Att 7_Section L and Section M.pdf

Section L – Instructions, Conditions, Notices to Offerors or Respondents

1) Information to Offerors (ITO) and Instructions for Proposal Preparation: The Offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by this ITO and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Solicitation and all attachments in Section J. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this information to Offerors may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation. The response shall consist of three (3) volumes: Volume I - Price/Required

Documentation, Volume II - Technical Risk, and Volume III - Past Performance. These listed part and subparts must be submitted in paper only; no form of electronic proposal documents (fax, email, etc.) will be accepted by this Contracting Office.

2) General Instructions

a) The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal will not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements.

Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal.

b) Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired. However, if used, elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments must be incorporated within the page limitation set forth by this ITO.

c) The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of the solicitation. The Offeror shall make a clear statement in Section A of the proposal documentation subpart that the proposal is valid through this date.

d) In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.803(a)(10) (Government Contract Files), the

Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the Offeror requests otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals.

3) General Information

a) Written requests for clarification may be sent to the Contracting Officer (CO) and

Contract Administrator (CA) at the address located in Section A of the solicitation. The primary point of contract (POC) for this acquisition is the CA, Mr. T. Cameron

Swathwood, who can be reached at 406-731-4001 or via email at todd.swathwood.3@us.af.mil. The secondary POC is the CO, Mr. Conn McKelvey, who can be reached at 406-731-4111 or via email at conn.mckelvey.1@us.af.mil. Questions must be submitted no later than (NLT) 23 May 2024 at 2:00 PM, Mountain Daylight

Time (MDT).

FA4626-24-R-0008 Repair LF Gates Requirements mailto:todd.swathwood.3@us.af.mil mailto:conn.mckelvey.1@us.af.mil

b) Debriefings: The CO will promptly notify Offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range or otherwise excluded from competition before award; whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505. Offerors excluded from the competitive range may request a pre-award debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a post-award debriefing.

However, Offerors excluded from the competitive range are entitled to no more than one debriefing for each proposal. The CO will notify unsuccessful Offerors in the competitive range of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.506. 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.

c) Discrepancies: If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the CO in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the Offeror is asking the CO to consider as related to the 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 discussion. This reservation includes matters of additional or substitute pages of the initial proposal.

d) Electronic Reference Documents: All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the System for Award Management website (SAM) at http://www.sam.gov.

Potential Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

e) Communications: Source selection information between Government and Offerors will be controlled by the CO. Email may be used to transmit such information to Offerors only if the email can be sent and received encrypted and includes “Source Selection

Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the Subject line.

f) The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Table 1 below. The titles and contents of the volume shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in Table 1. The attachments identified in the table shall be separately bound in three-ring, loose-leaf binders, as necessary. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the ITO paragraph as noted in the table below:

Table 1

Volume ITO Paragraph

Number Title Copies Page Limit

I 4 Price/Required

Documentation 3 Copies 5 Pages

II 5 Technical Risk 3 Copies 2 pages

FA4626-24-R-0008 Repair LF Gates Requirements http://www.sam.gov/

i) Page Limitations: Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal and excess paper copies will be returned to the Offeror as soon as practicable. Page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs). The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the

Offerors. Each page shall be counted except the following: Cover pages, Tables of

Contents, Tabs, Glossaries or Resumes.

ii) Page Size and Format: A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Pages shall be no less than single-spaced. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than 11-point. Tracking, kerning, and leading values shall not be changed from the default values of the word processing or page layout software. Use at least 1-inch margins on the top and bottom and ¾- inch side margins. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume or subpart. The same page size and format restrictions shall apply to responses to ENs. Legible tables, charts, graphs, and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 by 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume or subpart, and each 8.5 x 11 surface of a foldout shall be counted as a separate page. Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams, and schematics not for pages of text. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than 8-point.

iii) Cross-Referencing: To the greatest extent possible, each volume and subpart shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with minimal cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation, which is not found in its designated volume/subpart, will be assumed to having been omitted from the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume/subpart is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. If required, the Offeror shall provide a Solicitation Cross Reference Matrix indicating by ITO, SOW/SOO/PWS, and/or specification paragraph number, the corresponding proposal paragraph in that section which addresses the referenced item.

iv) Indexing: Each volume and subpart shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume/subpart. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

v) Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms: Each volume/subpart shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and with an explanation for each.

III 6 Past Performance 3 Copies

1 Page for each

Reference

Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volume/subpart.

vi) Binding and Labeling: Each volume of the proposal should be separately bound in a three-ring, loose-leaf binder permitting the volume to lie flat when open. Staples shall not be used. A cover sheet should be bound in each book, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification, and the Offeror’s name. The same identifying data should be placed on the spine of each binder. All unclassified document binders shall have a color other than red or other applicable security designation colors. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or

Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

g) Distribution: Volume I (Price/Required Documentation), Volume II (Technical Risk), and

Volume III (Past Performance) must be submitted in paper form only. No form of electronic proposal (fax, email, etc.) will be accepted by this Contracting Office.

All proposals must be received no later than 4 June 2024 at 2:00 PM MDT and shall be delivered to the CO at:

341 CONS/PKA (Attn: Mr. T. Cameron Swathwood)

7015 Goddard Drive, Bldg. 145

Malmstrom AFB, MT 59402-6863

NOTE: Hand carried deliveries shall be received and accepted at the address shown above. Delivery may be accomplished from 8:00 am – 4:00 pm on the date set forth for receipt and up to one week prior. Please call the CA or CO at least one hour prior to your anticipated arrival time to ensure there will be personnel available to receive your proposal. Offerors should speak personally with one of the individuals listed below and not rely on voice mail. Contractor personnel delivering proposals are advised that they may be unable to access Malmstrom, AFB without a valid U.S. Uniformed Services Identification Card or DoD Force Common Access Card (CAC) that has been through the Biometrics process. Be advised your vehicle may be subjected to random vehicle searches, and/or you may encounter unexpected delays at the gates and plan accordingly.

Phone numbers for the contracting office are as follows:

CA: Mr. T. Cameron Swathwood, 406-731-4001

341 CONS: Front Office, 406-731-3744

CO: Mr. Conn McKelvey, 406-731-4111

4) Volume I – Price/Required Documentation

a) General Instructions:

i) Cost/Price Reasonableness: This section is to assist you in submitting data other than certified cost or pricing data that is required to evaluate the reasonableness and realism of your proposed cost/price. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of your proposal. Note that unrealistically low or high-proposed costs or prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition either on the basis that the

Offeror does not understand the requirement or has submitted an unrealistic proposal.

Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed costs/prices rests with the Offeror.

b) Specific Instructions:

i) Rounding: All dollar amounts for all CLINs/SLINs should be proposed in whole dollar amounts rounded to two decimal points, for example: $1,423.78.

ii) Volume Organization: The Price/Required Documentation volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

(1) Table of Contents

(2) List of Tables and Drawings

(3) Glossary

(4) Cross Reference Matrix (if required)

(5) Factor I: Price/Required Documentation

(a) Solicitation Representations and Certifications

(b) Bid Schedule

(c) Acknowledgement of All Amendments

(d) Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements

(e) Other Information

iii) Format and Content:

(1) Solicitation Representations and Certifications: The purpose of this section is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file. The Offeror’s proposal shall include a signed copy of the solicitation and Sections A through K.

(a) Section A – Solicitation/Contract Form: Completion of blocks 14, 15, 16, 17, 19 and signature and date for blocks 20A, 20B and 20C of the SF 1442.

Signature by the Offeror on the SF 1442 block 20B constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept. The “original” copy should be clearly marked under a separate cover and should be provided without any punched holes.

(b) Section K – Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors:

Completed representations, certifications, acknowledgments, and statements.

(2) Bid Schedule: Insert proposed unit and extended prices for each line-item number as broken out in the Bid Schedule (Attachment 6). Offerors must propose on every contract line item, even if it is $0.00, to be considered for award.

(3) Acknowledgement of All Amendments: Each Offeror must sign and return one copy of the Standard Form (SF) 30 by the date specified on the form.

(4) Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements: Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. This information shall be provided in the format of Table 2 below.

(5) Other Information Required: Offerors shall provide the following information in Volume I of their proposal:

(a) Authorized Offeror Personnel: Provide the name, title, and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to your proposal, and who can obligate your company contractually and those individuals authorized to negotiate with the

Government.

(b) Company Division/Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable

Designations: Provide company/division’s street address, county, and facility code; UEI number (can be found on SAM.gov); size of business (large or small); and labor surplus area designation. This same information must be provided if the work for this contract will be performed at any other location(s). List all locations where work is to be performed and indicate whether such facility is a division, affiliate, or subcontractor, and the percentage of work to be performed at each location.

Table 2

Solicitation

Document Page/Paragraph Requirement/Portion Rationale

SOO, SOW, Specs, Model Contract, ITO, etc.

Applicable Page and

Paragraph Numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which the exception is taken

Describe why the requirement can/will not be met

FA4626-24-R-0008 Repair LF Gates Requirements

Price information to be submitted in the Bid Schedule (Attachment 6) is only for the initial task order. Pricing for future task orders will be completed IAW

FAR 16.505(b)(3).

(c) Teaming Arrangement: If a teaming arrangement is contemplated, provide complete information as to the arrangement and relationship and copies of any teaming or joint venture agreements.

5) Volume II – Technical Risk

a) General Instructions: The purpose of the technical risk evaluation is to assess the degree to which the offeror's proposed technical approach for the requirements of the solicitation may cause disruption of schedule, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or increased likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. The technical risk volume should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against the criteria defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. Using the instructions provided below, provide as specifically as possible the actual means and methodology you would use for accomplishing or satisfying the requirements of the solicitation. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By your proposal submission, you are representing that your firm will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. It is not necessary or desirable for you to tell us so in your proposal.

b) Specific Instructions:

i) Volume Organization: The Technical Risk volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

(1) Table of Contents

(2) List of Tables and Drawings

(3) Glossary

(4) Cross Reference Matrix (if required)

(5) Factor II – Technical Risk

(a) Technical Risk Subfactor 1

(b) Technical Risk Subfactor 2

ii) Format and Content:

(1) The Offeror will provide a written management plan documenting proof of capability and capacity to perform the requirements of the Statement of Work.

(2) To be considered responsive to this solicitation, the Offeror must provide a detailed management plan for the Technical Risk factor providing, as specifically as possible, the actual means and methodology you would use to accomplish the work and address your technical solution for meeting or exceeding the Government’s requirements as discussed in Section M of this solicitation.

(3) The technical management plan must be in accordance with the page limitations and page size restrictions set forth in paragraph 3(f).

6) Volume III – Past Performance

a) General Instructions: The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to assess the

Offeror’s ability to meet the solicitation requirements based on the recency, relevancy, and quality of the Offeror’s performance history. Each Offeror shall submit at least three recent and relevant past performance reference which demonstrates their ability to meet the technical requirements listed in Section M. Past performance references may include but are not limited to 1) federal contracts/task orders or 2) non-federal contracts/ task orders meeting the requirements of the solicitation. Offerors are cautioned that the

Government will use data provided by each Offeror and may review data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past performance.

The Government will use past performance information submitted by the Offeror’s references and may use other sources such as other federal government offices, Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARS), and private and commercial sources. Offerors are highly encouraged to submit past performance references for the consideration of the Government not already archived within these databases.

Failure to submit the required maximum number of past performance information will not result in Offeror disqualification.

b) Specific Instructions:

i) Recent and Relevant Past Performance: For this evaluation, “recent” is defined as completed or ongoing projects with the last five (5) years. For this evaluation, “relevant” is defined as work similar in nature and of similar complexity to the work described in the SOW and valued greater than or equal to $100,000.00. Offerors must include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance.

ii) Required Information: Offerors are required to provide the following information for each past performance reference:

(1) Contract/task order number and dollar value.

(2) Dates of Performance

(3) Name of Customer

(4) Name and contact information of customer POC

(5) All subcontractors, teaming arrangements, and/or joint venture partners

(6) Detailed explanation of what aspects of the project are deemed relevant to the solicitation.

In the event the Government identifies a need for additional information concerning an Offeror’s past performance, the Government may seek clarification from Offerors to discuss issues including (but not limited to) problems encountered on previous projects, steps taken by the Offeror to resolve said problems, past efforts to identify and manage risk, etc.

iii) Organizational Structure Change History: Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal subpart a “roadmap” describing all such changes in the organization of your company. A pamphlet or other commercial document describing such reorganizations may suffice. As part of this explanation, show how these changes affect the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation or performance confidence assessment. Since the

Government may consider past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the Offeror(s), your “roadmap” should be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award

1) Basis For Award and Evaluation Process

i) Basis For Award: This is a competitive best value source selection in which competing Offerors’ past performance will be evaluated as slightly more important than price or technical risk. This may result in an award to a higher priced Offeror if the decision is consistent with the evaluation criteria. By submission of its offer, the Offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined non-responsive. The

Government intends to award one firm-fixed price (FFP) contract. The Government seeks to award to the Offeror who in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the solicitation. All such offers shall be treated equally except for their past performance, price, or technical risk.

ii) Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and, in the format, specified in Section L. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal or respond to adverse past performance information to which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the Government reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision.

2) Evaluation Process: The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

i) Step 1 – Each Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated for responsiveness to the requirements set forth in the solicitation. Offerors deemed responsive to the requirements of the solicitation will then be evaluated utilizing the criteria in Steps 2 through 6. Offerors deemed non-responsive to the requirements of the solicitation will not be evaluated further.

ii) Step 2 – Each responsive Offeror’s past performance will be assessed and assigned a past performance confidence rating in accordance with the evaluation criteria described in Table 3.

iii) Step 3 – Each responsive Offeror’s technical risk will be assessed and assigned an adjectival rating in accordance with the evaluation criteria described in Table 1.

iv) Step 4 – Each responsive Offeror’s proposed price for the initial task order will be evaluated IAW FAR 15.404-1.

v) Step 5 – All proposals will be sorted in ascending order based upon price.

vi) Step 6 – An Offerors determination of responsibility will be made as described in FAR Part 9. The Source Selection Authority shall then award a firm-fixed price contract to the responsible Offeror whose proposal is determined to be most advantageous to the Government based on the comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria.

vii) The Government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective

Offerors. The Government, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

2) Evaluation Factors for Award: Three evaluation factors will be used to evaluate proposals.

Price (Factor 1), Technical Risk (Factor 2), and Past Performance (Factor 3).

a) Factor 1 – Price

i) An Offeror’s proposed prices will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified in Attachment 4: Bid Schedule by the proposed unit price for each SLIN to confirm the extended amount for each. Offerors whose total evaluated price is unreasonable (in accordance with FAR 15.404 and FAR 31.201-3) may not be considered for award.

ii) 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 prices will be considered the offer.

iii) 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.

iv) All Offerors are required to submit offers on all items listed on the Bid Schedule.

b) Factor 2 – Technical Risk

i) A technical evaluation of each Offeror’s proposal shall be made using the technical risk rating method. The technical rating will evaluate the quality of the Offeror’s proposed technical plan for meeting the requirements of the solicitation and includes consideration of the significant strengths, uncertainties, and deficiencies found in the proposal. Each Offeror will be assessed an adjectival rating as described in Table 1:

ii) Technical Risk, Subfactor 1: Offeror must provide a written narrative description that states, as clearly as possible and in as much detail as practicable, the actual means and methodology of the Offeror’s planned approach for completing the objectives outlined in the SOW. This narrative must include the names of key subcontractors and their contribution to the Offeror’s plan. This section must not exceed one (1) page.

iii) Technical Risk, Subfactor 2: Offeror must provide a Gantt chart illustrating the required activities to complete the objectives outlined in the SOW at ten (10) LFs in as minimal a time as practicable. This Gantt chart must have the critical path clearly labeled, along with all related activities. This section must not exceed one (1) page.

c) Factor 3 – Past Performance

i) Past performance will be evaluated as a measure of the Government’s confidence in the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform the requirement based on previous and current contract efforts.

ii) For this evaluation, “recent” is defined as completed or ongoing projects with the last five (5) years. For this evaluation, “relevant” is defined as work similar in nature and of similar complexity to the work described in the SOW and valued greater than or equal to $100,000.00. A level of relevancy will be assessed for each past performance reference as described in the table below:

Table 2

Table 1

Adjectival Rating Description

Low Risk

Proposal may contain weakness/weaknesses which have low potential to cause disruption of schedule, or degradation of performance. Normal contractor emphasis and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate Risk

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may have a moderate potential to cause disruption of schedule, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

High Risk

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to have high potential to cause significant disruption of schedule, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will unlikely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Unacceptable Risk

Proposal contains a deficiency or a combination of significant weaknesses that causes an unacceptable level of risk of unsuccessful performance.

Rating Definition

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.

iii) The Government will use past performance information submitted by the Offeror’s references and may use other sources such as other federal government offices and

Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARS), and private and commercial sources. The Government is not bound by the Offeror’s opinion of relevancy.

Relevancy is defined above. More relevant past performance will be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

iv) Where the relevant past and present performance record indicates performance problems, the Government may consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised). The Government may review more recent contracts, or performance evaluations, to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and to evaluate their effectiveness. If the Offeror clearly demonstrates management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified, this may allow the Offeror to be rated higher than might otherwise be indicated. The Government will evaluate/assess all past performance information, positive and negative. Offerors may be offered the opportunity to respond to negative past performance reports if they had not had the opportunity to do so previously. An Offeror without a record of relevant past performance will receive a past performance rating of “Neutral Confidence.”

v) Each Offeror will receive an overall Performance Confidence Rating as described in

Table 3 based on the recency, relevancy, and quality of the Offeror’s performance.

Table 3

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.

d) Contractor Responsibility: Prior to award, a responsibility determination will be made as described in FAR Part 9.

e) Notice of Award: 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 there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.