (2) performance must have been in a Department of Defense or federal agency dining facility or civilian cafeteria (3) performance must include (a) food preparation (b) food serving (g) compliance with sanitation requirements for Somewhat Relevant.

Not Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant performance does not meet one of the three relevancy categories above.

The government evaluation team will conduct an in-depth review and evaluation of all performance data obtained to determine how closely the work performed under those efforts relates to the proposed effort. The team will, as deemed necessary, confirm past performance data identified by offerors in their proposals and obtain additional past performance data, if available from other sources. Other government sources may include the Past Performance

Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), the Contractor Performance and Reporting System (CPARS), the Federal

Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), the Electronic Subcontract Reporting System

(eSRS), or other databases; interviews with program managers, contracting officers, and fee determining officials;

and the Defense Contract Management Agency.

When relevant performance record indicates performance problems, the government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised). The government may review more recent contracts or performance evaluations to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and to evaluate their effectiveness.

As a result of an analysis of those positive and negative aspects indicators identified, each offeror will receive an integrated performance confidence assessment, which is the rating for the past performance factor. Although the past performance evaluation focuses on performance that is relevant to the technical factors and the price factor, the resulting performance confidence assessment is made at the past performance factor level and represents an overall evaluation of contractor performance.

Each offeror will receive one of the ratings described below for the past performance factor.

Rating Definition:

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.

Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system.

Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (for example, the relevancy of past performance information) or respond to adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. The government reserves the right to reassess an offeror's performance based on the offeror's responses to or clarifications to certain aspects of their proposal and make a determination on the performance confidence assessment.

52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2016)

(a) North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code and small business size standard. The NAICS code and small business size standard for this acquisition appear in Block 10 of the solicitation cover sheet (SF

1449). However, the small business size standard for a concern which submits an offer in its own name, but which proposes to furnish an item which it did not itself manufacture, is 500 employees.

(b) Submission of offers. Submit signed and dated offers to the office specified in this solicitation at or before the exact time specified in this solicitation. Offers may be submitted on the SF 1449, letterhead stationery, or as otherwise specified in the solicitation. As a minimum, offers must show--

(1) The solicitation number;

(2) The time specified in the solicitation for receipt of offers;

(3) The name, address, and telephone number of the offeror;

(4) A technical description of the items being offered in sufficient detail to evaluate compliance with the requirements in the solicitation. This may include product literature, or other documents, if necessary;

(5) Terms of any express warranty;

(6) Price and any discount terms;

(7) "Remit to" address, if different than mailing address;

(8) A completed copy of the representations and certifications at FAR 52.212-3 (see FAR 52.212-3(b) for those representations and certifications that the offeror shall complete electronically);

(9) Acknowledgment of Solicitation Amendments;

(10) Past performance information, when included as an evaluation factor, to include recent and relevant contracts for the same or similar items and other references (including contract numbers, points of contact with telephone numbers and other relevant information); and

(11) If the offer is not submitted on the SF 1449, include a statement specifying the extent of agreement with all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation. Offers that fail to furnish required representations or information, or reject the terms and conditions of the solicitation may be excluded from consideration.

(c) Period for acceptance of offers. The offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 30 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers, unless another time period is specified in an addendum to the solicitation.

(d) Product samples. When required by the solicitation, product samples shall be submitted at or prior to the time specified for receipt of offers. Unless otherwise specified in this solicitation, these samples shall be submitted at no expense to the Government, and returned at the sender's request and expense, unless they are destroyed during preaward testing.

(e) Multiple offers. Offerors are encouraged to submit multiple offers presenting alternative terms and conditions or commercial items for satisfying the requirements of this solicitation. Each offer submitted will be evaluated separately.

(f) Late submissions, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers:

(1) Offerors are responsible for submitting offers, and any modifications, revisions, or withdrawals, so as to reach the Government office designated in the solicitation by the time specified in the solicitation. If no time is specified in the solicitation, the time for receipt is 4:30 p.m., local time, for the designated Government office on the date that offers or revisions are due.

(2)(i) Any offer, modification, revision, or withdrawal of an offer received at the Government office designated in the solicitation after the exact time specified for receipt of offers is “late” and will not be considered unless it is received before award is made, the Contracting Officer determines that accepting the late offer would not unduly delay the acquisition; and--

(A) If it was transmitted through an electronic commerce method authorized by the solicitation, it was received at the initial point of entry to the Government infrastructure not later than 5:00 p.m. one working day prior to the date specified for receipt of offers; or

(B) There is acceptable evidence to establish that it was received at the Government installation designated for receipt of offers and was under the Government's control prior to the time set for receipt of offers; or

(C) If this solicitation is a request for proposals, it was the only proposal received.

(ii) However, a late modification of an otherwise successful offer, that makes its terms more favorable to the

Government, will be considered at any time it is received and may be accepted.

(3) Acceptable evidence to establish the time of receipt at the Government installation includes the time/date stamp of that installation on the offer wrapper, other documentary evidence of receipt maintained by the installation, or oral testimony or statements of Government personnel.

(4) If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal Government processes so that offers cannot be received at the Government office designated for receipt of offers by the exact time specified in the solicitation, and urgent

Government requirements preclude amendment of the solicitation or other notice of an extension of the closing date, the time specified for receipt of offers will be deemed to be extended to the same time of day specified in the solicitation on the first work day on which normal Government processes resume.

(5) Offers may be withdrawn by written notice received at any time before the exact time set for receipt of offers.

Oral offers in response to oral solicitations may be withdrawn orally. If the solicitation authorizes facsimile offers, offers may be withdrawn via facsimile received at any time before the exact time set for receipt of offers, subject to the conditions specified in the solicitation concerning facsimile offers. An offer may be withdrawn in person by an offeror or its authorized representative if, before the exact time set for receipt of offers, the identity of the person requesting withdrawal is established and the person signs a receipt for the offer.

(g) Contract award (not applicable to Invitation for Bids). The Government intends to evaluate offers and award a contract without discussions with offerors. Therefore, the offeror's initial offer should contain the offeror's best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary. The Government may reject any or all offers if such action is in the public interest; accept other than the lowest offer; and waive informalities and minor irregularities in offers received.

(h) Multiple awards. The Government may accept any item or group of items of an offer, unless the offeror qualifies the offer by specific limitations. Unless otherwise provided in the Schedule, offers may not be submitted for quantities less than those specified. The Government reserves the right to make an award on any item for a quantity less than the quantity offered, at the unit prices offered, unless the offeror specifies otherwise in the offer.

(i) Availability of requirements documents cited in the solicitation. (1)(i) The GSA Index of Federal Specifications, Standards and Commercial Item Descriptions, FPMR Part 101-29, and copies of specifications, standards, and commercial item descriptions cited in this solicitation may be obtained for a fee by submitting a request to--GSA

Federal Supply Service Specifications Section, Suite 8100, 470 East L'Enfant Plaza, SW, Washington, DC

20407, Telephone (202) 619-8925, Facsimile (202) 619-8978.

(ii) If the General Services Administration, Department of Agriculture, or Department of Veterans Affairs issued this solicitation, a single copy of specifications, standards, and commercial item descriptions cited in this solicitation may be obtained free of charge by submitting a request to the addressee in paragraph (i)(1)(i) of this provision.

Additional copies will be issued for a fee.

(2) Most unclassified Defense specifications and standards may be downloaded from the following ASSIST websites:

(i) ASSIST (https://assist.dla.mil/online/start/).

(ii) Quick Search (http://quicksearch.dla.mil/).

(iii) ASSISTdocs.com (http://assistdocs.com).

(3) Documents not available from ASSIST may be ordered from the Department of Defense Single Stock Point

(DoDSSP) by--

(i) Using the ASSIST Shopping Wizard (https://assist.dla.mil/wizard/index.cfm);

(ii) Phoning the DoDSSP Customer Service Desk (215) 697-2179, Mon-Fri, 0730 to 1600 EST; or

(iii) Ordering from DoDSSP, Building 4, Section D, 700 Robbins Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19111-5094, Telephone

(215) 697-2667/2179, Facsimile (215) 697-1462.

(4) Nongovernment (voluntary) standards must be obtained from the organization responsible for their preparation, publication, or maintenance.

(j) Unique entity identifier. (Applies to all offers exceeding $3,500, and offers of $3,500 or less if the solicitation requires the Contractor to be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database.) The Offeror shall enter, in the block with its name and address on the cover page of its offer, the annotation ``Unique Entity Identifier'' followed by the unique entity identifier that identifies the Offeror's name and address. The Offeror also shall enter its Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) indicator, if applicable. The EFT indicator is a four-character suffix to the unique entity identifier. The suffix is assigned at the discretion of the Offeror to establish additional SAM records for identifying alternative EFT accounts (see subpart 32.11) for the same entity. If the Offeror https://assist.dla.mil/online/start/ http://quicksearch.dla.mil/ http://assistdocs.com/ https://assist.dla.mil/wizard/index.cfm does not have a unique entity identifier, it should contact the entity designated at www.sam.gov for unique entity identifier establishment directly to obtain one. The Offeror should indicate that it is an offeror for a Government contract when contacting the entity designated at www.sam.gov for establishing the unique entity identifier.

(k) System for Award Management. Unless exempted by an addendum to this solicitation, by submission of an offer, the offeror acknowledges the requirement that a prospective awardee shall be registered in the SAM database prior to award, during performance and through final payment of any contract resulting from this solicitation. If the Offeror does not become registered in the SAM database in the time prescribed by the Contracting

Officer, the Contracting Officer will proceed to award to the next otherwise successful registered Offeror. Offerors may obtain information on registration and annual confirmation requirements via the SAM database…