Airfield Paving Amend 0002.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) Extend the receipt for proposal date, Standard Form 1442, Block 13A; 2) add total extended amounts for base and all option years to Standard Form 1442, Section B, after Item No 4001; 3) add Economic Price Adjustment clauses to Standard Form 1442, Section I; and 4) Revision is made to Standard Form 1442, Section M, Paragraph 3.3;

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 7

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

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 FA4497-17-R-0005

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

23-Jun-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 X is extended, 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

18-Jul-2017

CODE

ANDRE JACKSON

639 ATLANTIC STREET

DOVER AFB DE 19902-5639

FA4497 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA4497-17-R-0005

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 24-Jul-2017 03:00 PM to 28-Jul-2017 03:00 PM.

SECTION B - Supplies or Services and Prices

The following extended prices for base and all option years have been added after Item No 4001:

TOTAL AMOUNT OF EACH YEAR

TOTAL ESTIMATED EXTENDED AMOUNT OF BASE YR $ _______________

TOTAL ESTIMATED EXTENDED AMOUNT OF OPTION YR 1 $ _______________

TOTAL ESTIMATED EXTENDED AMOUNT OF OPTION YR 2 $ _______________

TOTAL ESTIMATED EXTENDED AMOUNT OF OPTION YR 3 $ _______________

TOTAL ESTIMATED EXTENDED AMOUNT OF OPTION YR 4 $ _______________

TOTAL ESTIMATED EXTENDED AMOUNT ALL YEARS $ _______________

NOTE 1: All extensions of the unit prices shown will be subject to verification by the Government. In case of variation between the unit price and the extension, the unit price will be considered to be the bid.

NOTE 2: If a modification to a bid based on unit prices is submitted, which provides for a lump sum adjustment to the total EXTENDED cost, the application of the lump sum adjustment to each unit price in the bid schedule must be stated. If it is not stated, the bidder agrees that the lump sum adjustment shall be applied on a pro-rata basis to every unit price in the bid schedule.

NOTE 3: If the actual quantities should be less than 85% or more than 115% of the estimated quantities, the unit prices of those items falling outside the parameters of 85%, 115% will be subject to negotiation; however, if the actual quantities installed/removed fall within the 85% and 115% range of the estimated quantities, the unit price bid will be used for payment purposes. In either event, the contractor shall only be paid for actual quantities installed/removed (as applicable to bid schedule.) In no case shall the contractor exceed the amount of the contract without consent of the Contracting Officer.

CLAUSES AND PROVISIONS

(a) Clauses and provisions from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and supplements thereto are incourporated in this document by reference and in full text. Those incorporated by reference have the same force and effect as if they were given in full text.

(b) Clauses and provisions in this document will be nubered in sequence, but will not necessarily appear in consecutive order.

(c) Sections K, L and M will be physically removed from any resultant award, but will be deemed to be incorporated, by reference, in that award.

SECTION I - CONTRACT CLAUSES

The following have been added by reference:

52.216-2 52.216-3 52.216-4

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

SECTION M

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

M-1.0 Introduction:

This section outlines the criteria the Government will use in evaluating the offeror's capabilities and proposals for the MACC contract. The Government will evaluate proposals using the subjective trade-off technique.

M-2.0 Basis for Award:

This is a competitive, best value, subjective trade-off source selection in which competing offerors’ past performance history will be evaluated on a basis significantly more important than cost or price considerations. By submission of its offer, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements including terms and conditions, representations and certifications and technical requirements. All offers shall be treated equally except for prices and performance records. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. The evaluation process will be conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation Subpart 15.3, and Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement Mandatory Procedure 5315.3.

M-3.0 Evaluation:

The offeror's submission of a competitive paving unit price list and relevant performance information must convey to the Government that the offeror is capable, possesses technical expertise and experience, possesses sufficient resources, and is able to plan, organize, and use those resources to deliver timely and quality paving construction projects.

Offerors’ proposals will be evaluated for completeness and compliancy with the proposal instructions as described in Section L - Instructions to Offerors. Incomplete proposals submitted by the due date and time of this RFP will be considered incomplete, and shall not be evaluated.

M-3.1 Price:

The Government may use various price analysis techniques and procedures to ensure a fair and reasonable price.

Offerors must provide pricing via a paving unit price list. For evaluation of multiple contract awards (a target of four), offers shall initially be ranked according to price. All offerors will be evaluated in order starting with the lowest price first to highest price. An offeror’s proposed price will be determined by the total proposed price via the paving unit price list (RFP Attachment #10). The TEP will also include the evaluation of an additional 6-month pricing after option year four in accordance with FAR 52.217-8 Option To Extend Services.

Unreasonable or unbalanced price or cost estimates may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition. The Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items or subline items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

M-3.2 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, (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. For the purposes of this requirement a 20% Small Business Participation Goal has been set. The prime contractor must award 20% of the total contract value 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 and goals.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives and goals.

M-3.3 Performance:

Individual requirements/contracts submitted for evaluation will be evaluated and assigned a relevancy rating in accordance with paragraph M-3.3.1. Relevancy ratings will be used to determine an offerors overall performance confidence rating. The Government will evaluate performance records in accordance with paragraph M-3.3 below.

A relevancy rating as defined in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 4, and a confidence assessment rating will be assigned to each offeror. For the purpose of this evaluation, the “offeror” includes the prime contractor’s organization as complemented by the prime’s team (subcontractors and other operating units of the prime, for example). The assessment of past performance as a specific evaluation factor is separate and distinct from the Determination of Responsibility required by FAR Part 9.

The Government will use the assessment of past performance as a means of evaluating the relative capability of the offeror to successfully meet the requirements of this RFP. The performance evaluation will be accomplished through assignment of a confidence rating based on assessing performance confidence. The performance confidence assessment is accomplished by reviewing all aspects of an offeror's past and current performance, focusing on and targeting projects relevant to the scope of the solicitation. A confidence assessment rating is assigned through an analysis of the offeror's recent, current, and relevant performance. Recency and relevancy is critical in determining what performance information will be evaluated. Current performance will have greater impact in the performance confidence assessment than less recent performance.

The evaluation will take into account performance of predecessor companies, major subcontractors, consultant, or teaming contractor or partner whose effort, as demonstrated in the proposal, will significantly influence performance of the proposed construction and/or design-build effort and the ratings of these entities will contribute to the overall rating of the principal offeror. Demonstration of previous working relationship with the proposed entity will have a greater influence than a new relationship. Teaming partners supported by written agreements will have a greater influence than partners with no written agreement. Past Performance information regarding subcontracting efforts of the offeror or subcontractors that will perform major aspects of the requirement will not be rated as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror.

In determining relevancy, consideration will be given, but not limited to, such things as project magnitude, project complexity, contract type, contract environment, division of company proposing, and subcontractor interaction.

After evaluating an offeror’s performance record, the offeror will be assigned one of the following ratings:

TABLE-1. PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

ADJECTIVAL 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

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

the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

NO CONFIDENCE

the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

M-3.3.1 Evaluations of Past Performance:

The Government will make an effort to follow-up and obtain performance surveys, but it is the offeror’s responsibility to send the performance questionnaire (RFP Attachment #8) to references of relevant projects for evaluations, and to ensure their references transmit the questionnaire to the Contracting Office. Performance questionnaires not received by the Contracting Officer will not be evaluated for award.

Some of the important factors which will be considered during past performance evaluations include:

1. Projects with similar magnitude to those typical or projected for Dover AFB, DE.

2. Dollar value/threshold of requirement.

3. Projects with similar contract type (such as MACC, MATOC, and other multiple award, Firm Fixed Price, IDIQ contracts) using terms and conditions similar to those set forth in this solicitation (i.e.

Liquidated Damages, Material and Workmanship, Warranty of Construction).

4. Projects demonstrating multiple paving construction disciplines.

5. Projects demonstrating successful execution of simultaneous paving projects.

6. Ability to perform in the Dover Delaware geographical areas, or successful performance operating in a geographically separated location from main office location.

7. Projects on which offeror have previously worked.

8. CPARS report information, such as PPIRS and other relevant performance data, to include information obtained from PPQs and references.

In order to evaluate the magnitude of each Past Performance the following ratings shall be used:

TABLE-2. PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

ADJECTIVAL RATING: DESCRIPTION:

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.

M-3.4 Evaluations and Award:

If the three (3) lowest priced evaluated offerors are judged to have an overall "Substantial Confidence" performance rating, those offers represent the best value for the Government and a target of three (3) awards from that group may be made, in order of price. If the three lowest priced evaluated offerors are not judged to have an overall "Substantial Confidence" performance rating, evaluations will continue (in ascending order by price) until a target of three (3) offerors are rated with "Substantial Confidence" or, until all offerors are evaluated. If less than three are rated "Substantial Confidence", the Source Selection Authority shall then make a best value award decision on a target of three awards. For the selection of potential On/Off Ramp Selectees (See instructions on Attachment 11) the evaluation criteria will continue as described above up to three (3) On/Off Ramp Selectees or until the list of competitive offers is exhausted. The On/Off Ramp Selectees will be notified via letter of their selection to be on ramped at a time to be determined.

M-3.5 Communication and Clarifications:

Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and in the format specified in the proposal preparation instructions. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal or respond to adverse performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Adverse performance is defined as 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 shall not constitute discussions and the Contracting Officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

M-4.0 Competitive Range:

The Government reserves the right to limit for purposes of efficiency, the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals (10 U.S.C.2305(b)(4) and 41 U.S.C.253b(d)). If the Contracting Officer, decides that an offeror's proposal should no longer be included in the competitive range, the proposal shall be eliminated from consideration for award and written notice of the decision shall be provided to the unsuccessful offeror in accordance with FAR 15.503.

M-4.1 Discussions:

The Government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective offerors. The Government, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer deems doing so is in the Government’s best interest. To maximize the Government’s ability to obtain best value based on the performance/price trade-off evaluation technique set forth in this RFP, it may be necessary to conduct discussions; as such, discussions will be limited to price and/or performance-related issues and will be conducted with only those offerors determined to be within the competitive range. Discussions may be conducted either orally or in writing. For the purpose of this evaluation, the “offeror” includes the prime contractor’s bidding organization as complemented by the prime’s team (subcontractors and other operating units of the prime, for example). The scope and extent of discussions are a matter of contracting officer judgment. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal or respond to adverse performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Adverse performance is defined as 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 shall not constitute discussions. The Contracting Officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision. The Government may make a final determination as to whether the offeror’s proposal is acceptable or unacceptable solely on the basis of the initial proposal as submitted. Accordingly, offerors are advised to submit initial proposals which are fully and clearly acceptable and without the need for additional information. The competitive range, if required, may be reduced for purposes of efficiency pursuant to FAR 15.306(c)(2). Offerors may be restricted to a short suspense (i.e., less than 24 hours) in responding to the Contracting Officer during any discussion period.

M-5.0 General Responsibility:

The following conditions must be met prior to award of a MAPC contract:

(1) The offeror must be determined responsible according to the standards in FAR 9.1.

(2) A Pre-Award Survey (PAS) may be conducted as part of this evaluation according to FAR 9.1. and

9.106. Results of the PAS (if conducted) will be evaluated to determine each offeror’s capability to meet the requirements of the solicitation.

(3) Acceptability of other information: Other information submitted by the offeror must comply with the conditions set forth in the solicitation. The government reserves the right to make the final determination as to whether the other information complies with the conditions set forth in the solicitation.

(End of Summary of Changes)