Amendment_2__FA4417-17-T-0019.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 add an additional attachment, extend the solicitation closing date FROM: Friday, 18 Aug 17 at 4:00PM

C.S.T, TO: Tuesday, 22 Aug 17 at 11:00AM C.S.T., and to post additional answ ers to questions received.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 12

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 15-Aug-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 FA441717T0019

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

21-Jul-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

15-Aug-2017

CODE

1 SOCONS

350 TULLY ST.

HURLBURT FIELD FL 32544

FA4417 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA441717T0019

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 18-Aug-2017 11:00 AM to 22-Aug-2017 11:00 AM.

The following have been modified:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 1 Performance Work

Statement

43 19-JULY-2017

Attachment 2 Wage Determination

2015-4531, Rev 3

11 29-JUN-2017

Attachment 3 DD 254 2 07-JUN-2017

Attachment 4 Financial Reference Sheet 1 07-JUN-2017

Attachment 5 Past Performance

Questionnaire

3 07-JUN-2017

Attachment 6 Example POI 3 15-AUG-2017

Attachment 7 Responsive Quote

Checklist

1 07-JUN-2017

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 2017):

THIS SECTION IS FOR SOLICITATION PURPOSES ONLY. THIS SECTION WILL BE PHYSICALLY

REMOVED FROM ANY RESULTANT AWARD.

1.. Offerors are responsible for submitting offers, revisions, and amendments to the solicitation so as to reach identified personnel by the date and time specified in this solicitation.

1.1. Only electronic versions of proposals will only be accepted. Paper copies of offers will be rejected and not be considered for award. Offers may be submitted in the following ways:

1.1.1. Submit offers electronically to the Government via the Army AMRDEC site at https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/ or via email to the Government POCs: abigail.geniec.1@us.af.mil, and eric.moss@us.af.mil. All documents shall be submitted in .pdf format. The title of the documents shall include the volume number and offeror’s CAGE code (i.e., “Vol 1 Price CAGE#”).

1.2. All offers shall be complete, clearly presented, and contain sufficient detail for effective evaluation as detailed in

Addendum 52.212-2 of this solicitation. Offers shall be neat, indexed (cross-indexed as appropriate) and assembled in an orderly manner. Elaborate artwork, expensive visual, and other presentation aids are neither necessary nor desired. Offers shall only contain information that is relevant to this solicitation.

1.3. Page Size, Format and Limit

https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/ mailto:abigail.geniec.1@us.af.mil mailto:eric.moss@us.af.mil

1.3.1. A page is defined as each face of an 8 ½” X 11” document containing information. Page limitations shall be treated as maximums and shall apply to all electronic files documents submitted. Pages in excess of the maximum page limits defined below will not be evaluated.

1.3.2. For the purposes of formatting, font size shall not be less than 12 pitch.

1.3.3. Pages shall be numbered sequentially in each volume and identify the solicitation number.

1.3.4. Page limits shall be considered maximums. Pages in excess of the maximum will not be read or evaluated.

When Evaluation Notices (ENs) are necessary, the Government will issue them by electronic means to prospective offerors. Page limitations may be placed on responses to ENs and such limitations will be provided at the time the

EN is issued.

1.3.5. Indexing. Electronic files should be located in appropriately labelled files so as to easily discern each volume as outlined in 1.3.1.1. – 1.3.1.3. Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents identify the subparagraphs within that volume. The table of contents is not included in the maximum page limitation.

1.4. OFFER PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS: To assure timely and equitable evaluation of the offers, the offeror must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including format, 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 being ineligible for award.

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. Non-responsive offers will not be evaluated.

The response shall include five (5) parts:

1) Cover Page and Completed DD-254;

2) Volume I – Price;

3) Volume II – Technical

4) Volume III- Past Performance

5) Responsive Quote Checklist

The content of each part is discussed below.

1.4.1. COVER PAGE and DD-254:

1.4.1.1. Solicitation Number

1.4.1.2. Solicitation Date and Time specified for receipt of offers

1.4.1.3. Company name

1.4.1.4. Company address and remit to address if different than mailing address

1.4.1.5. Company point of contact (s)

1.4.1.6. Company point of contact(s) e-mail address(es)

1.4.1.7. Company point of contact(s) telephone numbers

1.4.1.8. SAM registration expiration date

1.4.1.9. CAGE code

1.4.1.10. DUNS number

1.4.1.11. Registration confirmation for NAICS code 611699

1.4.1.12. Offer Acceptance Period.

1.4.1.13. Offeror shall submit a completed DD254 (Attachment 3), including the Industrial

Security Facilities CAGE code; location of the company and Facility Security Officer (FSO) information.

1.5. VOLUME I – PRICE: There is no page limit for Volume I. Offerors shall submit the following information in

Volume I:

1.5.1. A statement the offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the solicitation in its entirety.

Offerors shall clearly identify any exceptions to the solicitation and provide accompanying rational.

1.5.2. A statement acknowledging all solicitation amendments, if any were issued.

1.5.3. Proposed unit prices and extended total prices for Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) 0001 – 4006, to include all option periods. All unit prices shall be rounded to no more than two places after the decimal point. The extended amount shall equal the unit price multiplied by the quantity of each unit.

1.5.4. Completed representations and certifications at FAR Provision 52.212-3 and all other provisions and clauses that require fill-in information. See FAR 52.212-3 for those representations and certifications the offer shall complete electronically.

1.5.5. Teaming Arrangement Documentation (If Applicable). If Teaming Arrangements are contemplated they must comply with the appropriate Federal Regulations (13 C.F.R. Part 121 (Size Regulations), Part 124 8(a) & SDB) and

Part 125 (Government Contracting Programs)). Offerors shall provide the following information not later than the date and time proposals are due:

1.5.6. Signed Teaming Agreement. Include the size of each concern required at 13 CFR 121.103(h) (i) (2) (ii) and

124.513(b) (1).

1.5.6.1. Clearly establish roles of each party (who is the prime, who is the subcontractor, and who is responsible for what tasks, contract administration, proposals, work management, etc.).

1.5.6.2. Subcontractor past performance cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor’s consent.

Include a letter 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.

1.5.6.3. Identify each member’s share of the prospective contract, 50/50, 51/49, etc.

1.5.6.4. Include exclusivity that the team member will not be replaced for the duration of the contract, any exceptions should be identified and assurance that the team members are not teaming with another firm for the same procurement.

1.5.6.5. Include a statement of acknowledgement that the Prime Contractor is responsible for adhering to contract terms and conditions and daily management. The Prime Contractor is obligated to negotiate in good faith and responsible for conveying mandatory Government terms and conditions to subcontractors.

1.5.6.6. Include a statement of acknowledgement that the prime contractor shall remain fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any teaming agreement between the prime contractor and its subcontractors.

1.5.7. Joint Venture Documentation (if applicable): The Joint Venture Agreement must be received by SBA prior to proposal due date and approved before award of any resulting contract. If you are contemplating a joint venture on this project, you must advise your assigned SBA Business Opportunity Specialist (BOS) as soon as possible. It is also recommended that the agreement be submitted as soon as practicable to ensure compliance with established regulations. Any corrections and/or changes needed can be made only when your BOS has adequate time for a thorough review before the proposal due date. NO CORRECTIONS AND/OR CHANGES ARE ALLOWED AFTER

TIME OF SUBMISSION OF OFFERS.

1.5.7.1. If a Joint Venture is contemplated, offerors shall provide the following information not later than the date and time proposals are due:

1.5.7.2. Include all requirements at 13 C.F.R. Part 124.513, including size concern information;

1.5.7.3. Include a statement confirming that the 8(a) firm will comply with FAR Clause 52.219-14(c)(1); and

1.5.7.4. Joint Venture registration in SAM with NAICS code of 611699 on representations and certifications.

1.6. Financial Institution Reference Sheet (Attachment 4 to this solicitation)

1.7. VOLUME II – TECHNICAL: Part one (1) of the Volume II is limited to 30 pages. Part two (2) of Volume

II is not limited.

The Technical Volume shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. Legibility, clarity and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against the Technical Factor as defined in Addendum 52.212-2. Proposals shall not simply rephrase or restate the Performance Work Statement (PWS) or contain general statements such as “Standard procedures will be employed.” Proposals shall provide convincing rationale addressing how the technical portion of the offer meets solicitation requirements. Offerors shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of the offeror’s experience.

The Government will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offer. Statements that the Offeror understands, can, or will comply with the PWS (including referenced publications, technical data, etc.); paraphrasing the PWS or parts thereof (including applicable publications, technical data, etc.); and phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used,” etc., will be considered unacceptable and will negatively impact the Offeror’s rating under the Technical factor. Elaborate artwork, expensive visual, and other presentation aids are neither necessary nor desired.

1.7.1. The Technical Volume shall be comprised of two parts.

(1) Program of Instruction (POI) for the SOMP and LDC-JO course.

(2) Proposed personnel.

1.7.2. Program of Instruction for SOMP and LDC-JO courses.

1.7.2.1. Offeror shall submit a Program of Instruction (POI) including SOMP and LDC-JO courses IAW paragraph

1.4. and all subsequent paragraphs, Appendix E, and Appendix G in the PWS. The offeror shall demonstrate their understanding of the course requirement(s) in the submission of two sample POIs for the SOMP and LDC-JO courses that (1) addresses current training offered and (2) draft courses that include all elements required for SOMP, and LDC-

JO courses in this requirement. Current training offered can be tailored to encompass elements required for the courses

IAW the PWS.

1.7.2.2. The format for the sample POIs for SOMP and LDC-JO shall demonstrate: a breakdown of each day for each individual course including a detailed concept of operations, Government equipment, facility, and personnel support requests (if any); notional training timeline (event start / stop time); and overview of learning objectives by event IAW paragraph 1.4 and all subsequent paragraphs, Appendix E, and Appendix G in the PWS. A sample POI format is provided as Attachment six (6) and is to be used as a guide only. Offerors shall not simply restate, rephrase or resubmit verbiage directly from this solicitation as your POI submission.

1.7.3. Proposed Personnel.

1.7.3.1. Offeror shall submit documentation demonstrating the Offeror’s proposed personnel meet the Personnel

Qualifications IAW PWS paragraphs 1.5-1.5.21. Offerors shall submit resumes for the offeror’s proposed personnel who will conduct each of the proposed courses and identify all qualifications in the resumes. In addition to the qualifications in paragraphs 1.5-1.5.21, Offerors’ proposed personnel shall possess (1) Tier 1 Special Operations

Operator Training Course (OTC) graduate, (2) At least three (3) years’ experience within USSOCOM Special Mission

Unit, and (3) must have held one of the qualified positions for each of the six (6) courses they will provide training for as outlined specifically in PWS paragraphs 1.5.2-1.5.4.

1.7.3.2. The offeror shall submit documentation for the proposed personnel demonstrating they have the qualifications, to include a DD-214 or equivalent. It is not necessary to duplicate efforts with certificates and reference letters if necessary information is contained in DD-214. The government reserves the right to formulate their own decision if personnel proposed meet the required qualifications based on positions or experience requirements and is not bound by the interpretations of the offeror.

1.7.3.3. In addition, the offeror shall list the names and number of qualified personnel proposed to conduct each of the six (6) courses. If personnel are not currently employed by your company, offerors may submit letters of intent signed by the proposed personnel. The government reserves the right to formulate their own decision if personnel proposed meet the required qualifications based on positions or experience requirements and is not bound by the interpretations of the offeror.

1.8. VOLUME III - PAST PERFORMANCE – Limited to no more than two pages per contract listed. Offerors shall submit contracts for the same or similar services as described in the PWS.

1.8.1. Offerors shall submit past performance information on no more than five (5) recent and relevant contracts performed for Federal agencies or commercial customers where offerors performed as the prime contractor that demonstrate offerors’ ability to successfully perform the scope and breadth of the requirements described in the PWS for this solicitation. Past performance information submitted in excess of the first five contracts submitted will not be evaluated.

1.8.2. Offerors with no same or similar past performance shall include this information in their past performance information.

1.8.3. If a teaming arrangement or Joint Venture is contemplated for this solicitation, offerors shall submit any recent and relevant performance information on previous teaming arrangements/Joint Ventures with the same partner or as the same CAGE in this solicitation. If this is a first time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide past performance information on no more than five contracts each.

1.8.4. Subcontractor Consent. Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. Offerors shall submit in their Past Performance Volume a signed consent letter from all proposed subcontractors consenting to the release of their past performance information to the prime contractor.

1.8.5. Offerors shall submit the following information for each contract submitted in their past performance volume:

1.8.5.1. Company/Division name

1.8.5.2. Product/Service

1.8.5.3. Contracting Agency/Customer

1.8.5.4. Contract Number

1.8.5.5. Contract Dollar Value

1.8.5.6. Period of Performance

1.8.5.7. Verified, up-to-date name, address, e-mail address, telephone number of the Government evaluator, contracting officer or customer POC responsible for procuring your services.

1.8.5.8. Explanation of how the scope of the referenced contract meets the relevancy definitions in this solicitation.

Identify what elements of each contract are deemed relevant to this solicitation and indicate what percentage of service was performed by the offeror (prime), subcontractor (if applicable) and teaming contractor (if applicable).

1.8.5.9. Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions.

1.8.5.10. Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable by the customer or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions, the resolution(s) implemented, and results.

1.8.5.11. If any of the contracts submitted were performed as teaming arrangements or joint venture partners, offerors shall thoroughly explain the relationship of each partner (e.g. managing partner under the contract submitted) and the duties that each assumed in the submitted contract

1.8.6. Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 5). Offerors shall complete Section A, Contract Information and send the Past Performance Questionnaires to their contract POCs listed in their Past Performance Volume. Past performance questionnaires received in excess to the first five contracts listed in the Past Performance Volume or, if applicable, for each party to the first time joint venture effort, will not be evaluated.

1.8.6.1. Offerors shall indicate in their past performance information, which POCs past performance questionnaires were sent to and confirm that the questionnaires were submitted.

1.8.6.2. Once questionnaires are completed by the POCs, the information contained in the questionnaires is considered source selection sensitive and not releasable to you, the offeror.

1.8.6.3. Questionnaires shall be e-mailed by POCs directly to 2d Lt Abigail Geniec and MSgt Eric Moss at abigail.geniec.1@us.af.mil, and eric.moss@us.af.mil.

1.8.6.4. Completed questionnaires received or routed through the offeror, subcontractor or teaming contractor will not be accepted.

1.8.6.5. Offerors are responsible for sending and tracking the timely completion and submittal of past performance questionnaires. The responsibility to send out the questionnaires rests solely with the offeror and shall not be delegated to any other entity.

1.8.6.6. Offerors shall ensure questionnaires are submitted to 2d Lt Abigail Geniec and MSgt Eric Moss no later than the solicitation closing date and time. Offerors shall also inform POCs of any extensions to the solicitation closing date and time.

1.9. Completed Responsive Quote Checklist (all cells in yellow completed) in both Excel and PDF formats.

1.10. Addendum to FAR 52.212-1(c), Period for Acceptance of Offers. This paragraph is tailored to read as follows:

“The Offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm from the date specified for receipt of offers through 30

September 17.”

1.11. Addendum to FAR 52.212-1(f), Late submissions, modifications, revisions, and withdrawal of offers. This paragraph is tailored to read as follows: Offerors are responsible for submitting electronic offers by the solicitation due date and time. Offers received after the solicitation due date and time are considered late and will be handled in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(f).

(End of Addendum)

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

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

(1) PRICE

(2) TECHNICAL

(3) PAST PERFORMANCE

Technical and past performance, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

mailto:abigail.geniec.1@us.af.mil mailto:eric.moss@us.af.mil

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) 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 negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2 - EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

1. This acquisition will utilize the best value approach, in which the Government seeks to award to an offeror who provides the greatest confidence that they will meet the Government’s requirements affordably. The Best Value technique for this acquisition will be Subjective Tradeoff, where technical and past performance, when combined, are significantly more important than price.”

Below is a synopsis of the evaluation steps; the evaluation process is defined in more detail immediately following the synopsis.

2. The first (1st) step of the evaluation process is to review the cover page and if applicable, any proposed Teaming

Arrangement/Joint Venture Documentation for completeness. Teaming arrangements shall conform to all requirements identified in the Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 of this solicitation and including all elements stated in

Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items. If an offeror is claiming this business approach, failure to submit Teaming Arrangement/Joint Venture documentation will render the offer non-responsive and no further evaluation will be conducted.

2.1. The second (2nd) step of the evaluation process is to evaluate prices and rank all responsive offers by price from lowest to highest.

2.2. The evaluation team will then proceed to the third (3rd) step. The first five (5) of the lowest priced responsive offers shall be evaluated for technical acceptability. In the event that the first five evaluated offers do not yield an offer with an acceptable technical rating, the evaluation process will continue in increments of the next five (5) lowest priced responsive offers until a technically acceptable offer is identified.

2.3. After technical evaluations conclude, the fourth (4th) evaluation step begins. For those offerors deemed technically acceptable, past performance will be evaluated for the lowest priced technically acceptable offer. If the lowest priced evaluated offer has been determined technically acceptable, and is judged to have a Substantial Confidence rating that offer represents the best value for the Government and the evaluation process stops. Award shall be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

2.4. If the lowest priced technically acceptable offeror is not judged to have a Substantial Confidence rating, the next lowest priced technically acceptable offeror will be evaluated and the process will continue in order by price until an offeror is judged to have a Substantial Confidence rating or until all offerors are evaluated. The Contracting Officer shall then make an integrated assessment to render the best value award decision.

3. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: By submission of its offer, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications. The Government intends to award a contract to the offeror deemed responsible in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), as supplemented, whose offer conforms to solicitation requirements including all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by the solicitation and is judged, based on the evaluation criteria, to represent the best value to the Government. The Government intends to award to the offeror who in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall value in response to the solicitation requirements. The Government intends to evaluate offers and make an award without discussions. Offers that are unrealistic in terms of price or technical acceptability may be rejected at any time during the evaluation process. Offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their written offers (e.g., defining the relevance of the offeror’s technical information and adverse past performance information to which an offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond) or to resolve minor clerical errors.

Any such exchange between the offeror and the Government will be for clarification only and will not constitute discussions within the meaning of FAR 15.306(a). Therefore, the offeror’s initial offer should contain the offeror’s best terms from a technical, performance and price standpoint.

3.1. However, if at any time during the evaluation process it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to open and hold discussions, offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and Final Offer Revisions will be considered in making the selection decision.

4. The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

4.1. All offeror cover pages and (if applicable) teaming arrangements will be reviewed for completeness in accordance with the requirements stated in Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items to determine the offeror responsive or non-responsive. Only those offers determined complete and responsive will be considered for further evaluation.

5. FACTOR 1: PRICE: All offers will be ranked by price:

5.1. Offers conforming to all requirements of this solicitation will be ordered from highest to lowest based on Total

Evaluated Price (TEP). Total Evaluated Price will be calculated as follows:

5.1.1. Total Evaluated Price = (Total Evaluated Price for Base Period) + (Total Evaluated Price for Option Period 1)

+ (Total Evaluated Price for Option Period 2) + (Total Evaluated Price for Option Period 3) + (Total Evaluated Price for Option Period 4) + (Total Evaluated Price for Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8):

5.1.1.1. Total Evaluated Price for the Base Period and Option Periods 1 through 4. Quantities identified will be multiplied by the unit price to confirm the extended price and then the extended price for all CLINS will be added together for a total for that specific period.

5.1.1.2. Unit prices shall be used in the event that extended prices are calculated incorrectly.

5.1.1.3. Total Evaluated Price for Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8. The government reserves the right to extend services for an additonal 6 month extension period, in accordance with FAR 52.217-8. Offerors shall not submit pricing for the six (6) month extension option. The Government will calculate the Total Evaluated Price for the six month extension period by multiplying the quantities in each CLIN by the unit prices for Option Period

4. Option to Extend Services are evaluated in the Total Evaluated Price for evaluation purposes only. The Option to

Extend Services CLINs totals will not be included in the contract value. If the Government exercises FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, the extension will not exceed 6 months total and the information and CLINS will be added to the contract at the time FAR 52.217-8 is exercised at a monthly price equal to the preceding period of performance’s monthly price in accordance with FAR 52.217-8.

5.2. Prices will be evaluated for completeness, fair and reasonableness, and unbalanced pricing. Offers whose price is determined to be incomplete or unreasonable will not be considered for award. Additionally, an offer may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

5.2.1. Completeness: The Government will review pricing submissions for completeness and compliance with the solicitation.

5.2.2. Reasonableness: The Government will use various price analysis techniques and procedures to ensure a fair and reasonable price.

5.2.3. Unbalanced Pricing: The Government will analyze each offer to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to prices proposed on different CLINs for the same or similar services in the same or similar quantities with respect to option pricing. An offer may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the prices are significantly unbalanced or if the unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

6. FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL: The first five lowest priced offers will be evaluated for technical acceptability. If none of the first five lowest priced offers are determined technically acceptable, the technical evaluation will continue in increments of five until all offers are evaluated, or until the Contracting Officer opens discussions if determined in the best interest of the Government. Only those offerors determined to be technically acceptable will be considered for further evaluation.

6.1 The rating assigned to this factor will be based on the offeror’s technical volume. The validity and thoroughness of the offeror’s technical volume will be evaluated as specific evidence of the offeror’s understanding and capability to perform this requirement. An overall rating will be assigned; failure to be assigned an acceptable rating in any element will render the entire technical volume unacceptable:

6.2. Evaluators shall assign a rating which falls within one of the following definitions according to the degree which the offeror’s technical offermeets the minimum requirement described below:

6.2.1. Acceptable: Offer meets the requirements of the solicitation.

6.2.2. Unacceptable: Offer does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

6.3. Program of Instruction for courses: Each Program of Instruction will be rated acceptable if it meets all the requirements of paragraphs 6.3.1 through 6.3.3. below.

6.3.1. The Program of Instruction (POI) clearly demonstrates a reasonable approach to managing and staffing the contract based on the requirements of the PWS. The offeror shall demonstrate their understanding of the course requirement(s) in the submission of two sample POIs for the SOMP and LDC-JO courses that (1) addresses current training offered and (2) draft courses that include all elements required for SOMP, and LDC-JO courses in this requirement. Ready state draft POI for SOMP and LDC-JO will be required fourteen (14) days after contract award.

Current training offered can be tailored to encompass elements required for the courses IAW the PWS.

6.3.2. The format for the sample POIs for SOMP and LDC-JO shall demonstrate: a breakdown of each day for each individual course including a detailed concept of operations, Government equipment, facility, and personnel support requests (if any); notional training timeline (event start / stop time); and overview of learning objectives by event IAW paragraph 1.4 and all subsequent paragraphs, Appendix E, and Appendix G in the PWS.

6.3.3. For each of the six (6) classes, the Offeror’s proposed personnel meet the Personnel Qualifications IAW PWS paragraphs 1.5-1.5.21. Offerors shall submit resumes for the offeror’s proposed personnel who will conduct each of the proposed courses and identify all qualifications in the resumes. Note: letter(s) of intent / proof of employment must be provided for each proposed instructor. In addition to the qualifications in paragraphs 1.5-1.5.21 of the

Performance Work Statement, Offerors’ proposed personnel shall possess (1) Tier 1 Special Operations Operator

Training Course (OTC) graduate, (2) At least three (3) years’ experience within USSOCOM Special Mission Unit, and (3) must have held one of the qualified positions for each of the six (6) courses they will provide training for as outlined specifically in PWS paragraphs 1.5.2-1.5.4.

7. Only technically acceptable offers will move on to the Past Performance phase of the evaluation.

8. FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE: The Government will evaluate the recency, relevancy and quality of the offerors’ provided past performance information, past performance questionnaires received and other past performance information data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources may include, but not limited to: the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS); Federal Awardee Performance and

Integrity Information System (FAPIIS); Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases.

8.1. Past Performance will first be evaluated for recency; all performance prior to three (3) years from the date of the solicitation or not yet performed on the date of this solicitation will not be evaluated.

8.1.1. The definition of recent as related to this solicitation includes performance within the last three (3) years from the issue date of this solicitation.

8.2. Past Performance will then be evaluated for relevancy and shall be assigned one of the relevancy definition ratings as described below when the offeror has identified and demonstrated what elements of each contract are deemed relevant to this solicitation and indicate what percentage of service was performed by the offeror (prime), subcontractor (if applicable) and teaming contractor (if applicable). The final determination of the identified and demonstrated relevancy elements of each contract will be the decision of the government.

8.2.1. The primary aspect of relevancy, as it pertains to this solicitation, is based on the similarity of services performed in the past. Relevance for Past Performance will be assessed against the following criteria:

(1) Experience developing & instructing SOF courses in accordance with paragraph 1.4 – 1.4.4.1 of the PWS.

8.2.2. Definitions of relevancy are as follows:

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

(1) Instructed four (4) of the courses of instruction in accordance with paragraph 1.4 – 1.4.4.1 of the PWS

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

(1) Instructed three (3) of the courses of instruction in accordance with paragraph 1.4 – 1.4.4.1 of the PWS

8.2.2.3. SOMEWHAT RELEVANT: Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

(1) Instructed two (2) of the courses of instruction in accordance with paragraph 1.4 – 1.4.4.1 of the PWS

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

(1) Instructed less than two (2) of the courses of instruction in accordance with paragraph 1.4 – 1.4.4.1 of the PWS

8.3 Finally, Past Performance will be evaluated for quality and assigned one of the following performance confidence assessment ratings based on the information provided in the Past Performance Volume, other past performance information data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources, may include, but not limited to: the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS); Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity

Information System (FAPIIS); Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases, and questionnaires received. Performance confidence assessment is an evaluation of the likelihood for the Government’s confidence that the offeror will successfully perform the solicitation’s requirements based upon the offeror’s past performance information.

8.3.1 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;

8.3.2 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;

8.3.3 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 performance; and

8.3.4 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;

8.3.5 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.

8.3.5.1 In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

8.4. Past performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or sub-contractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement will not be considered as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror. Past performance regarding minor members of Joint Ventures will be considered in accordance with the member’s share of the prospective contract.

8.4.1. If the Offeror is a Joint Venture, relevant project experience should be submitted for projects completed by the

Joint Venture entity. If the Joint Venture does not have shared experience, projects shall be submitted for the Joint

Venture members. The Offeror shall submit a signed copy of the Joint Venture agreement indicating the proposed participation of each Joint Venture member. Failure to submit the required Joint Venture Agreement will be considered unacceptable.

8.5. If the lowest priced evaluated offer has been determined technically acceptable, and is judged to have a

Substantial Confidence rating, that offer represents the best value for the Government and the evaluation process stops. Award shall be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

8.6. If the lowest priced technically acceptable offeror is not judged to have a Substantial Confidence rating, the next lowest priced technically acceptable offeror will be evaluated and the process will continue in order by price until an offeror is judged to have a Substantial Confidence rating or until all offerors are evaluated. The Contracting Officer shall then make an integrated assessment to render the best value award decision.

(End of Addendum)

(End of Summary of Changes)