FA448618R0003P0002.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:

1. Add clause 252.225-7041 Correspondence in English.

2. Update on Section M - Evaluation Factors for Aw ard on paragraph 3.3. Factor 3 - Past Performance.

3. The Government Point of Contact (POC) for this Amendment is Ms. Tania Cardoso, email tania.cardoso.2.pt@us.af.mil and 65CONF.LGC.ALL@us.af.mil

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 5

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 12-Jun-2018

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 FA448618R0003

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

22-May-2018

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 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

12-Jun-2018

CODE

65 CONF/PKA

65TH CONTRACTING FLIGHT

APO AE 09720-7710

FA4486 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA448618R0003

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION I - CONTRACT CLAUSES

The following have been added by reference:

252.225-7041

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

SECTION M

1. Basis for Contract Award: The Government intends to award a Firm Fixed Price contract to a qualified offeror deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) FAR 9.104, whose proposal conforms to all RFP requirements and is judged to represent the Best Value to the Government, with appropriate consideration to: Volume I - Construction Permit, Volume II - Price and Volume III - Past Performance.

The Government will utilize the Tradeoff Process in accordance with FAR 15.101-1, as supplemented by the Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) 215.3, the DoD Source Selection Procedures dated 1 April 2016, the Air Force FAR Supplement (AFFARS) 5315.3, and AFFARS Mandatory Procedure (MP) MP5315.3 and the Performance Price Tradeoff source selection strategy. In terms of relative importance, Past Performance is considered approximately equal to price. To arrive at a best value decision, the Government Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) will strive for maximum objectivity however, this source selection process, by its nature, is subjective and, therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process. The government has the right to award to an offeror whose price is higher than the lowest acceptable offeror if the past performance factor is rated higher than the lowest priced. The minimum acceptable evaluation ratings to be eligible for contract award are as follows:

Factor 1 – Construction Permit: Acceptable Factor 2 – Price: Fair and reasonable Factor 3 – Past Performance: Neutral

The evaluation process will contemplate all three Factors. First, Factor 1 will be rated either acceptable or unacceptable; Factor 2 will be subject to a fair and reasonable assessment; and, finally, Factor 3 will ascertain the confidence level of the Government in obtaining a successful performance.

2. Discussions: The Government intends to make the award without conducting discussions with any offerors. Nevertheless, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if, during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to do so.

Discussions, if necessary, will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306. The Government also reserves the right to conduct exchanges with some, all or none of the offerors.

3. Evaluation Factors: The contracting officer will begin the evaluation process by conducting a proposal compliance review for all timely-received proposals for determination of basic proposal adequacy prior to providing the proposals to the evaluators. Failure to address any of the following factor(s) and/or submitting an incomplete package will result in the proposal being removed from further consideration for award: (1) Construction Permit, (2) Price and (3) Past Performance.

3.1. Factor 1 – Construction Permit: This factor will receive either an “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” rating, as stated in the following table. If an offeror receives an ‘Unacceptable” rating they will NOT be eligible for award.

Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

CRITERIA: Offeror shall provide proof that they possess a valid Construction Permit/Alvara, issued by the Portuguese Institute of Public Market, Real Estate and Construction (IMPIC, I.P.).

MEASURE OF MERIT: This requirement is met when the offeror submits a copy of a valid Construction Permit/Alvara Certification attesting that the offeror can conduct business in the country of Portugal, and if the Construction Permit/Alvara Certification’s level covers the scope and magnitude of their proposal.

3.2. Factor 2 – Price: The Government will evaluate price to make a determination that it is fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR 15.404 and FAR 31.201-3.

a) Fair and Reasonable Determination: The Government reserves the right to use one or more of the price analysis techniques defined in FAR 15.404, in order to determine fairness and reasonableness. The price evaluation will document fairness and reasonableness of the proposed price. Offers that include unreasonable, unbalanced, or incomplete pricing may not be considered for award.

b) Completeness: A proposal is complete when all pricing information required by the solicitation is provided in the format prescribed.

3.3. Factor 3 – Past Performance: The Past Performance factor will receive one of the performance confidence assessments described in the Confidence Assessment table, IAW Table 5 of the DoD Source Selection Procedures dated 1 April 2016. The following two elements will be considered when performing the past performance assessment.

a) Recency Assessment: An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. The time period during which past performance references are considered relevant for this solicitation is five (5) years prior to the release date of the solicitation.

b) Relevancy Assessment: The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of the past performance information submitted and the information obtained through other sources to determine how closely the past projects relate to the Specifications of the requirement. The past performance information and information obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance. The Government will use the relevancy definitions and matrix below.

RELEVANCY ASSESSMENT

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

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.

c) Confidence Assessment: The confidence rating represents an overall evaluation of the contractor’s past performance, that ascertain’ s the confidence level of the Government in obtaining a successful performance.

CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT

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.

(End of Summary of Changes)