Solicitation Amendment FA449725R00080001 SF 30.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

Created On:

01 Jul 2025, 12:16 PM Central Daylight Time

SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Section A - Solicitation/Contract Form

The following modifications were made:

Information From To

Contract Description

1. This acquisition is a Small Disadvantaged Business set-aside.

2. The NAICS Code is 237310; size standard is $45,000,000.

3. The project magnitude is between $250,000 and $500,000.

4. Contract performance period is 180 calendar days.

5. The contract type will be Firm Fixed Price (FFP).

6. There will be no site visit for this requirement.

7. Questions resulting from solicitation must be submitted via email to the POC below by 1:00pm (EST), 17 June 2025.

8. Proposals are due no later than 1:00pm (EST), 30 June 2025.

9. Proposals must be valid through 30 September 2025.

POINT OF CONTACTS FOR THIS SOLICITATION ARE:

SSgt Mariah Thompson/Contract Admin. Email:

mariah.thompson@us.af.mil Mr. Dimas Bernacchia/Contract Officer. Email:

dimas.bernacchia.2@us.af.mil

1. This acquisition is a Total Small Business set-aside.

2. The NAICS Code is 237310; size standard is $45,000,000.

3. The project magnitude is between $250,000 and $500,000.

4. Contract performance period is 180 calendar days.

5. The contract type will be Firm Fixed Price (FFP).

6. There will be no site visit for this requirement.

7. Questions resulting from solicitation must be submitted via email to the POC below by 1:00pm (EST), 8 July 2025.

8. Proposals are due no later than 1:00pm (EST), 22 July 2025.

9. Proposals must be valid through 30 September 2025.

POINT OF CONTACTS FOR THIS SOLICITATION ARE:

SSgt Mariah Thompson/Contract Admin. Email:

mariah.thompson@us.af.mil Mr. Dimas Bernacchia/Contract Officer. Email:

dimas.bernacchia.2@us.af.mil

Response Due Date 30 Jun 2025 22 Jul 2025

Section B - Supplies or Services & Prices or Costs

Line Item 0001

The following Line Item modifications were made:

Information From To

Description

Provide all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and performing all work necessary for FY25 Base Pavements Preventative Maintenance to include all mobilization, safety, labor, materials, equipment, clean up, disposal and demobilization by order of priority IAW the SOW dated 14 Jan 2025.

Provide all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and performing all work necessary for FY25 Base Pavements Preventative Maintenance to include all mobilization, safety, labor, materials, equipment, clean up, disposal and demobilization by order of priority IAW the SOW dated 6 Jun 2025.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

Header Miscellaneous Text (Modified):

M-1.0 Introduction:

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

M-2.0 Basis for Award:

This is a competitive, subjective, best value trade-off source selection in which competing offerors' technical capability and past and present performance survey history will be evaluated on a basis significantly higher than cost or price considerations. By submission of its offer in accordance with the instructions provided in Section L, 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 their 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 Department of Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement Mandatory Procedure 5315.3.

M-3.0 Evaluation:

FA449725R00080001

The offeror's submission of a competitive bid schedule, technical capability and relevant performance information using the Past and Present Performance Survey 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 based on specific technical and/or management approach and Past and Present Performance. The proposal must outline the following:

1) Work plan description including a detailed narrative, no more than two (2) pages of how the contractor will perform all pavement work in accordance with UFC/UFGS criteria and the attached specifications. The plan shall discuss all areas included in the Statement of Work including closing off the work site to start work Paint removal and striping, saw cutting and paving asphalt pavement, paving using DelDot (or equivalent) PG 70-22 Superpave mix design, sealing municipal streets and parking lots with up to 1/2 crack sealing material, and sealing municipal streets and parking lots with up to 1/2 crack sealing material and applying sealer/rejuvenator to existing pavements. The work plan shall also outline the duration and timing of the entire repair.

2) Provide three (3) Past and Present Performance Survey, with at least one (1) project completed within the last four (4) years satisfactorily on a large Department of Defense or civil airfields involving both PG 70-22 Superpave mix design, striping and pavement asphalt crack routing and sealing. Additionally, the offeror's proposal will be evaluated for completeness and compliance 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 bid schedule. Offers shall initially be ranked according to price. The price evaluation will document the completeness and reasonableness of the proposed total evaluated 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 bid schedule (RFP Attachment #5).

M-3.2 Small Business Competition:

This requirement will be for 100% small business set-aside.

M-3.3 Technical Capability:

Each offeror's submitted Technical Capability will be assigned a Combined Technical/Risk Rating as defined in DoD

Source Selection Procedures found in Table 1. Offerors must submit a detailed technical approach demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of the requirements in the Statement of Work (SOW). The proposal may also identify potential risks that could disrupt the schedule. If risks are identified, describe specific mitigation strategies for each risk.

The Government will use the Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method to evaluate the offeror's understanding of the requirements and any potential weaknesses that pose risks to project completion. Proposals will also be evaluated for potential weaknesses, uncertainties, or challenges in the proposed approach such as unrealistic schedules, inadequate resources, or unproven methodologies that could impact successful completion. The adjectival rating assigned to offeror's proposal will be based on the technical approach's quality, clarity, comprehensiveness, and likelihood of successful performance. Offerors who fail to submit a technical capability will automatically be disqualified.

After evaluating an offeror's technical capability, the offeror will be assigned one of the following ratings:

TABLE 1 -

COMBINED

TECHNICAL/RISK

RATING

ADJECTIVAL

RATING

DESCRIPTION

Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good

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

Acceptable

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

Marginal

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

Unacceptable

Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

M-3.4 Performance:

A performance confidence assessment rating as defined in DoD Source Selection Procedures, found in Table 2 will be assigned to each offeror's submitted Past and Present Performance Survey. The offeror shall submit three (3) Past and Present Performance Surveys with one (1) project completed within the last four (4) years that is relevant to the requirements specified in the SOW. The Government will evaluate performance records in accordance with paragraph M-3.4.1 below.

The Government will use the assessment of past and present performance survey 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 are critical in determining what performance information will be evaluated. Current performance will have greater impact in the performance confidence assessment than less recent performance. Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably and, as a result, will receive a "Neutral Confidence" rating for the Past Performance factor. More relevant performance will have a greater impact on the Performance Confidence Assessment than a less relevant effort. A strong record of relevant past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than a "Neutral Confidence" rating.

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 2 - PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE

ASSESSMENT

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

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.

M-3.4.1 Evaluations of Past and Present Performance Survey:

The Government will make an effort to follow-up and obtain performance surveys, but it is the offeror's responsibility to send the past and present performance survey (RFP Attachment #6) 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 awards, 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.

If the Government finds conflicting past performance information in CPARS, the Government will rely on the information in CPARs to evaluate that past performance effort.

M-3.5 Evaluations and Award:

If the lowest priced evaluated offeror is judged to have an overall "Substantial Confidence" performance rating, that offer represents the best value for the Government and a target of one (1)award from the group will be made. If less than one

(1) evaluated offeror is rated "Substantial Confidence", the Source Selection Authority shall then make a best value award decision on a target of one (1) award to the next highest adjectival rating "Satisfactory Confidence". However, price will not determine any order. The selectee will be notified via letter or email of their selection at a time to be determined.

M-3.6 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:

There is no need to establish a competitive range in accordance with FAR 15.306(c)(1). If determined necessary, the government reserves the right to limit for purposes of efficiency, the number of proposals 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 evaluated, 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. Discussions may be conducted either orally or in writing. 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 based on 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 FAR15.306(c)(2). Offerors may be restricted to a short suspense (i.e., less than24 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:

(1) The offeror must be determined responsible according to the standards in FAR subpart 9.1 and meet bonding requirements per FAR 28.102 to be eligible for award.

(2) Proposals must remain valid for the minimum acceptance period specified in the solicitation. Proposals that do not specify a period or that specify a period shorter than the minimum required in the solicitation will be considered unacceptable and ineligible for award.

(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.

639 ATLANTIC ST BLDG 639, CP 302 677 5068

DOVER AFB, DE 19902-5639

UNITED STATES

MARIAH THOMPSON, Email: mariah.thompson@us.af.mil Telephone: 445-5104 AdminBy:

SCD: PAS:

1. Change the acquisition from a small disadvantaged business set-aside to a total small business set-aside.

2. Extend the Questions period to later than 1:00pm (EST), 8 July 2025.

3. Extend the proposal due date to no later than 1:00pm (EST), 22 July 2025.