FA4418-17-R-0004_JB_CHS_COCESS_Amendment_0001.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 correct Addendum to FAR 52.212-2 Section I. the due date of Past Performance information from 01

July 2017 to 01 June 2017.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 5

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 01-May-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 FA4418-17-R-0004

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

01-May-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 is extended, X 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

01-May-2017

CODE

628 CONTRACTING SQUADRON

101 E HILL BLVD, B503

JOINT BASE CHARLESTON SC 29404 5021

FA4418 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA4418-17-R-0004

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2

Addendum to FAR 52.212-2

Evaluation Factors for Award

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS

(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 will be used to evaluate offers:

(1) PAST PERFORMANCE

(2) PRICE

(3) SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATON

Past Performance is significantly more important than Price with consideration of Small Business participation.

(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 or unit price(s) are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of unit price(s) and 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.

Addendum to FAR 52.212-2:

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: This is a competitive best value source selection in which competing offerors past performance history will be evaluated on a basis significantly more important than price and with the consideration of Small Business participation. By submission of its offer in accordance with the instructions provided in clause FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors, the offeror accedes to the terms of this model contract and all such offers shall be treated equally except for their prices, Small Business Participation Proposals and/or

Plans and performance records. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

A. Price Evaluation. Initially, offers will be ranked according to price. An offeror’s proposed prices will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified in the Pricing Schedule by the unit price for each item to confirm the extended amount for each line item. All sub-totals will then be added to confirm the total for the base period.

The total price for each option period shall be the same price as the base period for evaluation purposes. The price for the 6-month Option to Extend Services, IAW FAR 52.217-8, shall be evaluated by using half of the price of the th

Option period The Total Evaluated Price shall be the total of the base period plus the four option periods plus the

Option to Extend Services. The line item prices may change, increase or decrease, after award based on the file://///Periwinkle/SAF_AQC_ORG/AQCP/5640%20-%20AFFARS/AFAC%20Working%20Folders%20--%20PM/far/FAR52.000.doc%23b522122 file://///Periwinkle/SAF_AQC_ORG/AQCP/5640%20-%20AFFARS/AFAC%20Working%20Folders%20--%20PM/far/FAR52.000.doc%23b522122 file://///Periwinkle/SAF_AQC_ORG/AQCP/5640%20-%20AFFARS/AFAC%20Working%20Folders%20--%20PM/far/FAR52.000.doc%23b522121 addition/removal of fixed-priced items and/or the increase or decrease with the annual EPA as described in

Addendum to FAR 52.212-4.

B. Small Business Participation. All Offerors (both large and small businesses) are required to complete a Small

Business Participation Proposal. Offerors should propose the level of participation of small businesses (as a small business prime and/or small business service/suppliers) in the performance of the acquisition relative to the objectives/goals set forth in the evaluation of this area. The Small Business Participation Proposal format is designed to streamline and bring uniformity to responses and evaluations for Small Business Participation IAW

FAR 15.304, (Attachment 3, Small Business Participation Proposal). The Small Business Participation Proposal format is distinctly different from the Small Business Subcontracting Plan (required by large businesses only) IAW

FAR 52.219-9. All offerors who are small businesses are advised that their own participation as a prime contractor counts toward the percentages set in this evaluation factor and small businesses shall not be required to subcontract to other small businesses in order to achieve the small business participation goals. Large Businesses may achieve small business participation goals through subcontracting to small businesses. IAW the DoD Source Selection

Procedures, the Small Business Participation Proposal will be rated “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” according to

Table 6 Below. Offerors must submit an acceptable Small Business Participation Proposal in order to be considered for award.

Table 6 Small Business Participation

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

C. Subcontracting Plan: Separate from the Small Business Participation Proposal; the Small Business

Subcontracting Plan is not a requirement for evaluation, but rather a requirement to award to a Large Business and will be incorporated into any resulting contract. Large Businesses are required to submit a Small Businesses

Subcontracting Plan IAW FAR19.704; meeting the requirements of FAR52.219-9 (DEVIATION 2016-O0009) and

DFARS 252.219-7003 or DFARS 252.219-7004 (if the offeror has a comprehensive subcontracting plan) Large businesses with a Commercial Plan, IAW FAR 19.701, may submit their Commercial Plan in lieu of the Small

Business Subcontracting Plan for consideration, but the Subcontracting Plan must be consistent with the Small

Businesses Participation Plan in attachment 3. For submission of the Small Business Subcontracting Plan format, see attachment 4, FAR 19.704 Subcontracting Plan Requirements and SUBCONTRACTIN PLAN. Large businesses will be evaluated on the amount of small business participation identified in the Small Business

Participation Plan.

To demonstrate commitment in using small business concerns, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan or

Subcontracting Participation Plan shall be incorporated in the resulting contract. In accordance with FAR 19.702(a)

(1) “If the apparent successful offeror fails to negotiate a subcontracting plan acceptable to the contracting officer within the time limit prescribed by the contracting officer, the offeror will be ineligible for award.”

The Small Business Administration and DoD FY 2017 Subcontracting Goals indicated below are the minimum goal requirements for the Small Business Subcontracting Plan required from Large Businesses. There are no mandatory goals for the Small Business Participation Plan.

Department of Defense Subcontracting Goals: (based on the total planned subcontracting dollars)

Small Business- 34.00%

SDB- 5%

WOSB- 5%

SDVOSB- 3%

HUB Zone- 3%

IAW with the DoD Source Selection Procedures, the Small Business participation objectives will be rated

“Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” according to Table 6. Offerors must submit an “Acceptable” Small Business

Participation Proposal in order to be considered for award.

Note: The system for Award Management (SAM) and SBA Dynamic Small Business Search databases will be viewed to verify the small business category of the proposed small businesses listed in the Small Business

Subcontracting Plan. The definition of a small business concern is as set forth in 13 CFR 121.105. The definition of

“subcontract” is as set forth in FAR 19.701.

D. Performance Confidence Assessment. The contracting officer will seek recent and relevant performance information on all offers based on (1) the references provided by the offeror and (2) data independently obtained from other government and commercial sources.

E. Relevant performance includes performance of efforts providing management, tools, equipment, and labor, for

COCESS that involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexity as this solicitation requires. The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to allow the government to assess the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements based on the offeror’s demonstrated past performance. The assessment process will result in an overall performance confidence assessment of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Neutral

Confidence, Limited Confidence, or No Confidence as defined in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 5. Past performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement will not be rated as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror. Offerors with no recent/relevant performance history or if the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned shall receive the rating of

“Neutral Confidence," meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably. The Government shall give greater consideration to offerors whose past performance information rates “Substantial Confidence” or

“Satisfactory Confidence” than to those offerors whose past performance information rates “Neutral Confidence.”

Table 5. Performance Confidence Assessments

Rating Description

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

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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

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

F. In evaluating past performance, the government reserves the right to give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in this solicitation. The following table, also from the

DoD Source Selection Guide, describes past performance relevancy ratings.

Table 4. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition

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

file:///C:/JeffreyW.Voudren/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Content.Outlook/LF8798DU/MP5315.3.doc

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

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

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

G. If the lowest priced evaluated offer is judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” performance rating, and an

Acceptable Small Business Participation Proposal, then that offer represents the best value for the government and the evaluation process stops at this point. Award shall be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

H. If the lowest priced offeror is not judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” performance assessment or an unacceptable Small Business Participation Proposal, then the next lowest priced 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 and an acceptable Small Business Participation Plan or until all offerors are evaluated. The Source

Selection Authority shall then make an integrated assessment best value award decision.

I. Submission of Past Performance information is due no later than 01 June 2017, 4 pm EST. Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and in the format specified in the proposal preparation instructions to permit a meaningful assessment of past performance. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal 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. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the contracting officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

J. If, during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision. If the offeror’s proposal has been evaluated as acceptable at the time discussions are closed, any changes or exceptions in the Final Proposal Revision are subject to evaluation and may introduce risk that the offeror’s proposal be determined unacceptable and ineligible for award.

(End of Summary of Changes)