Solicitation_Amendment_FA441719QA0120001_SF_30.pdf

R

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offers 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 theoffer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication 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 letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication 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 NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

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

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, 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.)

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

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

1 13

0001 5/13/2019 F2F3239009AW02

FA4417

FA4417 1 SOCONS LGC

CP 850 884 7602

350 TULLY ST BLDG 90339

HURLBURT FIELD, FL 32544-5810

United States Goldie Silvestre, Email: goldie.silvestre.1@us.af.mil Telephone: 850-884-7691

FA441719QA012

4/18/2019

See Section G

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1- Update the PWS. Paragraphs 1.3.6.1, 1.5.1, 1.8.4, 3.6.1, and Appendix A Item #3 have been updated.

2- Update the Joint Venture information under section I of the Addendum to FAR 52.212-1.

3- Update Attachment 3- Wage Determination from 2015-4531 Rev 9 to 2015-4531 Rev 10.

Charles Carnley Email: charles.carnley@us.af.mil Telephone: 850-884-1258

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Supplies or Services & Prices or Costs

Contract Clauses

Miscellaneous text in this section has been modified to:

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1

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

REMOVED FROM ANY RESULTANT AWARD, BUT WILL BE DEEMED INCORPORATED BY

REFERENCE.

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 - INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS - COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT

2018) Addendum to 52.212-1(c), Period for Acceptance of Offers. The paragraph is tailored as follows:

"The offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 120 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers."

ADDENDA TO 52.212-1 OFFER PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

General Instructions A. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of the offer, the offeror must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including

1. Terms and conditions

2. Representations and certifications

3. 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 must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

B. The offer shall consist of three (3) separate parts:

Part I-- Price Part II--Technical Capability Part III-- Past Performance Information C. Complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications in provisions and in the on-line Representations and Certifications at www.sam.gov. Return the provision FAR 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications - Commercial Items along with the offer. For other provisions and clauses in the solicitation, the offeror is required to submit the pages that require an offeror fill-in.

D. A site visit will be scheduled for 29 April 2019 at 1:00 PM CDT. The meeting location will be:

1st Special Operations Contracting Squadron 350 Tully Street, Bldg 90339 Hurlburt Field, FL 32544 Contractor shall provide the company name, each person's name/phone number to 2d Lt Goldie Silvestre at goldie.silvestre.1@us.af.mil not later than 12:30 PM CDT on 26 April 2019 Hurlburt Field, FL has a visitor control procedures requiring individuals not affiliated with the installation to obtain a visitor pass prior to entrance. Please plan accordingly so that you obtain your visitor passes prior to the site visit time.

Please bring the following documents to be processed in the visitor center:

1. Driver's license

2. Vehicle Registration

FA441719QA0120001

3. Proof of Auto Insurance Please note that this is the only site visit for this solicitation.

E. Points of Contact: All communications shall be submitted via e-mail to all the following personnel/ addresses:

Goldie Silvestre at goldie.silvestre.1@us.af.mil and Charles Carnley at charles.carnley@us.af.mil F. Questions must be submitted via email to the personnel noted above. All questions are due no later than 3:00 PM CDT, by 07 May 2019. All questions and answers will be posted to the FBO website at https://www.fbo.gov.

G. Offer Submission Instructions:

Offers may be submitted electronically in one of the following three ways:

1. Contractors may submit offers electronically to the Government via the Army AMRDEC SAFE site (https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/). All documents submitted must be saved in .pdf format, and shall follow the instructions in FAR 52.212-1. Title of the documents should include the offerors CAGE code (i.e., "Part 1 Tech Proposal CAGE#").

2. Offers may be hand carried submissions of compact disks (CDs) containing electronic files. All documents must be in .pdf format and shall follow the instructions in FAR 52.212-1. Title of the documents should include the offerors CAGE code (i.e., "Part 1 Tech Proposal CAGE. The physical address for hand carried deliveries is 350 Tully Street, Building 90339, Hurlburt Field, Florida 32544.

Contractors should request base access for hand carried offer delivery NLT 24 hours prior to the offer due date/time by sending an email request identifying the company name and list of individuals requesting access to the Contracting Officer identified below.

3. Offers may also be submitted by mail to the 1st Special Operations Contracting Squadron at Hurlburt Field, Florida. Mailed offers must be on compact disk (CD) and all files must be in .pdf format. Title of the documents should include the offerors CAGE code (i.e., "Part 1 Tech Proposal CAGE#"). The address for offers is:

1st Special Operations Contracting Squadron/PKA Attention: Charles M. Carnley 350 Tully Street Hurlburt Field, FL 32544

4. Faxed, e-mail, or printed offers will not be accepted.

5. Offerors are cautioned that Hurlburt Field, FL has visitor control procedures requiring individuals not affiliated with the installation to obtain a visitor pass prior to entrance. SOME DELAY SHOULD BE ANTICIPATED WHEN HANDCARRYING OFFERS. Offerors should allow sufficient time to obtain a visitor pass and arrive at 1 SOCONS front desk PRIOR to the time specified for receipt.

6. Late offers will be processed in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(f) "Late submission, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers."

The submittal due time and date for offers is 2:00 PM CDT on 20 May 2019.

H. Format for offer Parts I, II and III shall be as follows:

1. Submit one (1) electronic copy on a compact disk-read only memory (CD-ROM) or via Army's Safe Access File Exchange (https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/).

2. All documents shall be submitted in .pdf format. The title of the documents shall include the part number, part title, and the offeror's CAGE code. (i.e. "Part 1 Price CAGE#").

3. The offers will be on 8.5" x 11" page except for fold-outs used for charts, tables, or diagrams, which may not exceed 11" x 17."

4. A page is defined as one face of a sheet of paper containing information.

5. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than 12 pitch.

6. Pages shall be single-spaced.

7. Use at least 1 inch margins on the top and bottom and 1 inch side margins.

8. Elaborate formats, bindings, or color presentations are not desired or required.

9. Printed offers, USB flash drives, floppy disks, and zip disks are not acceptable.

Copies and Page Limits. Evaluators will only read up to the maximum number of pages specified. If the page limit is exceeded, the excess pages will be removed from the offer and will not be evaluated.

Cross-Referencing. Offerors shall not cross reference between Parts I, II, and III. Each Part shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing to other Parts of the offer. Information required for offer evaluation, which is not found in its designated Part, will be assumed to have been omitted from the offer.

I. Specific Instructions Teaming Arrangements/Joint Venture Documentation: There is no page limitation for the Teaming Arrangements/Joint Venture Documentation. Failure to submit this documentation, if offeror is claiming this is their business approach, will render the offerors' offer non-responsive and no further evaluation of the offeror's offer will be conducted; and Teaming Arrangement/Joint Venture Documentation (If Applicable). If Teaming Arrangements are contemplated they must comply with the appropriate Federal Regulations (13 C.F.R. Part 121 and Part 125), FAR 52.219-27, and appropriate small business policies and regulations. The Joint Venture Arrangement must be in writing. Any corrections and/or changes needed can be made before the offer due date. NO CORRECTIONS AND/OR CHANGES IN PROPOSED TEAMING

ARRANGEMENTS OR JOINT VENTURES ARE ALLOWED AFTER TIME OF SUBMISSION OF

OFFERS.

Teaming Arrangements as a Prime and Subcontractor relationship (if applicable): Offerors must provide the following information not later than the date and time offers are due:

1. Include size of each concern required at 13 CFR 121.103(h);

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

3. Subcontractor past performance cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor's consent. Provide 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;

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

5. 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;

6. 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; and

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

Joint Ventures (if applicable): Offerors must provide the following information not later than the date and time offers are due:

1. Include all requirements at 13 C.F.R. Part 121 and Part 125 and FAR 52.219-27, including size concern information;

2. Include a statement confirming that at least 50% of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the concern IAW FAR 52.219-27(d)(1); and

3. Joint Venture registration in SAM, identifying the Joint Venture as a small business concern under NAICS code 561730 in their representations and certifications.

No corrections and/or changes in proposed teaming arrangement or joint ventures will be accepted after the solicitation closing date and time.

There is no page limit for Teaming Arrangement / Joint Venture documentation.

Financial Institution Reference Sheet, Attachment 4 to the solicitation, shall be completed by the offeror's financial institution, Teaming Arrangement/Joint Venture (if applicable) and Financial Institution Reference Sheet will be submitted as part of Part I.

Part I--Price Offer--Submit original. No page limit.

1. Complete blocks 12, 17a, and 30a, b, and c of the Standard Form (SF) 1449. In doing so, the offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the SOLICITATION, with attachments. The solicitation constitutes the model contract.

2. Insert proposed unit and extended prices in the Pricing Schedule. The extended amount must equal the whole dollar unit price multiplied by the number of units. The offer(s) must be submitted for a base period plus four (4) Option Years (14 September 2019 - 13 March 2020 is the base period).

3. Complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications in the Contract Clauses section. The provisions FAR 52.212-3 shall be returned along with the offer. If the offeror has completed all representations and certifications contained in this solicitation in their SAM registration, the offeror shall state so.

4. Return page one of all solicitation amendments with the original solicitation documents, signed by the same official authorized to sign the SF 1449.

5. Include teaming arrangement and joint venture information, if applicable.

6. Include financial institution reference sheet.

Part II--Technical Capability--Limited to no more than fifty (50) pages. Submit original plus one (1) redacted copy (company name/logo will be redacted) The Technical Capability Part shall include the following three subparts:

(1) Program Management and Staffing Plan,

(2) Transition Plan,

(3) Quality Control Plan The Technical Capability Part shall be specific, detailed, and complete to clearly and fully demonstrate that the offeror has a thorough understanding of the requirements for the accomplishment of the effort. Statements that the offeror understand, can, or will comply with the PWS (including Air Force (AF) publications, technical requirements, etc.); statements paraphrasing the PWS or parts thereof; and phrases such as "standard procedures will be employed", "well known techniques will be used", etc., will be considered unacceptable. The offeror's offer shall, at a minimum, be prepared in a form consistent with the technical criteria set forth in 52.212-2 Addendum, Basis of Award, of this solicitation. All information that the offeror deems appropriate to address for this factor and its subfactors must be included in the offer in an orderly format. The technical part shall address all the required parts as follows:

Tab 1: Subfactor 1 - Program Management and Staffing Plan---- The contractor shall provide a Program Management and Staffing Plan, which shall illustrate in detail how the contractor will manage personnel throughout the life of the contract to ensure performance is accomplished IAW the PWS requirements. The contractors plan shall include as a minimum, but is not limited to:

a) A management and staffing approach that illustrates an adequate plan to manage personnel throughout the life of the contract to ensure performance is accomplished IAW the PWS.

b) An organizational structure, descriptions of proposed roles and responsibilities.

c) A staffing plan that addresses the labor mix between the growing season and non-growing season.

Tab 2: Subfactor 2 - Transition Plan-- The contractor shall provide a Transition Plan IAW PWS paragraph 4.16.2, which shall illustrate in detail how the contractor will mobilize for contract performance during the 30-day transition period and to show how the contractor will perform the requirements as outlined in the PWS on the first day of the performance period without degradation in service from the previous contract. The contractors plan shall include as a minimum, but is not limited to:

a) Gantt chart or similar to outline key mobilization activities including a plan to a) recruit, b) train, and

c) qualify and/or certify personnel during the 30-day mobilization period that result in a 100% staffed and qualified contractor workforce fully performing on the contract start date.

b) Draft annual schedule. The schedule shall identify plots, acreages, or base areas and days of the week service will occur.

c) Approach to deliver uninterrupted support of critical Hurlburt mission assets right after contingency situations (i.e. natural disasters, manmade disasters, and/or wartime) IAW PWS paragraph 4.8.

Tab 3: Subfactor 3 - Quality Control Plan--The contractor shall provide a Quality Control Plan. The Quality Control Plan shall identify Quality Control Procedures the contractor plans to use to ensure compliance with PWS paragraph 2.1, performing all requirements identified within the PWS and to effectively meet the quality thresholds defined in the Services Summary. Note that if selected for award, your Quality Control Plan will be incorporated into the contract and will be monitored for compliance on the Service Summary as a performance objective item. The contractors plan shall include/address as a minimum, but is not limited to:

a) Methods of Surveillance and Methods of Documentation

b) Frequency/Schedule of inspections at each location

c) Procedures to detect quality program problems and defects

d) Procedures to correct root causes related to detected problems/defects

e) Procedures to follow-up to ensure quality related problems/defects do not recur

f) Identification of the commercial practices and procedures to be used such as those of the Professional Grounds Management Society (PGMS), Tree Care Industry Association etc.

g) Describe the records to be kept to document inspections and corrective or preventive action taken.

Part III--Past Performance Information--Limited to no more than three (3) pages per contract listed and thirty (30) pages total. Pages exceeding the page limitations set forth in this section will not be read or evaluated, and will be removed from the offer. The Past and Present Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 2 of the solicitation) is not included in the thirty (30) page limit for Part III.

Only references for recent and relevant contracts are desired. Submit original.

Submit a list of no more than ten (10) recent and relevant contracts performed for Federal agencies or commercial customers as a prime contractor that demonstrates the ability to successfully perform the scope and breadth of the requirements as described in the PWS for this solicitation.

1. Quality and Satisfaction Rating for Contracts Completed in the Past Three (3) Years: Provide information currently available (letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys, etc.)

which demonstrates customer satisfaction with overall job performance and quality of completed product for relevant past efforts/contracts (similar or greater in scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires). In addition, explain corrective actions taken in the past, if any, for substandard performance and any current performance problems such as cost overruns, extended performance periods, etc.

NOTE: To be considered recent, the information provided must be on efforts/contracts that are ongoing or must have been performed during the past three years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.

2. Past Performance Surveys: The government will evaluate the quality and extent of offeror's performance deemed recent and relevant to the requirements of this solicitation. The government will use information submitted by the offeror and other sources such as other Federal government offices and commercial sources, to assess performance. Provide a list of no more than ten (10) of the most recent and relevant contracts performed for Federal agencies and commercial customers within the last three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.

3. The evaluation of past performance information will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the current acquisition. Offerors shall furnish the following information for each contract listed in Part III, Past Performance Information:

(a) Company/Division name

(b) Product/Service

(c) Contracting Agency/Customer

(d) Contract Number

(e) Contract Dollar Value

(f) Period of Performance

(g) Verified, up-to-date name, address, e-mail address, FAX and telephone number of the contracting officer or customer POC responsible for procuring your services

(h) Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions

(i) Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions,

(j) Precise details regarding how the predecessor companies, key personnel, or subcontractors will perform in this effort.

(k) Details as to what the predecessor companies, key personnel, or subcontractors participation was in the example past performance being provided.

(l) Explanation of how the scope of the referenced contract is relevant to the PWS in this solicitation.

Identify the amount of acreage serviced.

If a teaming arrangement/Joint Venture is contemplated, provide complete information as to the arrangement, including up to five (5) recent and relevant past/present performance information on previous arrangements with same partner or as this entity (CAGE). If this is a first time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide a list of past and present relevant contracts of no more than five (5) contracts each. Subcontractor past performance may only be disclosed for use by the prime contractor if a letter of consent to release past performance information to the prime is completed by the subcontractor and included with the past performance.

4. Questionnaires. Each offeror shall send out Past and Present Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 2) to each of the offerors past performance references/to each of the Points of Contact identified in the contracts listed in the contractor's Part III, Past Performance Information. Any past performance questionnaires received in excess to the first ten references in the Past Performance Part for the prime or, if applicable, for each party to the first time teaming arrangement/joint effort, will not be evaluated. The responsibility to send out Past Performance Questionnaire rests solely with each offeror--IT SHALL NOT BE DELEGATED TO ANY OTHER ENTITY. The Request for Past Performance Evaluation transmittal letter (Attachment 2) shall be used by the offeror in sending out Past Performance Questionnaires.

(a) Complete Section A, General Information, of the Past and Present Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 2) and submit the attached Request for Past Performance Evaluation transmittal letter to all past performance references listed in the contractor's Part III, Past Performance Information.

Evaluators shall use Attachment 2, Past and Present Performance Questionnaire. Altered or substituted questionnaires will not be evaluated. Offerors are responsible to ensure questionnaires are transmitted to their references, and to indicate which evaluator(s) the questionnaire was sent to.

(b) Once the Past and Present Performance Questionnaires are completed by the evaluator, the information contained in the questionnaires shall be considered source selection sensitive and not released to you, the offeror. Questionnaires shall be sent directly to the Government.

(c) Past Performance Questionnaires are to be completed and sent directly to the Government by the evaluator completing the questionnaire. It is the sole responsibility of the offeror to track the submission of Past and Present Performance Questionnaires and ensure that the Government receives them NOT LATER THAN THE DUE DATE AND TIME ESTABLISHED IN THIS RFQ FOR OFFER SUBMISSION. The Government highly recommends the submission of completed questionnaires prior to the solicitation closing date and time. It is also the sole responsibility of the offeror to inform the evaluators of any extensions the Government approves to the date and time offers are due to be submitted.

(d) The evaluator shall e-mail questionnaires to both Goldie Silvestre AND Charles Carnley at goldie.silvestre.1@us.af.mil and charles.carnley@us.af.mil. If the questionnaires cannot be e-mailed, mail the questionnaire to:

ATTN: Goldie Silvestre/ Charles Carnley 1st Special Operations Contracting Squadron/PKA 350 Tully Street, Bldg. 90339 Hurlburt Field, FL 32544.

(e) If the offeror claims there is no past performance, then that status must be identified to the contracting officer in Part III, Past Performance Information.

(End of Addendum)

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

1. This acquisition will utilize a 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 in a way that will be advantageous to the Government. Simplified Procedures for Certain Commercial Items in accordance with FAR 13.5 and the procedures outlined in this addendum will be used to make a Best Value decision. The Best Value technique chosen for this particular acquisition will be Performance Price Tradeoff (PPT), where technical and past performance, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

The tradeoff process permits tradeoffs among cost or price and non-cost factors and allows the Government to award to a higher priced offeror where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors and the Government reasonably determines the higher priced offeror outweighs the cost difference. To arrive at a best value decision, the Contracting Officer will integrate the Government's evaluation of the factors and subfactors described in this solicitation. While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the tradeoff process is by its nature, subjective; therefore professional judgement is implicit throughout the process.

2. 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 one contract to the offeror deemed responsible in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), as supplemented, whose offer conforms to the 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 technical acceptability or price may be rejected at any time during the evaluation process. Discussions or negotiations may be conducted with all offerors in the competitive range.

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.

Offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their offer (for example, 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 evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. 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).

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.

3. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each responsive offer: Award will be made to the offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors described below.

Factor 1: Price Factor 2: Technical Subfactor 1: Program Management and Staffing Plan Subfactor 2: Transition Plan Subfactor 3: Quality Control Plan Factor 3: Past Performance The relative importance of each factor and subfactor is as follows: Technical and past performance, when combined, are significantly more important than price when being evaluated. Within the technical factor, the subfactors are of equal importance.

4. SYNOPSIS OF EVALUATION

The first step of the evaluation process is to review the offer and if applicable, any proposed Teaming Arrangement Documentation, for completeness. Teaming Arrangement shall conform to all requirements identified in FAR 52.212-1 of the solicitation. If an offeror is claiming this business approach, failure to submit Teaming Arrangement documentation will render the offerors quote non-responsive and no further evaluation will be conducted.

The second step of the evaluation process is to rank prices and record all responsive offerors by price from lowest to highest.

The evaluation team will then proceed to the third step. The first five (5) of the lowest priced responsive offers shall be evaluated for technical acceptability. In the event that the first five (5) 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 , or until all offerors have been evaluated.

After technical evaluations conclude, the fourth evaluation step begins. For those offerors deemed technically acceptable, past performance will be evaluated for the lowest priced technically acceptable offeror. If the lowest priced evaluated offer has been determined technically acceptable, and is judged to have a SUBSTANTIAL CONFIDENCE PERFORMANCE assessment 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.

If the lowest priced technically acceptable offeror is not judged to have a SUBSTANTIAL CONFIDENCE PERFORMANCE assessment, 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 PERFORMANCE assessment or until all offerors are evaluated.

The Contracting Officer shall then make an integrated assessment to render the best value award decision.

5. PRICE EVALUATION

Offers conforming to all requirements of this solicitation will be ordered from lowest to highest according to TEP. TEP will be calculated as follows: TEP = Base Period (CLINS 0002- 0030) + Option Period 1 (CLINS 1002- 1030) + Option Period 2 (CLINS 2002- 2030) + Option Period 3 (CLINS 3002- 3030) + Option Period 4 (CLINS 4002- 4030) + Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8. 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. Unit prices shall be used in the event that extended prices are calculated incorrectly. It is important for offerors to verify their extended pricing is accurate and to have complete unit prices and exact total amounts. Prices shall be rounded off to two decimal points.

FAR clause 52.217-8 (Extension of Services) is included in this RFP and will be incorporated into the resultant contract. Upon exercise, the clause will extend the terms and conditions of the contract period being extended at the rates specified in the contract. The CO may exercise this clause during the life of the contract at any option period to extend services for up to 6-months.

Total Evaluated Price for Option to Extend Services IAW FAR 52.217-8. The Government reserves the right to extend services for an additional six (6) month extension period, in accordance with FAR 52.217-8. Offerors shall not submit pricing for the six (6) month extension period.

TEP for 52.217-8 will be calculated as follows: TEP for FAR 52.217-8 = (CLIN 4002 price x quantity

6) + (CLIN 4004 price x quantity 6) + (CLIN 4006 price x quantity 6) + (CLIN 4011 price x quantity 6) + (CLIN 4012 price x quantity 6) + (CLIN 4014 price x quantity 6) + (CLIN 4017 price x quantity 6) + (CLIN 4018 price x quantity 6) + (CLIN 4022 price x quantity 6) + (CLIN 4030 extended price x 50%).

The TEP for the 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services six month extension is included in the TEP for evaluation purposes only. The Option to Extend Services price totals will not be included in the awarded contract value. If the Government exercises FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, the extension will not exceed six (6) months total 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.

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 the pricing to be unbalanced.

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

Reasonableness: The Government may use the following various price analysis techniques established in FAR 15.404-1 to ensure a fair and reasonable price to include: comparison of proposed prices received (adequate price competition), comparison of previously proposed prices and previous Government contract prices, use of parametric estimating/rough yardsticks, comparison with competitive published price lists or market prices, comparison with Independent Government estimates, comparison with market research, and/or analysis of pricing information provided by the offeror.

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.

Offerors are cautioned against submitting an unbalanced offer. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite a reasonable TEP, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. The Government will analyze offers to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to price. An example of an unbalanced offer would be proposed contract line items that are significantly less than or significantly overstated in relation to the other proposed contracted line items (either of the offeror's offer or the same contract line items as proposed by other offerors). The Government may also consider an offer unbalanced if there is a significant difference between proposed contract line items in the same contract line items category between option periods or the proposed prices from year to year or above what would be considered a reasonable adjustment for inflation. An offer may be rejected if the CO determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

If the Government cannot determine the proposed pricing to be fair and reasonable, other than certified cost and pricing data will be obtained from the offerors.

6. TECHNICAL EVALUATION

The technical rating reflects the degree to which the offeror's offer meets or does not meet the minimum performance or capability requirements. The focus is on the ability of the offeror's offer to meet the minimum requirements of the PWS.

The government will evaluate technical offers and the below listed sub-factors on a pass/fail-basis, assigning an overall rating of Acceptable, or Unacceptable. An unacceptable rating for any of the below sub-factors will result in an unacceptable rating for the Technical Capability primary factor.

Definitions: Evaluators shall assign a rating which falls within one of the following definitions according to the degree which the offeror's technical offer meets the minimum requirement described below:

Acceptable: Offer meets the requirements of the solicitation.

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

Technical Acceptability shall be evaluated against the following sub-factors where all sub-factors are considered equal:

Subfactor 1: Program Management and Staffing Plan Subfactor 1 is deemed acceptable when it successfully meets the following criteria: The offeror shall provide:

a) A management and staffing approach that illustrates an adequate plan to manage personnel throughout the life of the contract to ensure performance is accomplished IAW the PWS.

b) An organizational structure, descriptions of proposed roles and responsibilities.

c) A staffing plan that addresses the labor mix between the growing season and non-growing season.

Subfactor 2: Transition Plan Subfactor 2 is deemed acceptable when it illustrates in detail an adequate plan to mobilize for contract performance during the 30-day transition period and an adequate plan showing how the contractor will perform the requirements outlined in the PWS. The plan shall include as a minimum, but is not limited to:

a) Address key mobilization activities and a plan to recruit, train, and qualify/certify personnel during the 30-day mobilization period that result in a 100% staffed and qualified contractor workforce fully performing on the contract start date and through the life of the contract

b) Provide an adequate draft annual schedule. The schedule shall identify plots, acreages, or base areas and days of the week service will occur.

c) Approach to deliver uninterrupted support of critical Hurlburt mission assets right after contingency situations (i.e. natural disasters, manmade disasters, and/or wartime) IAW PWS paragraph 4.8.

Subfactor 3: Quality Control Plan In order to meet the government's quality requirements and for subfactor 3 to be determined acceptable, the contractor must provide a Quality Control Plan that adequately describes the approach you will use to successfully perform to the standards detailed in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and to effectively meet the quality thresholds defined in the Services Summary.

Your plan shall include/address as a minimum, but is not limited to:

a) Methods of Surveillance and Methods of Documentation

b) Frequency/Schedule of inspections at each location

c) Procedures to detect quality program problems and defects

d) Procedures to correct root causes related to detected problems/defects

e) Procedures to follow-up to ensure quality related problems/defects do not recur

f) Identification of the commercial practices and procedures to be used such as those of the Professional Grounds Management Society (PGMS), Tree Care Industry Association etc.

g) Describe the records to be kept to document inspections and corrective or preventive action taken.

Technical evaluation will start with the lowest priced responsive offeror. If the lowest priced offeror receives a technical rating of acceptable, offer evaluations will continue until a minimum of five (5) technically acceptable offers have been evaluated. Only those offerors determined to be technically acceptable will be considered for evaluation of past performance.

The rating assigned to this factor will be based on the offeror's technical offer. The validity and thoroughness of the offeror's technical offer 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 offer unacceptable:

To be determined technically acceptable at the factor level, the offeror must be rated acceptable in each subfactor. A subfactor will be rated acceptable when all the corresponding elements of the subfactor are met.

Procedures at FAR 15.306, Exchanges with Offerors After Receipt of Quotations/Offers, may be implemented to determine technical acceptability in accordance with the solicitation requirements.

Only those offers determined to be technically acceptable will be considered for further evaluation.

7. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Using the Past and Present Performance questionnaires, the contracting officer shall seek performance information for only those offerors rated technically acceptable. Each offer shall provide recent and relevant information regarding an offerors actions under previously awarded contracts.

The Government will evaluate the offerors previous performance and may evaluate information on problems identified/ encountered on previous contracts and corrective actions taken by the offeror.

Performance confidence ratings assess the probability of the offeror successfully accomplishing the proposed effort based on the offerors past performance. The Government will use past performance information submitted by the offerors' references, other sources such as other Federal Government offices, Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)/Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARS), and private and commercial sources. The Government is not bound by the offeror's opinion of relevancy. Relevancy is defined below.

Recency. Past Performance will first be evaluated for recency. For the purpose of this evaluation, "recent" is defined as performance occurring within three (3) years from the date of issuance of the solictation. All performance prior to three years from the date of the issuance of solicitation or not yet performed on the date of this solicitation will not be evaluated.

Relevancy. 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.

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:

a) Familiarity and experience with landscaping and grounds maintenance on and around an active airfield

b) Familiarity and experience with grounds maintenance in ditches and drainage areas which may become water-logged

c) Total acreage of grounds maintenance experience.

The following relevancy definitions apply:

a) VERY RELEVANT: Past/present performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. In order to be defined as Very Relevant, the effort shall have included the below services:

(1) Familiarity and experience with landscaping and grounds maintenance on and around an active airfield, and

(2) Familiarity and experience with grounds maintenance in ditches and drainage areas which may become water-logged, and

(3) Total acreage of grounds maintenance experience: Continuous grounds maintenance for a location consisting of 400 acres or more managed on a regular basis.

b) RELEVANT: Past/present performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. In order to be defined as Relevant, the effort shall have included the below services:

(1) Familiarity and experience with landscaping and grounds maintenance on and around an active airfield, and

(2) Familiarity and experience with grounds maintenance in ditches and drainage areas which may become water-logged, and

(3) Total acreage of grounds maintenance experience: Continuous grounds maintenance for a location consisting of 300 but less than 400 acres managed on a regular basis.

c) SOMEWHAT RELEVANT: Past/present performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. In order to be defined as Somewhat Relevant, the effort shall have included the below services:

(1) Familiarity and experience with landscaping and grounds maintenance on and around an active airfield, and

(2) Familiarity and experience with grounds maintenance in ditches and drainage areas which may become water-logged, and

(3) Total acreage of grounds maintenance experience: Continuous grounds maintenance for a location consisting of 200 but less than 300 acres managed on a regular basis.

d) NOT RELEVANT: Past/present performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. In order to be defined as Not Relevant, the effort shall have included the below services:

(1) No familiarity and experience with landscaping and grounds maintenance on and around an active airfield, or

(2) No familiarity and experience with grounds maintenance in ditches and drainage areas which may become water-logged, or

(3) Total acreage of grounds maintenance experience: Continuous grounds maintenance for a location consisting of less than 200 acres managed on a regular basis.

Quality of Performance. All recent past performance that is determined to be somewhat relevant, relevant, or very relevant will be reviewed to determine the quality of the offeror's performance, general trends, and the usefulness of the performance. This information will be used by the evaluation team in determining the overall performance confidence assessment rating.

The process will result in an overall performance rating as defined below. This performance assessment represents the Government evaluation team's judgement of the probability of an offeror successfully accomplishing the proposed effort based on the offerors demonstrated past and present performance. The ratings are defined as follows:

a) 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.

b) 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.

c) 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.

d) 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.

e) NO CONFIDENCE: Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated…