Solicitation Amendment 1 full conformed copy for reference.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 the offer 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

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Section A - Solicitation/Contract Form

The following changes have been made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Accept Within Days 90 180 Begin Performance Delivery Lead Time Duration 90 Calendar Days 1095 Calendar Days

Section L - Instructions, Conditions, & Notices to Offerors or Quoters

Miscellaneous text in this section has been modified to:

FAR Clauses Incorporated by Reference Number Title Date 52.204-7 System for Award Management 2018-10 FAR Clauses Incorporated by Full Text 52.222-5 - Construction Wage Rate Requirements--Secondary Site of the Work.

As prescribed in 22.407(h), insert the following provision:

(a)

(1) The offeror shall notify the Government if the offeror intends to perform work at any secondary site of the work, as defined in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of the FAR clause at 52.222-6, Construction Wage Rate Requirements, of this solicitation.

(2) If the offeror is unsure if a planned work site satisfies the criteria for a secondary site of the work, the offeror shall request a determination from the Contracting Officer.

(b)

(1) If the wage determination provided by the Government for work at the primary site of the work is not applicable to the secondary site of the work, the offeror shall request a wage determination from the Contracting Officer.

(2) The due date for receipt of offers will not be extended as a result of an offeror's request for a wage determination for a secondary site of the work.

(End of Provision)

Section L - Instrs., Conds., and Notices to Offerors FAR Clauses Incorporated by Reference Number Title Date 52.204-7 System for Award Management 2018-10 FAR Clauses Incorporated by Full Text 52.222-5 - Construction Wage Rate Requirements--Secondary Site of the Work.

As prescribed in 22.407(h), insert the following provision:

(a)

(1) The offeror shall notify the Government if the offeror intends to perform work at any secondary site of the work, as defined in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of the FAR clause at 52.222-6, Construction Wage Rate Requirements, of this solicitation.

(2) If the offeror is unsure if a planned work site satisfies the criteria for a secondary site of the work, the offeror shall request a determination from the Contracting Officer.

(b)

(1) If the wage determination provided by the Government for work at the primary site of the work is not

FA441920R00010001

applicable to the secondary site of the work, the offeror shall request a wage determination from the Contracting Officer.

(2) The due date for receipt of offers will not be extended as a result of an offeror's request for a wage determination for a secondary site of the work. (End of Provision) Section L

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS

1. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.1. The offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by these Instructions to Offerors and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Solicitation and the Statement of Work (SOW). Evaluation will be made in accordance with Section M of this solicitation. Proposals shall be neat, indexed (cross-indexed as appropriate), and assembled in an orderly manner. Include only information that is relevant to this source selection. Pages in excess of the maximum per the instructions in each section may be removed from the proposal and risk not being considered in the evaluation.

NOTE: All proposal preparation costs will be the sole responsibility of the Offeror. The Government will not reimburse any firm for proposal preparation costs. Period for acceptance of offers: The Offeror agrees to keep the prices in its offer firm until 180 days after the proposal due date. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation and/or making an offer ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. NOTE: It is the offeror's sole responsibility to ensure that the Government receives all the documents submitted by the offeror as required for this solicitation.

1.2. The proposal submission due date and time are specified in Block 13, SF 1442, of this solicitation.

1.3. By signing block 20B of the SF 1442, the offeror certifies that the proposal is valid from the due date and time listed in block 13A through the entire period specified in block 13D.

1.4. All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Contract Opportunities website at betasam.gov. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

1.5. The Government reserves the right to revise or amend the specifications, drawings, or the solicitation prior to the proposal closing time. Such revisions or amendments will be communicated by amendments to the Request for Proposal (RFP) and posted on Contract Opportunities website. If such amendments require material changes in quantities or prices, the proposal closing date (due date) may be postponed by enough days to enable offerors to revise their proposals. In such cases, the amendment will include an announcement of the new closing date and time. Offerors MUST acknowledge all amendments in their proposal, either by completing SF 1442 Block 19, providing a signed copy of the amendments with their proposal (Volume I), or by separate letter which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers.

1.6. The Contracting Officer listed below is the Government's primary point of contact for this acquisition.

Address any questions or concerns you may have to the Contracting Officer. Written requests for clarification may be sent to the Contracting Officer at the following email address: Mrs. Lori Clinton, Email: lori.clinton@us.

af.mil. Please include Mr. Michael Sherlock, Email: Michael.Sherlock@us.af.mil with any request.

1.7. The Contracting Officer will promptly notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competition; whereupon, they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505. Excluded offerors may request a preaward debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a post award debriefing. However, excluded offerors are entitled to no more than one debriefing for each proposal. The Contracting Officer will notify unsuccessful offerors of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.503. Upon such notification, unsuccessful offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR

15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

1.8. If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the offeror is asking the Contracting Officer to consider as related to the claimed omission or error. The offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions. This reservation includes matters of additional or substitute pages of the initial proposal.

1.9. The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the Contracting Officer will review this determination and if, in the Contracting Officer's opinion, adequate price competition exists no additional cost information will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition the Contracting Officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the Contracting Officer to determine the reasonableness and affordability of the price.

1.10. Who Can Participate. Proposals may only be submitted by 8a Small Business firms at the time of proposal submission and at time of award. Each business must be an 8a Small Business under the designated NAICS size standard. In order to submit an offer on a solicitation, each business concern in a teaming agreement must be a small business under the designated NAICS size standard.

2. COMMUNICATIONS

2.1. Exchanges of information between Government and the offerors will be controlled by the Contracting Officer. Email shall be used to transmit such information. For large files or sensitive information, offerors can use DoD SAFE at https://safe.apps.mil/. The contractor is solely responsible for ensuring the receipt of any information sent to the Government.

3. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS. The following instructions are to aid in the evaluation process.

3.1. Offerors are responsible for submitting proposals (including any revisions, and amendments) so as to reach the Government office designated in this solicitation by the time specified in block 13, SF 1442, of this solicitation.

3.2. The response shall consist of one (1) labeled CD/disc submission and one (1) hard copy. We will not accept e-mail or faxed proposals. The sealed envelope or package used to submit your proposal must show the Solicitation Number, and the name and address of the Offeror.

3.2.1. Proposals may be sent via mail or may be hand carried submissions of compact disks containing electronic files. The compact disks shall be write once/read only (i.e. CD-R, DVD-R) and "closed" so that no further writes can be made to the media. CD-R/W or DVD-R/W media types are not acceptable. Media must be virus scanned by the offeror prior to submitting to the Government. All documents must be in .pdf format. Title of the documents should include the offerors CAGE code (i.e., "Vol II Tech Proposal CAGE#"). Contractors should request base access for hand carried proposal delivery NLT 7 calendar days prior to the proposal due date /time by sending an email request identifying the company name and list of individuals requesting access to the Contracting Officer identified in para 1.6 of this section.

3.2.2. Proposals may also be submitted by mail to the 97th Contracting Flight at Altus AFB, Oklahoma. The address for proposal submission is:

97th Contracting Flight / PKB Attention: Mrs. Marina Papayanki and Mr. Brian Ames 308 North 1st Street, Ste 2301 Altus AFB OK 73523-5003

3.3. Any proposal, bond, modification, or revision, that is received at the designated Government office after the exact time specified for receipt of proposals will be "late" and will not be considered unless the Contracting Officer determines the criteria set forth in FAR 15.208 exists.

3.4. Proposals shall be complete, clearly presented, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation as detailed in section M of this solicitation and for substantiating validity of stated claims. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but rather provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the offeror's facilities and/or experience and will rely heavily on the information presented in the offeror's proposal. Proposals shall be neat, indexed (cross-indexed as appropriate) and assembled electronically in an orderly manner. Elaborate artwork and expensive visual and other presentation aids are neither necessary nor desired. Include only information that is relevant to this source selection.

3.5. Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits.

3.5.1. A complete proposal shall consist of four (4) volumes:

-Volume I, Completed Request for Proposal (RFP) -Volume II, Technical Proposal

(a) Subfactor 1

(b) Subfactor 2 -Volume III

(a) Past Performance Information

(b) Signed Teaming Agreement (if applicable) -Volume IV, Seed Project Proposal Specific guidance regarding the content of each volume will be discussed further below. Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. 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 these ENs and such limitations will be provided at the time the EN is issued.

3.5.2. Electronic Page Size, Format and Limit.

3.5.2.1. An electronic page is defined as each face of an 8 1/2" X 11" electronic sheet of paper containing information. Pages in excess of the maximum page limits defined below will not be evaluated. For the purposes of formatting, the type font shall not be less than 12 pitch. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume.

VOLUME DESCRIPTION PAGE LIMITS

I Completed RFP None II Technical Proposal 30 -Subfactor 1: Program Management -Subfactor 2: Coefficient Rationale III (a) Past Performance 20 III (b) Signed Teaming Agreement (if applicable) None IV Seed Project Proposal 30

3.5.2.2. All pages of each part shall be appropriately numbered and identified with the RFP number. Each page containing proprietary information should be marked as such. Pages in excess of the maximum will not be evaluated. Additionally, each page should contain the following legend at the bottom of each page: SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION--SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

3.5.3. Cost or Pricing Related Data. All cost and/or pricing data shall ONLY be addressed in Volume I.

3.5.4. Indexing. Electronic files should be titled appropriately so as to easily discern each volume as outlined in paragraph 3.5.1 and 3.2.1. Tab indexing of the hard copy shall be used to identify sections. Tab indexing is not included in the page limitations.

3.5.5. Proposal Acceptance Period. The proposal acceptance period is specified in Block 13d, SF 1442, of this Solicitation. In accordance with Block 17, the number inserted must be equal to or greater than the number of days listed in Block 13d.

4. VOLUME I - COMPLETED RFP

4.1. Volume I, Completed RFP shall consist of the completed and signed RFP, to include any amendments issued, with a cover letter delineating any exceptions taken to the RFP terms and conditions with accompanying rationale. However, offerors are cautioned that any noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the RFP may cause their proposal to be determined not eligible for award. Offerors shall ensure that all clauses and provisions that require "fill in" information are appropriately completed, including the proposed coefficients associated with the contract line items in the Schedule of the RFP.

4.1.1. Complete blocks 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, and 20a-c of the SF 1442, Solicitation, Offer, and Award. An authorized official of the firm submitting the offer must sign and date the SF 1442 in block 20a-c. (In doing so, the offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP, Sections A through K).

4.1.2. Complete the Total Evaluated Price Worksheet (Attachment 5), paying close attention to the notes referenced within the Total Evaluated Price Worksheet. Insert proposed coefficients for each category listed within the Total Evaluated Price Worksheet for the ordering period. Calculate the "Adjusted Total Estimated Value" for each category by multiplying the "Adjusted Amount Based on Percent of Estimated Volume" by the associated "Proposed Coefficient." Calculate the "Total Proposed Price for Ordering Period" by adding the "Adjusted Total Estimated Value" for each category for the ordering period. Failure to fully comply may eliminate the offer from competition.

4.1.2.1. It is estimated that the maximum dollar amount of this contract will be distributed amongst the following categories as indicated below (this shall be reflected in the proposed coefficient for the CLIN /performance period identified in Section B).

a. Standard Hours (0700 - 1600) --- 90%

b. Non-Standard Hours --- 10%

4.1.2.2. Insert the standard hours and non-standard hours coefficients used in the Total Evaluated Price Worksheet into the corresponding blocks in Section B of the SF 1442 (SABER Coefficient Schedule).

4.1.3. Complete representations and certifications in Section K or the System for Award Management (SAM).

5. VOLUME II - TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

In the technical volume, address your technical solution for meeting the Government's minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical subfactor.

5.1. Technical Risk. For each subfactor, address Technical Risk associated with those aspects of your proposed technical approach you consider to have the potential for disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Describe the impact of each identified risk in terms of its potential to interfere with or prevent the successful accomplishment of other contract requirements (for example: SOW annexes, appendices, workload, or referenced publications), whether or not those requirements are identified as subfactors. Propose a realistic "work-around" or risk mitigations for identified risks that will eliminate or reduce risk to an acceptable level.

5.2. SUBFACTOR 1, PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

5.3.1. Key Personnel Capabilities and Functions. The purpose of this subfactor element is to ensure offerors propose a logical organizational and management structure, key personnel with the proper qualifications and experience, and effective management of key personnel capabilities and functions.

5.3.1.1. Offerors shall provide an organizational diagram that depicts the offeror's overall organizational and management structure. The diagram shall include the key personnel expected under this contract (see paragraph

5.3.1.2 below for key personnel), and lines of responsibility.

5.3.1.2. Offerors shall provide evidence that their proposed key personnel meet the minimum standards (education and/or experience) for those positions in accordance with the SABER Statement of Work (SOW).

Provide individual's name, title, duty, years of experience and experience level relating to similar multidiscipline construction projects involving repair, alteration, or new construction of real property including size and scope.

At a minimum, the Offeror shall provide information for the following disciplines:

5.3.1.2.1. Project Manager

5.3.1.2.2. Quality Control Manager

5.3.1.3. Provide resumes clearly showing the level of education, and a minimum of five (5) years of experience as outlined in the SOW. Each individual's name, title, duty, years of experience, and experience relating to similar contracts in size and scope of the contract in resume format. After award, any alternates or replacements must have similar qualifications in dealing with projects of similar size and scope, and will be approved by the Contracting Officer.

5.3.1.4. Identify the maximum number of active projects to be assigned to Project Managers and Quality Control Managers with a rationale to support the determination.

5.3.1.5. Identify how often work associated with each active project will be inspected by specific key personnel with Quality Control responsibilities and key personnel with Safety Management responsibilities. Provide a rationale to support the determination.

5.3.2. Subcontract Management Plan. The purpose of this subfactor element is to ensure the offeror has an effective plan for acquiring qualified subcontract support and to define company policy, procedures, and responsibilities for post-award management of subcontractors.

5.3.2.1. Describe the method and criteria to be used in selection of subcontractors and the policies and procedures for subcontractor management, including surveillance, quality control, scheduling, and performance.

5.3.2.2. Identify the proposed level of subcontracting and in-house/organic work to be accomplished and addressing how the offeror will mitigate potential issues caused by the availability of local labor.

5.3.2.3. Describe the plan for handling surges in workload and/or in number of concurrent active task orders due to cyclical funding, emerging requirements (e.g. emergency repairs), etc. by way of obtaining additional subcontractor support and/or augmenting existing in-house project resources/supervision.

5.3.3. Bonding Capacity. The purpose of this subfactor element is to ensure the offeror has the ability to obtain adequate bonding capacity applicable to projected task orders.

5.3.3.1. Provide evidence that the offeror is able to obtain the maximum single award/task order performance and payment bonding capacity of $1M and a minimum aggregate bonding capacity of $5M, backed by a bonding surety with a certified Department of Treasury Surety, as listed in FAR 28.202. The document(s) shall include the surety company's name, address, phone number, and points of contact.

5.4. SUBFACTOR 2, COEFFICIENT RATIONALE

5.4.1. Offerors shall submit information to substantiate their proposed coefficients. The Government requests this information in order to examine if an Offeror has a complete understanding of contract requirements. The following shall be provided:

5.4.1.1. Offerors shall provide the rationale that was utilized to develop the coefficients for the CLIN. The Offeror's rationale must acknowledge the applicability of the City Cost Index to this acquisition and address, at a minimum, the perceived accuracy of the pricing within the RS Means price book as well as the City Cost Index Weighted Average Total for Lawton, OK (to include any increments or decrements), and potential limitations associated with the local labor force. The offeror shall address assumptions and adjustments made with regard to developing each proposed coefficient to account for the increased complexity in accomplishing work on an active DoD installation (i.e. additional paperwork, increased security and contractor vetting procedures, etc.) in a location such as Altus AFB, OK. Offerors shall address their assumptions regarding the expected volume of work, in both dollars and number of task orders, and the sensitivity of each coefficient to the expected volume of work. Examples, not all inclusive, of elements that are typically included in a coefficient are Full Time Equivalents, Labor Burden, Field Office, Home Office, Permits and Licenses, Mobilization/Demobilization, Minimum Design Costs, Software, References and Codes, General and Administrative, Bond Premiums, Subcontractor Mark-Up, Oklahoma Gross Receipts Tax, all other taxes, Clean-Up, Quality Control, Overhead, and Profit.

5.4.1.2 Offeror should provide additional information explaining how the contractor will maintain successful performance at their proposed coefficient.

6. VOLUME III - (a) PAST PERFORMANCE and (b) SIGNED TEAMING AGREEMENT

6.1. Submit one (1) copy of Volume III (a) Past Performance Information and Volume III (b) Signed Teaming Agreement. Past Performance Questionnaires and Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluations are not included in the page limitation.

6.1.1. Volume III (a) - PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION. Offerors shall provide adequate past performance information on five (5) recent and relevant completed Federal Government contracts. Two (2) of the five (5) completed contracts must have a value that exceeded a Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT).

Recent will be defined as completed within the last five (5) years, and relevant is defined as the work similar in scope and complexity as described in the SABER SOW. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of each contract are deemed relevant to complexity and magnitude as related to the requirements of this solicitation and in accordance with Section M. Failure to provide required relevancy description may impact the confidence rating. If in a teaming agreement or joint venture with no combined past performance, projects from either/both team members can be submitted not to exceed five (5) total projects with at least two (2) projects from each team member.

6.1.1.1. Provide a summary of the previous contracts described above, not to exceed four (4) pages of past performance information per reference. The summary should explain what aspects of each contract are deemed recent and relevant as related to the requirements of this solicitation and in accordance with Section M. Failure to provide required relevancy description may impact the confidence rating, (i.e. aspects of previous projects should match work elements identified in the solicitation/specification). The summary should not exceed four

(4) pages per reference and include:

a) Name of project (Contract number, if applicable)

b) Name and address of customer or Government agency

c) Name, telephone, fax number and/or email of customer contact or contracting officer

d) Dollar value

e) Period of performance/Completion date

f) Brief description of work performed, and why the effort is relevant

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

6.1.1.2. Each proposal shall provide current and relevant information regarding an offeror's actions under previously awarded contracts.

6.1.1.3. Complete the Attachment Past Performance Questionnaire and email the attached Past Performance

Questionnaire to all past performance references in the list you provide and instruct them to return the completed questionnaire to the individual(s) indicated in paragraph 6.1.1.3.1 below. Project Owner evaluators are only allowed to use the Attachment Past Performance Questionnaire. Altered or substituted questionnaires will not be evaluated. Also, Past Performance Questionnaires will only be accepted electronically by email from Project Owners or their authorized representatives. Past Performance Questionnaires will not be accepted from Prime Contractors, Subcontractors, or Manufacturers. Offerors are responsible to ensure questionnaires are transmitted to their references, and to indicate which references the questionnaire was sent to.

6.1.1.3.1. Inform your references that they shall forward questionnaires electronically by email directly to the address below. Questionnaires must be received by the 97th Contracting Flight office not later than the closing date of the solicitation. Offerors are responsible for ensuring their references transmit the questionnaire to the Contracting Office. In lieu of a Past Performance Questionnaire, if a project is currently available in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) the contractor should attach the evaluation to the questionnaire with the relevant solicitation number and submit directly to the 97th Contracting Flight office before the official closing date and time. Electronic submissions shall be sent to:

Mrs. Marina Papayanki - marina.papayanki@us.af.mil Mr. Brian Ames - brian.ames@us.af.mil

6.1.1.4. Lack of any past performance will not automatically disqualify an offeror, but it is a factor that is considered in the Best Value Subjective Tradeoff Source Selection described in Section M.

6.1.1.5. If the offeror claims there is no past performance, then that status must be identified to the Contracting Officer not later than the date/time proposals are due from all offerors.

6.1.2. Volume III (b) Signed Teaming Agreement - If Teaming Agreements are contemplated they must comply with the appropriate Federal Regulations.

6.1.2.1. The Government will recognize the integrity and validity of formal contractor teaming agreements;

provided, the agreements are identified and company relationships are fully disclosed in an offer. A teaming agreement must establish each party's role in the proposal preparation process and will be incorporated into the contract. Failure to clearly define roles and/or provide a teaming agreement with a proposal shall make teaming arrangements and related subcontractor past performance ineligible for evaluation and consideration of award.

The prime contractor shall remain fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any teaming agreement between the prime contractor and its subcontractors. Teaming Agreements must provide the following information as part of their proposal, Volume III (b), not later than the date/time proposals are due:

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

6.1.2.1.2. Provide for protection of competition-sensitive proprietary information. (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;

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

6.1.2.1.4. Exclusivity. Assurance that the team member will not be replaced for the duration of the contract, any exceptions should be identified. Assurance that the team members are not teaming with another firm for the same procurement; and

6.1.2.1.5. 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.

6.1.2.2. The prime contractor shall remain fully responsible for contract performance, regardless of any teaming agreement between the prime contractor and its subcontractors.

6.1.2.3. At the time of receipt of proposals and at time of award, each business must be an 8(a) small business.

In order to submit an offer on a contract, each business concern in a teaming agreement must be a small business under the designated NAICS size standard.

7. VOLUME IV - SEED PROJECT PROPOSAL

7.1. This volume will not be reviewed during the award evaluation process. The Seed Project is not an evaluation factor in selecting an awardee/successful contractor. Once an awardee/successful contractor is selected, Volume IV of the successful contractor's proposal will be evaluated and used to issue the first task order of the resulting IDIQ. The first task order is anticipated to be issued on the same day of award of the resulting IDIQ.

7.2. Using the Government provided Seed Project Statement of Objectives Attachment and other Seed Project Attachments, provide a proposal for this Project. Information provided shall include, but not limited to a proposal utilizing RSMeans prepared in E4Clicks with line items broken out by division and a detailed Statement of Work.

8. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INSTRUCTIONS AND EVALUATION

8.1. Your attention is directed to the functional relationship between Sections L and M of this solicitation.

Section L provides information for the purpose of organizing the proposal and is not intended to be all inclusive.

Section M describes evaluation factors for award. Since the Government evaluation of proposals will cover areas identified in Section M, proposals should address all such areas of evaluation.

9. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION PRIOR TO CLOSING

9.1. The Government reserves the right to revise or amend the specifications, drawings, or the solicitation prior to the proposal closing time. Such reservations or amendments will be communicated by amendments to the Request for Proposal (RFP) and posted on the Contract Opportunities website (betasam.gov). If such amendments require material changes in quantities or prices, the proposal closing date may be postponed by enough days to enable offerors to revise their proposals. In such cases, the amendment will include an announcement of the new closing date and time. Offerors MUST acknowledge all amendments in their proposal (Volume I), either by completing SF 1442 Block 19, providing signed copies of the amendments with their proposal, or by separate letter which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers.

10. QUESTIONS.

10.1. All questions regarding this solicitation must be submitted in writing via e-mail. All questions and subsequent answers will be posted to the Contract Opportunities website betasam.gov. It is the responsibility of the contractor to continuously monitor the site for updates. To mitigate the risks associated with the cancellation of this solicitation due to untimely submission of questions, all questions must be submitted electronically to the individual(s) listed below no later than close of business 5 business days after the preproposal conference. Any questions submitted after this period may not be answered.

Mrs. Marina Papayanki - marina.papayanki@us.af.mil Mr. Brian Ames - brian.ames@us.af.mil

11. FEDERAL HOLIDAYS: The following Federal Legal Holidays are observed by Altus AFB:

New Year's Day - 1 January Martin Luther King's Birthday - Third Monday in January President's Day - Third Monday in February Memorial Day - Last Monday in May Independence Day - 4 July Labor Day - First Monday in September Columbus Day - Second Monday in October Veterans Day - 11 November Thanksgiving Day - Fourth Thursday in November Christmas Day - 25 December

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

Miscellaneous text in this section has been modified to:

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

EVALUATION CRITERIA

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD. This acquisition will utilize the Tradeoff source selection procedures in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.101-1 and 15.3 as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 215.300, and the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS) Mandatory Procedures 5315.3 to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision. These regulations are available electronically at acquisition.gov. The Best Value technique chosen for this particular acquisition will be a Subjective Tradeoff. The Government will select the best overall offer, based upon an integrated assessment of Technical/Technical Risk, Past Performance, and Cost /Price. A contract may be awarded to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation's requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Section L of this solicitation) and is judged, based on the evaluation factors and subfactors to represent the best value to the Government. The Government seeks to award to the offeror who gives the Air Force the greatest confidence that it will best meet, or exceed, the requirements. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors, and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) reasonably determines that the technical and/or past performance of the higher price offeror outweighs the cost difference.

The SSA will base the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation (described below). While the Government source selection evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process. The Government intends to award one

(1) contract as a result of this solicitation.

2. DISCUSSIONS. The Government intends to award without discussions. Therefore, the offerors initial offer should contain the offeror's best terms from a price and a technical standpoint. Although the Government intends to award without discussion, it reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary. Any discussions will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer, with the concurrence of the Source Selection Authority, may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. 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 at the time discussions are closed, any changes or exceptions in the Final Proposal Revision are subject to evaluation and may introduce risk to the offeror's proposal that may change the rating of the offeror's proposal.

3. CLARIFICATIONS. In accordance with FAR 15.306, Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (for example, relevance of past performance information). Clarifications 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.

4. EVALUATION FACTORS. The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal:

Factor 1: Price Factor (located within Vol 1) Factor 2: Technical Factor (Located within Vol 2) Subfactor 1: Program Management Subfactor 2: Coefficient Rationale Factor 3: Past Performance Factor (Located within Vol 3) Award will be made to the offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

4.1. Relative Importance of Factors. For this solicitation, the Technical Factor, which includes the technical rating and technical risk rating, is the most important followed by past performance, and then cost/price.

Technical Subfactors 1 and 2 are of equal importance. Additionally and in accordance with FAR 15.304(e), all evaluation factors other than Cost/Price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price.

5. PRICE FACTOR. The offeror's price proposal, as described in Section L, will be evaluated as follows.

5.1. Completeness and Reasonableness. Offeror's price proposal will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness. Additionally, the offeror's price proposal will be evaluated, for award purposes, based upon the standard and non-standard hours coefficients proposed for the SABER ordering period. The offeror's price proposal will be evaluated to ensure it is fair and reasonable, pursuant to FAR 15.404. For additional information see FAR 31.201-3.

5.2. The price proposal will be evaluated using the information listed on the Total Evaluated Price Worksheet, located in Section B of the solicitation document. The adjusted annual amount based on percentage of estimated volume will be multiplied by the offeror's proposed coefficient for each category. The resulting adjusted total estimated value for each category will be added together to arrive at the total estimated usage for the ordering period. The percentage of estimated volume per category is as follows:

Standard Hours (0700 - 1600) -- 90% Non-Standard Hours -- 10%

5.3. Estimated volume is based on a maximum contract value of $9M over 3 years, and will be used for evaluation purposes only. The offeror should not consider this figure as any indication of proposed contract usage, nor base the proposed coefficient rates on any expectation that such levels of award will be made by the Government.

5.4. Balance. Offeror's price proposal(s) will be reviewed for balance among all Total Evaluated Price Worksheet Line Items in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g). Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total cost/price, the cost/price of one or more line items is significantly over or understated as demonstrated by application of cost or price analysis techniques. The Government will analyze offers to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to Cost/Price. Per FAR 52.215-1(f)(8), the Government may determine a proposal unacceptable if the costs/prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items. The Government may also consider an offer unbalanced if there is a significant difference between proposed prices from year to year, such that they are above or below what would be considered a reasonable adjustment for inflation. A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

5.5. Total Evaluated Price. Evaluation of proposed pricing will be based on review of prices provided in the Total Evaluated Price Worksheet. The offeror's price proposal will be reviewed for compliance with Section L cost/price instructions. The total evaluated price will be calculated as the sum of the offeror's price for all contract line item numbers. The Seed Project will NOT be factored into the price evaluation.

6. TECHNICAL FACTOR. Each offeror's written technical proposal will be evaluated, based on the subfactors identified in paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2, to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets the requirements of the solicitation and General Requirements and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks. The technical proposal addresses each of the subfactors in sufficient detail. For each subfactor, the offeror identifies risks, if any, associated with the proposed approach and actions the offeror will take to mitigate the identified risks. If no risks/mitigations are identified in the offeror's proposal, it indicates the offeror does not consider there to be any risk associated with their proposed approach.

6.1. Subfactor 1 - Program Management: This subfactor evaluates the Offeror's management approach as it relates to key personnel capabilities and functions, subcontract management plan, and bonding capacity. The proposal shall be evaluated and rated to determine if the Offeror's proposal demonstrates a sound approach to executing and concurrently managing task orders under the resulting contract.

6.1.1. Key Personnel Capabilities and Functions. The Offeror's proposal shall demonstrate the following:

6.1.1.1. A logical organizational and management structure;

6.1.1.2. Sufficient key personnel that meet the minimum standards (education and/or experience) for those positions in accordance with the SABER SOW listed on page 28 (Section 01 30 00) and all subparagraphs;

6.1.1.3. An effective approach to ensure Project Manager and Quality Control Manager are not over saturated with the management and/or responsibilities associated with assigned active projects.

6.1.1.4. An effective approach to ensure quality control and safety management are properly applied to each active project.

6.1.2. Subcontract Management Plan. The Offeror's proposal shall communicate a plan that demonstrates the following:

6.1.2.1. An effective approach to ensure the successful use and management of subcontractors;

6.1.2.2. A thorough understanding of all trades/disciplines required under the resulting contract; the availability of an appropriate labor force; and the determination of in-house/organic versus subcontractor execution per trade /discipline;

6.1.2.3 An effective approach to provide sustained contract compliance during surges in workload and/or in number of concurrent active task orders.

6.1.3. Bonding Capacity. The Offeror's proposal shall demonstrate the following:

6.1.3.1. Evidence that the offeror is able to obtain the maximum single award/task order performance and payment bonding capacity of $1M and a minimum aggregate bonding capacity of $5M, backed by a bonding surety with a certified Department of Treasury Surety, as listed in FAR 28.202. The document(s) shall include the surety company's name, address, phone number, and points of contact.

6.2. Subfactor 2 - Coefficient Rationale: This subfactor evaluates the Offeror's Coefficient Rationale. The proposal shall be evaluated and rated to determine if the Offeror's Coefficient Rationale reflects an understanding of contract requirements and evaluates the risk that a low coefficient poses to the quality of performance. Offeror's proposal must demonstrate how the Offeror considered the below in formulating their proposed coefficients:

6.2.1. Understanding of local market pricing and conditions;

6.2.2. A thorough understanding of the perceived accuracy of the RSMeans pricing as it relates to the local market;

6.2.3. A thorough understanding of the application of the associated City Cost Index; and

6.2.4. An understanding of contract requirements as it relates to the expected volume of work. 6.3. Combined Technical/Technical Risk Rating. The technical rating evaluates the quality of the offeror's technical solution for meeting the Government's requirement. Technical risk, which is manifested by the identification of weaknesses, assesses the degree to which an offeror's proposed approach for the requirements of the solicitation may cause disruption of schedule, increased costs, degraded performance, the need for increased government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. The evaluation shall address the Source Selection Team's identification of any weakness as well as the offeror's identified risks and proposed mitigation (if applicable) and document why that is or is not manageable.

6.3.1. Each Technical subfactor will receive one of the color ratings described in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 3 - Combined Technical/Risk Ratings, excerpted below, which focuses on the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies of the offeror's proposal. The color rating depicts how well the offeror's proposal meets the Technical subfactor requirements.

DoD Source Selection Procedures, Combined Technical/Risk Ratings Color Rating Adjectival Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red…