FA4625-13-R-0005 _Amendment_1.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:

A. To change the offer due date.

B. To update verbage of clause FAR 52.212-2 to read Pricing for CLIN X001 ONLY.

C. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

//////////Last Item////////////////////////

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 5

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 17-Jul-2013

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 FA4625-13-R-0005

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

20-Jun-2013

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 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE

RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

17-Jul-2013

CODE

509 CONS/LGCB - FA4625

727 SECOND ST, STE 124A

WHITEMAN AFB MO 65305-5344

FA4625 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA4625-13-R-0005

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 22-Jul-2013 10:00 AM to 26-Jul-2013 10:00 AM.

The following have been modified:

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 1999)

EVALUATION AND SELECTION CRITERIA:

A. The Government will award a firm fixed price contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the

Government, price and other factors considered. This acquisition will utilize the Performance Price

Tradeoff (PPT) process to make a best value award decision. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

(1) TECHNICAL EVALUATION

(2) PAST PERFORMANCE

(3) PRICE

*Past Performance is significantly more important than price, however cost/price will contribute substantially to the selection decision.

B. Options. The government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement and transition period. The government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). In the event the Government extends services under the authority of FAR 52.217-8, “Option to Extend Services”, unit pricing for the last option period exercised preceding the extension shall remain in effect. These prices are already determined to have been evaluated at time of contract award.

C. A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

Addendum to FAR 52.212-2:

A. Basis For Contract Award: The basis of award for this acquisition will be Performance Price

Tradeoff (PPT). A pass/fail technical evaluation will be conducted on the contractor’s submission of the required certificates identified in section 1.7 of the PWS. Only those contractors that have an acceptable technical proposal will be considered for award using the Performance Price Tradeoff method. The offeror must provide all required certificates listed in Section 1.7.2.2 of the PWS with their proposal.

B. Evaluation Criteria:

1. PRICE: For award purposes, the Government will evaluate the total prices in the Base and

Option Periods of this solicitation. The total price of the Base or Option Period is the sum of the extended unit prices within the applicable period. The extended amounts for the base period and all option periods, will be added together for a total contract price and will be used for the ranking of offerors. Unit prices shall prevail in the event the extended price is calculated incorrectly. The Government may determine an offer unacceptable if the proposed prices are materially unbalanced, which is defined as significantly understated or overstated in relation to the actual cost of the item or when the price is determined not to be fair and reasonable. Proposed prices will become fixed prices on the contract. In the event the

Government extends services under the authority of FAR 52.217-8, “Option to Extend Services”, unit pricing for the last option period exercised preceding the extension shall remain in effect. These prices are already determined to have been evaluated at time of contract award.

a. Total evaluated amount for Base Period and Option Periods: Extended amounts for CLIN

X001 ONLY are all added together for a total for that specific period.

c. Total Contract Amount: (Total Evaluated Amount for Base Period) + (Total Evaluated

Amount for Option Period 1) + (Total Evaluated Amount for Option Period 2) + (Total Evaluated

Amount for Option Period 3) + (Total Evaluated Amount for Option Period 4) = Total Evaluated

Amount.

d. The Government will use various techniques and procedures described under FAR 15.404-

1(b) as the primary means of assessing proposal reasonableness. The evaluation techniques described under FAR 15.404-1(c), as determined appropriate, may also be performed in further determining the reasonableness of the proposal.

e. 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/price information will be requested. However, if at any time during this competition the Contracting Officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, offeror’s may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the Contracting Officer to determine the reasonableness of price.

2. EVALUATING PAST PERFORMANCE: The evaluation team will assess past performance, specifically information on relevant and recent contracts obtained from the results of past performance surveys. Using questionnaires, the evaluation team shall seek performance information on the offeror’s based on (1) the references provided by the offeror and (2) data independently obtained from other

Government and commercial sources.

a. The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to allow the Government to make an evaluation of the offeror’s ability to perform the effort described in the RFP, based on the offeror’s demonstrated present and past performance. Relevant past performance is defined as land mobile radio maintenance services as provided in the Performance Work Statement contained in this solicitation.

Recent past performance is defined as contracts performed within the last five years from date of issuance of solicitation, but limited to the most recent 10 contracts. Offerors with no past experience in land mobile radio maintenance services shall state so. Past performance information shall include information on corporate experience and past performance which clearly demonstrates that the offeror is capable of conforming to contractual requirements. Past performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or sub-contractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement will not be considered as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror.

Past performance regarding minor members of joint ventures or teaming arrangements will be considered as highly as the majority member of those arrangements. Offerors with no relevant past or present performance history or the offeror’s performance record is so limited that no confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned shall receive the rating "Unknown Confidence," meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably.

b. The assessment represents the Government evaluation team’s judgment of the probability of an offeror successfully accomplishing the proposed effort based on the offeror’s demonstrated present and past performance. Past performance evaluation is accomplished through the assignment of a confidence assessment rating based on assessing offeror’s relevant past performance history focusing in and targeting performance that is relevant to the solicitation. The government reserves the right to seek information on higher priced offerors if none of the lower priced offerors receive a “Substantial Confidence” performance assessment rating. The assessment process will result in an overall performance confidence assessment rating of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Limited Confidence, No

Confidence, or Unknown Confidence as defined in Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures

(see the following table). Each proposal will be assigned one of the following performance confidence assessments. Note that these assessment ratings are subjective based on the past performance information collected.

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

Rating Description

SUBSTANTIAL

CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

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

SATISFACTORY

CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

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

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.

UNKNOWN

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.

c. Performance of the three lowest priced offers, with a passing technical rating, will be evaluated and receive a performance confidence assessment. If none of the three lowest priced offerors is judged to have a Substantial Confidence performance assessment, the next lowest priced offeror will be evaluated and the process will continue (in order by price) until an offeror is judged to have a Substantial

Confidence performance assessment or until all offerors are evaluated. The Source Selection Authority shall make an integrated assessment best value award decision if the lowest priced offeror is not judged to have a Substantial Confidence performance assessment.

d. The government reserves the right to award a contract to other than the lowest priced offeror, with a passing technical rating, if the lowest priced offeror is judged to have a performance confidence assessment of other than “Substantial”. In that event, the Source Selection Authority shall make an integrated assessment best value award decision.

e. Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and in the format specified in Addenda

To 52.212-1. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (for example, the relevance of past performance information) or respond to adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the contracting officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

(End of Provision)

(End of Summary of Changes)