Past_Performance_Questionnaire.pdf

For Official Use Only When Completed this Document is Source Selection Information IAW FAR 2.101 and 3.104

For Official Use Only 1

The 628th Contracting Squadron, Joint Base Charleston (JB CHS), is in the process of competitively selecting a source for Runway Continuous Friction Measuring Inspection at JB CHS.

The Contractor shall perform Runway Friction Testing with the use of the CFME at both 40mph and 60mph in each direction on the runways located at Joint Base Charleston, South Carolina. The period of performance will be a 12-month base period of 1 Oct 2016 – 30 Sep 2017 and 4 - one year option periods:

1st Option - 1 Oct 2017 – 30 Sep 2018; 2nd Option 1 Oct 2018 – 30 Sep 2019; 34d Option 1 Oct 2019 – 30 Sep 2020; 4th Option 1 Oct 2020 – 30 Sep 2021 and 6-month extension 1 Oct 2021 – 31 March 2022.

The offerors past performance is one consideration that will be evaluated. The verification of the offeror’s past performance on contracts or other work efforts which reflect the offeror's ability to perform on the proposed effort. We depend on information received from organizations such as yours, which have had first-hand experience with the offeror, for the evaluation of the offeror's performance on those contracts or work efforts. The offeror shall submit no more than 3-5 of your most recent (last 3 years) and relevant references.

Our areas of interest regarding the offeror are summarized in the enclosed questionnaire. In order to meet the acquisition milestones, we request your written response no later than 22 August 2016.

To assist you in preparing your response and expediting your reply, the questionnaire may be filled out electronically and e-mailed or by hand and faxed to the Point of Contact(s) identified below.

Your completed questionnaire will become part of the official records. Your assistance is greatly appreciated and your prompt response will be one of the keys to the successful and timely completion of this award.

ATTN: Mr. Elmer Howard Email: Elmer.Howard.1@us.af.mil and / or

ATTN: Mr. Victor McKinnon

Email: Victor.Mckinnon@us.af.mil

FAX: (843) 963-5183

1 Atch Past Performance Questionnaire mailto:Elmer.Howard.1@us.af.mil mailto:Victor.Mckinnon@us.af.mil

For Official Use Only 2

PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

When Filled In This Document Is Source Selection Sensitive IAW FAR 2.101 and FAR 3.104

Contractor’s Name: _________________________ Solicitation Number: _______________________

Reference Name: __________________ Reference Title: ___________________ Email: _______________________ Telephone Number: _______________

Contract Number, if any: _ __________________ Dollar Amount: ___________

Description of Work (Relevancy): __________________________________________________

Contract Period of Performance (Recent): _________________

Contractor performed as the Prime Contractor Sub-Contractor Key Personnel.

PERFORMANCE INFORMATION: Choose the appropriate letter on the scale (E, VG, S, M, US, and NA) that most accurately describes the contractor’s performance or situation. PLEASE PROVIDE A NARRATIVE EXPLANATION FOR ANY RATINGS OF M or U.

The contractor: Rating Scale (Legend on Pg 2) E VG S M US NA

1. Demonstrated ability to hire, maintain, and replace, if necessary, qualified personnel during the contract period.

2. Technical accuracy & quality of deliverables (ie reports, data, documentation).

3. Provides Testing for 40 MPH and 60 MPH each way on the runway

4. Contractor’s responsiveness toscheduling requests and reliability regarding on time delivery of service per schedule.

5. How would you rate the contractor's overall performance?

6. Was the contractor ever terminated or did not performed as required under the referenced contract? If yes, explain outcome in “remarks.”

Y/N

7. Would you award another contract to this contractor? If not, explain in “remarks.”

Y/N

Additional Comments: _________________________________________________________ file:///C:%5CUsers%5C1009972958C%5CDesktop%5CHoist%2071216%5C14-D-0006%20JB%20Oil%20Water%5CC%20Pre-Award%20Documents%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CMicrosoft%5CWindows%5CTemporary%20Internet%20Files%5CContent.Outlook%5Crobert.melton%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CMicrosoft%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CMicrosoft%5CWindows%5CTemporary%20Internet%20Files%5CContent.Outlook%5Cfar%5CFar02.doc#T2101 file:///C:%5CUsers%5C1009972958C%5CDesktop%5CHoist%2071216%5C14-D-0006%20JB%20Oil%20Water%5CC%20Pre-Award%20Documents%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CMicrosoft%5CWindows%5CTemporary%20Internet%20Files%5CContent.Outlook%5Crobert.melton%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CMicrosoft%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CMicrosoft%5CWindows%5CTemporary%20Internet%20Files%5CContent.Outlook%5Cfar%5CFAR03.DOC#b3104

For Official Use Only 3

RATING SCALE – PAST PERFORMANCE

RESPONDENT WILL NOT FURNISH ANY PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

TO OFFEROR SUBMITTING A PROPOSAL FOR THIS SOLICITATION.

Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows:

CODE PERFORMANCE LEVEL

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

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

S SATISFACTORY – Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance being assessed contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

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

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

N/A NOT APPLICABLE – Unable to provide a rating. Contract did not include performance for this aspect, performance was not observed, or information was not available. Do not know.

Please provide detailed narrative comments to support your ratings. At a minimum, please discuss each response for which you indicated E (Exceptional), M (Marginal) or US (Unsatisfactory) in response to the questions (use additional sheets, if necessary).

Please indicate your satisfaction with the contractor’s performance by placing an “X” in the appropriate block using the scale provided to the right of each question. This scale is defined as follows: