FA3047-10-R-0012-0002 Amendment to RFP Roofing IDIQ

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

*** SEE PAGE 2 OF THIS SOLICITATION AMENDMENT SF30 ***

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 12

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 28-Jun-2010

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 FA3047-10-R-0012

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

07-Jun-2010

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 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

28-Jun-2010

CODE

802D CONTRACTING SQUADRON

1655 SELFRIDGE AVE

LACKLAND AFB TX 78236-5253

FA3047 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA3047-10-R-0012

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

CHANGES

Purpose: To incorporate the following changes:

A. Deleted "Firm-Firm Price (FFP)" in both Section H, Paragraph A and Section M, Third Paragraph

B. Section H, Paragraph K has been revised

C. Changed FAR 52.217-8 verbiage from "within 15 days" to "no later than 15 calendar days prior contract expiration"

D. Changed FAR 52.217-9 verbiage from "within 15 days" to "no later than 15 calendar days prior contract expiration"

E. Section L, Paragraph (I)(A) has been revised

F. Corrected Section L, Paragraph (I)(B)(1)(d) DFARS Clause from "252-223-7001" to "252.223-7001"

G. Section L, Paragraph (III)(A) has been revised

H. Section L, Paragraph (III)(D)(1&2) has been revised

I. Section L, Last Paragraph has been revised.

J. Deleted FAR Clause 52.215-5 Facsimile Proposals

K. The following paragraphs in Section M has been revised; a. Third Paragraph; b. Fifth Paragraph; c. Paragraph

B; Paragraph (B)(1); d. Paragraph (C)(2)(a & b); e. Paragraph (C)(2)(b)(1); f. Paragraph (C)(2)(b)(2) including the Relevancy Table; g. Paragraph (C)(2)(c)(2); h. Paragraph (C)(2)(c)(4); i. Paragraph (C)(2)(c)(5); j.

Paragraph (C)(2)(c)(6); k. Paragraph D; and l. Paragraph F.

L. Deleted Section L Paragraph III sentence "Current and relevant performance may have greater impact than less recent and less relevant performance (reference Section M)"

END

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

A. The required response date/time has changed from 07-Jul-2010 11:00 AM to 08-Jul-2010 11:00 AM.

SECTION H - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

The following have been modified:

SF 1442, BLOCK 10 CONTINUATION

Title: Roofing IDIQ for Lackland AFB, TX. The work is required in support of the 802D Base Civil Engineer

Squadron (CES). Contract Delivery Orders will support roof requirements primarily for Lackland AFB, to include the Lackland Training Annex (LTA), Wilford Hall Medical Center (WHMC), ancillary medical facilities, Lackland

AFB assets at Camp Bullis, and Kelly Field Annex, Texas. The Government reserves the right under this acquisition to execute delivery orders beyond the primary to include any military installation under the BRAC Joint

Basing plan for San Antonio, TX.

A. This is an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), single contract award acquisition. Award will be made pursuant to the 8(a) Business Development Program. This acquisition is 8(a) competitive basis only to those within the San Antonio District Office which have the assigned NAICS code of 238160. The small business size standard is

$14 million.

B. There is a Bona Fide Need for subject project; a Delivery Order will be issued on Contract Award Date.

C. The magnitude of this Contract (including all Option Years) is between $5,000,000.00 and $10,000,000.00.

D. Contract Ceiling for subject project is not to exceed (NTE) $10,000,000.00.

E. Amendment(s) issued during this solicitation will be incorporated upon award.

F. Pre-Proposal Conference / Site Visit is Scheduled for 8 Jun 10 at 9:00am (CST). Location: 802D Contracting

Squadron (Legacy Room). For POC information, see Section L, FAR 52.236-27, Site Visit (Construction).

G. Labor Laws: Davis Bacon Act is applicable to all individual Delivery Order requirements that are $2,000 and above. The General Decision for subject project located in Section J - Attachment 3 will be used for Roofing IDIQ solicitation/contract and will only be updated when exercising an Option Year. Contractor unit costs for each year should account for the wage rate adjustments per year.

H. Bonds: FAR 28.102-1(a), The Miller Act, 40 U.S.C. 3131, requires performance and payment bonds for any construction contract exceeding $100,000. This requirement will be requested for all Delivery Orders $100,000 and above. An irrevocable letter of credit and payment bond will be required for delivery orders greater than $30,000, but not greater than $100,000. See Section I for Bond Clauses; FAR 52.228-1, Bid Guarantee; 52.228-14, Irrevocable Letter of Credit; and 52.228-15, Performance and Payment Bonds--Construction.

I. Offeror must READ and COMPLY with the entire solicitation package (including all attachments). Section L, General Instructions -- Proposal Preparation Instructions gives major details. Basis of award: This is a competitive best value source selection in which competing offerors' past performance history will be evaluated on a basis, significantly more important than cost or price considerations. However, cost/price will contribute substantially to the selection decision.

J. Section J – Attachment 1 (Bid Schedule); Offeror MUST fill in all “Yellow Highlighted” Excel cells (Company

Name, Unit Prices, and Signature Block (Name / Title and Date)). Making changes to the Bid Schedule Excel document may make an Offeror Proposal “Non-Responsive”. Use ONLY two decimal places to the right (to the hundredths) of the decimal point for Unit Prices entries – Example of an “acceptable” unit price: $1.95. If you use

$1.9578 (non-acceptable), the excel document will round up the Unit Price, to read $1.96 causing your Extended

Amounts and Total Amounts for each year and Total Amount of your Offer to have errors. Any pricing errors could require clarifications / discussions and/or be rejected / non-responsive. All unit prices (including Compensate Time

(percentage)) for CLINS must include all Offeror’s cost factors; labor, material, equipment, other direct costs, labor burden, overhead, profit, etc. DO NOT provide additional cost or pricing documents not required under this solicitation.

K. Past Performance requirements are in Section L of this solicitation. NOTE: Recency is defined as some portion of performance that begun no less than three (3) months from issuance of this solicitation and some portion of performance occurring within the last three (3) years of the date of this solicitation. If the project is not within the defined recency period, it will not be evaluated for relevancy. Relevant performance includes performance of efforts involving requirements that are similar to the RFP specifications.

L. The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation, either before or after the closing date.

M. Contracting Officer: Jackie L. Murray: 210-671-1728; email: jackie.murray@us.af.mil

(END)

SECTION I - CONTRACT CLAUSES

52.217-8 OPTION TO EXTEND SERVICES (NOV 1999)

The Government may require continued performance of any services within the limits and at the rates specified in the contract. These rates may be adjusted only as a result of revisions to prevailing labor rates provided by the

Secretary of Labor. The option provision may be exercised more than once, but the total extension of performance hereunder shall not exceed 6 months. The Contracting Officer may exercise the option by written notice to the

Contractor no later than 15 calendar days prior contract expiration.

(End of clause)

52.217-9 OPTION TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT (MAR 2000)

(a) The Government may extend the term of this contract by written notice to the Contractor no later than 15 calendar days prior contract expiration; provided that the Government gives the Contractor a preliminary written notice of its intent to extend at least 60 days before the contract expires. The preliminary notice does not commit the

Government to an extension.

(b) If the Government exercises this option, the extended contract shall be considered to include this option clause.

(c) The total duration of this contract, including the exercise of any options under this clause, shall not exceed 66 months or 5.6 years.

(End of clause) mailto:jackie.murray@us.af.mil

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS -- PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

I. GENERAL. These instructions prescribe the format of the proposal and describe the approach for the development and presentation of proposal data. These instructions are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information and to provide for the understanding and comprehensive evaluation of proposals. Carefully review this section and its relationship to Section M prior to commencing proposal preparation. All solicitation amendments must be acknowledged in accordance with Section L, FAR 52.215-1, Instruction to Offerors--

Competitive Acquisition.

A. ORIGINAL AND ONE (1) COPY OF THE PROPOSAL (Hard copies) and ONE ELECTRONIC COPY

(DVD or CD) must be completed in pdf. format and returned to the 802D Contracting Squadron, 1655 Selfridge

Avenue, Lackland AFB TX 78636-5253, PRIOR to the exact time set for receipt of proposals. The envelope used in submitting your reply must be plainly marked with the solicitation number, as shown above and the date and local time set forth for receipt of proposals in the solicitation document.

B. The Offeror's proposal shall consist of two (2) separately bound volumes:

1. Volume 1, Price: Offerors shall complete and return the following:

(a) Section A – In its entirety, complete the "Offeror" portion of the Standard Form 1442 (i.e. pages 1 and 2).

An official having the authority to contractually bind your company must sign and date the SF 1442 in accordance with FAR 4.102. One copy of the SF 1442 must bear an original signature. In accordance with

FAR 28.101-2; an Offer/Bid Guarantee Bond in the amount of 20% is required.

(b) Section B – Insert the price(s) in the CLIN areas provided.

(c) Section G – Insert the required information in the spaces provided, as applicable.

(d) Section I –FAR Clause 52.223-3, Hazardous Material Identification and Material Safety Data, and

DFARS Clause 252.223-7001. Insert the required information in the spaces provided, as applicable.

(e) Section J – Attachment 1 (Line Item Schedule), insert the price(s) in the area provided.

(f) Section K – ALL required certifications and representations.

2. Volume 2, Past Performance Information. There is no page limitation for this volume. If submitting subcontractor past performance data, a subcontractor consent letter must be provided.

NOTE: Volume 1 constitutes the offer/proposal, while Volume 2 is obtained for evaluation purposes in performance rating.

C. Technical Acceptability. A technical proposal is not required; however, the offeror shall submit a statement to the effect that the offeror takes no exception to the specifications and requirements of the RFP in order to be determined technically acceptable.

II. VOLUME 1, PRICE INFORMATION. Price Information: Offerors shall provide all price information necessary to provide a meaningful basis for the government's analysis and evaluation of price for the project as set forth in Section M of this solicitation. The Contractor shall insert its proposed prices in SF 1442, Section B

(CLINS) and Section J, Attachment 1 (Line Item Schedule).

III. VOLUME 2, PRESENT & PAST PERFORMANCE:

A. When addressing Present & Past Performance evaluation criteria set forth in Section M of the solicitation, the offeror shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire, Section J, (Attachment 4) to not more than five (5) Federal, State and Local Government references, for whom the offeror has performed similar construction/services that begun no less than three (3) months from issuance of this solicitation and occuring with in the last three (3) years of the date of this solicitation. Information on no more than two (2) projects should be submitted by any one reference. The offeror is not required to submit government references but if offeror provides references from private industry sources must not be prohibited from furnishing information to the

Government. The Past Performance Questionnaires must be forwarded to a verified point of contact at each of these agencies or business organizations for completion. After completion, the questionnaires must be sent by the agency/organization directly to the contracting specialist or contracting officer (paragraph C. below). Offerors may include with their proposal information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and the offeror’s corrective actions. The Government will consider this information as well as information obtained from any other sources when evaluating the offeror’s past performance. The Government may contact the references for further information. In selecting the references, offerors should submit only those that are recent and relevant information. Furnish the following information for each contract referenced:

Company/Division Name

Program Title

Contracting Agency

Contract Number

Brief Description of the Contract Effort

Type of Contract

Period of Performance

Contract Dollar Value at Time of Award

Current Contract Value including all Changes and Exercised Options

Original Completion Date

Current or Actual Completion Date

Discussion of any problems areas and final solutions

Name, address, telephone e-mail address and fax number of the Program Manager, Administrative

Contracting Officer (ACO) and Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)

B. Offerors are requested to submit past performance information to the Contracting Officer within seven (7) calendar days prior to the date specified for receipt of proposals. However, past performance information will not be considered late as long as it is received by the time and date established for receipt of proposals.

C. The cover letter (sample provided) you include with the Past Performance Questionnaires request shall reference the following:

802D Contracting Squadron/LGCA-3 Fax number: (210) 671-3360

1655 Selfridge Avenue

Lackland AFB, TX 78236

Mr. Ryan Bueno, Contracting Specialist Mr. Jack Murray, Contracting Officer

Email: ryan.bueno.1@us.af.mil Email: jackie.murray@us.af.mil

Phone Number: (210) 671-1726 Phone Number: (210) 671-1728

D. Offerors lacking relevant present/past performance may submit information regarding predecessor companies who have relevant present/past performance or key subcontractors that will perform major or critical mailto:ryan.bueno.1@us.af.mil mailto:jackie.murray@us.af.mil aspects of the requirement, if such information is relevant to this acquisition. In this case, offerors shall provide relevant information to allow government evaluators to conduct a Past/Present Performance evaluation on the predecessor companies and/or subcontractors. Such information shall, as a minimum, include:

1. Name(s) of Predecessor Company/Key Subcontractor and include:

Complete Address

E-Mail Address, Telephone and Fax Number

Brief synopsis of relevant past/present performance

2. Provide three (3) references for each Predecessor Company/Key Subcontractor and include for each reference:

Complete Address

Point of Contact

E-Mail Address, Telephone and Fax Number

Contract Number

Contract Type

Project Title

Contract Period of Performance

Brief description of work

3. If the offeror submits past performance information of major subcontractor(s) for evaluation, it shall also submit a consent letter, executed by the subcontractor(s), authorizing release of past performance information to the offeror so the government evaluators can discuss such information with the offeror.

DISPOSITION OF UNSUCCESSFUL PROPOSALS

In compliance with FAR Subpart 4.8, the Government will retain one hard copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals will be destroyed by the Government.

The following have been deleted:

52.215-5 Facsimile Proposals OCT 1997

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION CRITERIA

Basis For Contract Award: This is a competitive best value source selection in which competing offerors' past performance history will be evaluated on a basis significantly more important than cost or price considerations.

However, cost/price will contribute substantially to the selection decision.

By submission of its offer, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors.

This is a competitive SBA 8(a), best value, IDIQ single award acquisition. The Government intends to award one contract to the offeror deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose proposal conforms to the RFP's requirements and is judged to represent the best value to the Government. The best value is the most advantageous offer, price and other factors considered, consistent with the Government's stated importance of evaluation criteria. If the responsible and reasonably priced offeror with the lowest evaluated price is determined technically acceptable and judged to have an exceptional performance confidence rating, that offer 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 offers. The Government reserves the right to award a contract to other than the lowest priced offeror if the lowest priced offeror is judged to have a performance confidence rating other than substantial. In that event, the contracting officer shall make an integrated assessment best value award decision. This may result in award being made to a higher-rated, higher-priced offeror when the Contracting Officer determines that the past/present performance of the higher-priced offeror outweighs the price difference. Award shall be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers. To arrive at a best value decision, the Contracting Officer will integrate the evaluation of past performance and price.

While the Government and the Contracting Officer will strive for maximum objectivity, the evaluation process, by its nature, is subjective and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire evaluation process.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions. Therefore, the offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms from price standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

The Government reserves the right to reject any or all offers if such action is in the Government's best interests. The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

A. Technical Acceptability. An offeror will be determined technically acceptable if no exception is taken to the specifications and requirements of the RFP. The offeror shall submit a statement to that effect. Other than the necessity for this statement in writing, no written technical proposal is required. Omission of this statement will result in a determination of technical unacceptability.

B. Price Proposal. The Government will evaluate the price proposals of all technically acceptable proposals, and any other relevant proposal data submitted, to determine if proposed prices are reasonable and balanced based on the offeror (s) price proposal.

1. Each offeror’s Total Evaluated Price (TEP) will be calculated as the sum of the Firm-Fixed-Price Basic Year

CLIN 0001 and all Options CLINS; including all Sub-CLINS (Basic Year and Option Years) in Section J –

Attachment 1 (Line Item Schedule). All proposed prices for all contract periods will be evaluated for reasonableness and balance, which may be determined based on prices submitted by the competition, historical pricing, current market conditions, comparison to the Independent Government Estimate, and/or other proposal analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404-1. Evaluation of option years will not obligate the Government to exercise options.

2. The Government may require submission of information other than cost or pricing data to the extent necessary to evaluate price reasonableness. A contract will not be awarded to an offeror whose proposed price is not determined reasonable.

3. Proposed contract line item prices will be evaluated for unbalanced pricing (FAR 15.404-1(g)). Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items or sub line items appears to be significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. An offeror’s proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

C. Past Performance. The Government will evaluate past performance to assess how well the performed work relevant to the type of effort and type of requirement described in the solicitation as an indicator offeror’s ability to perform the contract successfully. The Government will use the following procedures in evaluating past performance:

1. The Government will accomplish the past performance evaluation, assigning a performance confidence assessment rating to the offeror’s proposal based on performance ratings of recent and relevant efforts.

2. The Government will seek relevant performance information from:

(a) Past and present efforts provided by the offeror using Past Performance Questionnaires, which are forwarded by the offeror to their selected sources or forwarded by the contracting officer to the contractor’s selected sources and;

(b) Data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources. The past performance evaluation will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition. The past performance evaluation may also consider the past performance of affiliated companies or operating divisions within the parent company or joint ventures of the parent company when it is reasonable to attribute the experience of these past efforts to the proposed effort and when the clearly demonstrates the resources (e.g. financial resources, overall oversight and management or other resources) of the parent or affiliated division will meaningfully affect performance of the instant acquisition.

The past performance of teaming partners or subcontractors who are proposed to perform less than 20% of the work and are not proposed to perform critical aspects will not be evaluated.

(1) Recency is defined as some portion of performance that begun no less than three (3) months from issuance of this solicitation and some portion of performance occurring within the last three (3) years of the date of this solicitation. If the project is not recent, it will not be evaluated for relevancy or quality of performance.

(2) Relevant performance includes performance of efforts involving requirements that are similar to the

RFP specifications. Relevancy will be assigned ratings of Very Relevant, Relevant, Somewhat Relevant, and Not Relevant. The Government will give greater consideration to performance on those contracts deemed more relevant to the effort described in this RFP. 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. A performance effort that is found to be not relevant it will not be rated for quality of performance.

The following table provides relevancy definitions that will be used:

RELEVANCY DEFINITIONS

RATING DEFINITION

Very Relevant

Very relevant performance carries more weight than relevant or somewhat relevant. To qualify as very relevant the past/present performance effort must meet all of the following criteria: (1) the dollar value of the acquisition must have equaled or exceeded $2 million (2) performance must have included one of the following two items: a. Steel Standing Seam; b. Built Up

Roof (BUR) (3) performance must have been completed in one of the following three project complexities: a. 10-story hospital buildings

(requiring very high lift equipment); b. facilities abutting to active runways and aprons; c. multi-story and single story buildings in secured perimeters requiring security escorts at all times and controlled vehicle entry.

Relevant

Relevant performance fails to meet all requirements for very relevant performance but meets all of the following: (1) the dollar value of the acquisition must have equaled or exceeded $1 million (2) performance must have included one of the following two items: a. Steel Standing Seam; b.

Built Up Roof (BUR)

Somewhat Relevant

Somewhat relevant performance does not meet all requirements for very relevant or relevant but meets all of the following: (1) The dollar value of the acquisition must have equaled or exceeded $500K (2) performance must have included one of the following two items: a. Steel Standing Seam; b.

Built Up Roof (BUR)

Not Relevant Not relevant performance is all performance that fails to meet one of the three relevancy categories above.

(c) Performance information may be obtained from the references on each project submitted. The

Government may also obtain performance data from other sources.

(1) In addition to evaluating the extent to which the offeror’s performance meets basic contract SOW, specifications, and technical requirements. The assessment will consider the offeror’s history of adhering to schedules (including the administrative aspects of performance).

(2) Where a 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).

(3) The following performance definitions will be used in the assessment of performance.

PERFORMANCE DEFINITIONS

PERFORMANCE

RATING

DEFINITION

Exceptional

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Very Good

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some requirements to the Government’s benefit. The contractual performance of the element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Satisfactory

Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions or the contractor’s actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

Unsatisfactory

Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element being assessed contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

Not Applicable Unable to provide a score. Performance in this area is not applicable to the effort assessed.

(4) The Government will develop a performance confidence rating based on the quality of performance on recent and relevant performance efforts. The evaluation will result in a performance confidence assessment of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Limited Confidence, No Confidence, or Unknown

Confidence as defined below for the offeror. Offerors with no relevant past or present performance history or whose performance record is so limited that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned shall receive the rating of “Unknown Confidence”, meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably.

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT DEFINITIONS

RATING DEFINITION

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

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

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

No Confidence

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

Unknown Confidence No performance record is identifiable or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

(5) The Government will rank all technically acceptable offers by evaluated price. If the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated reasonable price has an overall “Substantial Confidence” performance confidence assessment rating, that offer represents the best value for the Government and the evaluation stops at this point without consideration or evaluation of the past performance of any other offeror.

Award will be made to that offeror without entering into discussions contingent upon a determination of the contractor responsibility in accordance with FAR Part 9.

(6) If the lowest reasonably priced offer technically acceptable offer does not have a Substantial Confidence performance confidence assessment rating, the next lowest reasonably priced, technically acceptable offeror will be evaluated for performance confidence, and the process will continue (in order by TEP) until the

Government reaches a technically acceptable offer with a Substantial Confidence performance confidence assessment rating or until all technically acceptable offers are evaluated for past performance, whichever occurs first. The Source Selection Authority will then make an integrated assessment best value award decision.

D. The Government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective offerors. Offerors shall submit sufficient information and in the format specified in Proposal Preparation Instructions. Offeror’s may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (e.g., the relevance of past 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 performance effort or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system.

Exchanges conducted with regard to adverse past performance or 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.

E. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest. If the

Government elects to hold discussions, a competitive range will be established based on FAR 15.306(c) procedures and this solicitation. The Government reserves the right to further limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. If the contracting officer 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 this decision shall be provided to unsuccessful offerors in accordance with FAR 15.503. Offerors excluded or otherwise eliminated from the competitive range may request a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505 or 15.506.

F. After conclusion of discussions and receipt of final proposal revisions, the Government will rank all offers remaining in the competitive range by TEP. If the lowest reasonably priced technically acceptable offer, is determined responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9, and has a Substantial Confidence performance confidence assessment rating, award will be made to that offeror as this represents the best value to the Government. If the lowest reasonably priced offer does not have a Substantial Confidence performance confidence assessment rating, the next lowest reasonably priced, technically acceptable, and responsible offeror will be considered, and the process will continue (in order by TEP) until the Government reaches an offer with a Substantial Confidence performance confidence assessment rating or until all offers remaining in the competitive range are considered, whichever occurs first. The Source Selection Authority will then make an integrated assessment best value award decision of those offers remaining in the competitive range whose offers are considered.

(End of Summary of Changes)