FA4819-16-R-4001-0001.pdf

, n

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 for this amendment is to correct errors in the Period of Performance for CLIN 0001 and CLIN 0002. Amended 52.212-1 and

52.212-2, also amended the follow ing attachments: CDRLs and amended the PWS.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 10

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 08-Dec-2016

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 FA4819-16-R-4001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

16-Nov-2016

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, 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

08-Dec-2016

CODE

325 CONS/LGCB STOP 28

501 AIREY AVE, STE 5

TYNDALL AFB FL 32403-5526

FA4819 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA4819-16-R-4001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 0001

The CLIN extended description has changed from:

Base Year - Nonpersonal Service: Provide all personnel, supervision, equipment, tools, materials, spare parts, bench stock levels and other items and services (except as specified as Government Furnished) to perform maintenance and operations of Contracted Training Flight Services (CTFS) at Tyndall AFB, Florida, IAW Performance Work

Statement (PWS), Contracted Training Flight Services (CTFS) and Bid Sheet. Base Year Period of Performance 1

July 2017 - 28 Feb 2018

To:

Base Year - Nonpersonal Service: Provide all personnel, supervision, equipment, tools, materials, spare parts, bench stock levels and other items and services (except as specified as Government Furnished) to perform maintenance and operations of Contracted Training Flight Services (CTFS) at Tyndall AFB, Florida, IAW Performance Work

Statement (PWS), Contracted Training Flight Services (CTFS) and Bid Sheet. Base Year Period of Performance 1

June 2017 - 28 Feb 2018

CLIN 0002

The CLIN extended description has changed from:

Nonpersonal service: Transition Period There will be a Not To Exceed (NTE) Amount of $50,000Period of

Performance 1 Mar 2017 - 30 Jun 2017

Nonpersonal service: Transition Period There will be a Not To Exceed (NTE) Amount of $50,000Period of

Performance 1 Mar 2017 - 31 May 2017

DELIVERIES AND PERFORMANCE

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0001 has been changed from:

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

POP 01-JUL-2017 TO

28-FEB-2018

N/A 337 ACS/ADOB

ANTHONY E. GLESSNER

865 BEACON BEACH RD

TYNDALL AFB FL 32403

850-283-2967

FOB: Destination

F4A102

POP 01-JUN-2017 TO

28-FEB-2018

N/A 337 ACS/ADOB

ANTHONY E. GLESSNER

865 BEACON BEACH RD

TYNDALL AFB FL 32403

850-283-2967

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0002 has been changed from:

POP 01-MAR-2017 TO

30-JUN-2017

N/A 337 ACS/ADOB

ANTHONY E. GLESSNER

865 BEACON BEACH RD

TYNDALL AFB FL 32403

850-283-2967

POP 01-MAR-2017 TO

31-MAY-2017

N/A 337 ACS/ADOB

ANTHONY E. GLESSNER

865 BEACON BEACH RD

TYNDALL AFB FL 32403

850-283-2967

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Table of Contents has changed from:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 1 Performance Work

Statement

41 05-OCT-2016

Attachment 10 CDRL 0009 2 03-AUG-2016

Attachment 11 Bid Schedule 1 16-NOV-2016

Attachment 12 Bid Sheet Descriptions 1 03-NOV-2016

Attachment 2 Price Matrix 1 16-NOV-2016

Attachment 3 Financial Responsibility

Questionnaire

1 28-SEP-2016

Attachment 4 PPQ 10 16-NOV-2016

Attachment 5 Site Visit 1 16-NOV-2016

Attachment 6 Wage Determination 9 28-SEP-2016

Attachment 7 CDRL 0001 and 0002 2 03-AUG-2016

Attachment 8 CDRL 0005 and 0006 2 03-AUG-2016

Attachment 9 CDRL 0007 and 0008 2 03-AUG-2016 to:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 1 Performance Work

Statement

41 05-OCT-2016

Attachment 10 CDRL 0009 2 03-AUG-2016

Attachment 11 Bid Schedule 1 16-NOV-2016

Attachment 12 Bid Sheet Descriptions 1 03-NOV-2016

Attachment 13 Attachment 13 - CDRL

0003 and 0004

07-DEC-2016

Attachment 2 Price Matrix 1 16-NOV-2016

Attachment 3 Financial Responsibility

Questionnaire

1 28-SEP-2016

Attachment 4 PPQ 10 16-NOV-2016

Attachment 5 Site Visit 1 16-NOV-2016

Attachment 6 Wage Determination 9 28-SEP-2016

Attachment 7 CDRL 0001 and 0002 2 03-AUG-2016

Attachment 8 CDRL 0005 and 0006 2 03-AUG-2016

Attachment 9 CDRL 0007 and 0008 2 03-AUG-2016

The following have been modified:

ADDENDA TO FAR 52.212-2

Addenda to FAR 52.212-2—Evaluation—Commercial Items (Oct 2014)

The following is inserted as new paragraph (d) of the provision:

1. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD.

a. This is a competitive, subjective tradeoff best value source selection conducted in accordance with Federal

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Parts 12 and 15, Air Force FAR Supplement (AFFARS) Mandatory Procedure (MP)

5315.3, and DoD Source Selection Procedures dated 31 March 2016 in which competing offerors’ past performance information will be evaluated on a basis significantly more important than price.

b. By submission of its offer, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. All technically acceptable offers will be treated equally except for their prices and performance records.

Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined unacceptable. The Source Selection

Authority (SSA) will make an integrated assessment best value award decision using the total evaluated price (TEP) and the past performance confidence rating. While the government source selection evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process is by nature subjective; therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the process.

c. Proposals will be ranked by overall TEP and evaluated starting with the lowest priced proposal. The TEP shall be the sum of: contract line item numbers (CLINs) 0001-5001 (this will include the base year, option years, and the

6-months of service possible under FAR 52.217-8), and the cost of fuel for the offeror’s proposed aircraft using the standard of $2.24 per gallon of Jet Fuel (this is the current price of JP8 from the Defense Logistics Agency current 1

October 2016). To account for the option period(s) possible under Clause 52.217-8 (maximum 6 months), the government will use the price for Pricing Band 1 (1-2000 hrs) of CLIN 4001 (which is considered the maximum number of hours needed during a potential extension). CLIN 0002 (transition period CLIN) is a pre-established amount (not to exceed $50,000) that will be excluded from TEP evaluation; however, the amount will be added for the purposes of calculating total contract value.

d. If the lowest priced offeror receives a past performance rating of “substantial confidence,” proposal evaluations will continue until a minimum of two technically acceptable proposals have been evaluated. At that point, evaluations cease and the Source Selection Authority will make an integrated assessment best value award decision considering the TEP and the Past Performance Confidence Rating.

e. If the lowest priced offeror is rated technically unacceptable or receives a past performance rating of less than substantial confidence, evaluation will continue in order of price until an offeror is rated technically acceptable and receives a past performance rating of substantial confidence. At that point, evaluations cease and the Source

Selection Authority will make an integrated assessment best value award decision considering the TEP and the Past

Performance Confidence Rating.

f. The USG reserves the right to evaluate as few as two proposals as mentioned in paragraphs d and e above.

2. DISCUSSIONS.

a. The government reserves the right to award a contract without discussions with offerors based on the initial proposals submitted. Therefore, offerors are cautioned to submit their best proposal initially. However, discussions may be held and result in Final Proposal Revisions (FPR). Formal responses to discussion items and FPRs will be considered in making the award decision. Offerors should be aware that a complete understanding as to technical, price, past performance, and all terms and conditions of the proposed contract must exist between the offeror and the government at the conclusion of discussions, if held. All offeror and team member/subcontractor information must be incorporated into one coherent proposal to be considered complete.

b. Any revision or non-concurrence to contract terms and conditions submitted in the FPR may not be subject to further discussion or negotiation, and may render the offer unacceptable to the government. This provision is not intended to restrict the offeror’s opportunity to revise figures (e.g., prices, discounts, percentages, rates, etc.), rather it is intended to preclude any misunderstandings by the government, which could result if new or revised terms and conditions are submitted in the FPR that have not been fully disclosed, discussed, and understood during discussions or negotiations. Hence, such new or revised terms and conditions are not solicited and, if submitted in the FPR, may render the offer unacceptable to the government.

3. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY.

Proposals will be evaluated using three evaluation factors which are (1) technical, (2) price, and (3) past performance.

a. Factor 1: Technical Proposal:

Subfactor 1: Technical Equipment

A. Planned Number and Type of Aircraft

B. Aircraft Performance

C. Technical Characteristics and Specifications

Subfactor 2: Technical Program Management

Subfactor 3: Quality Control

Subfactor 4: Transition Plan

The focus of the technical rating is on the offeror’s ability to meet the minimum requirements of the PWS. The government will not search for data to cure problems or address inconsistencies in an offeror’s proposal. The government will evaluate technical proposals on a pass/fail basis and assign an Acceptable or Unacceptable rating at the subfactor level in accordance with the new DoD Source Selection Procedures effective 31 March 2016, as shown in Table 1 below. To be eligible for award, offerors are required to receive an Acceptable rating in each technical subfactor. Proposals that exceed the evaluation criteria will not receive higher ratings. If one subfactor is determined unacceptable the entire proposal will be determined technically unacceptable and ineligible for award.

Table 1. Technical Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

The proposals will be evaluated against the following technical subfactors:

(i) Subfactor 1, Technical Equipment: For the government to give the offeror an “acceptable” rating, the offeror must provide technical reports and/or written declarations that fully and accurately address each of the criteria below that meet the PWS requirements.

1. Planned Number and Type of Aircraft: The offeror must state the planned number and type of aircraft they propose for this requirement; per PWS 1.7.2, the offeror must have at least five aircraft available for daily missions. Additionally, all contract aircraft and flight equipment used for performance under this contract must be certified, operated, and maintained in accordance with applicable FAA regulations and directives. Offerors will provide FAA certification and a written declaration affirming aircraft compliance with FAA regulations for operation and maintenance.

2. Aircraft Performance: Aircraft used for the performance under this contract must meet the aircraft performance characteristics listed in PWS para 1.3. Offerors will provide aircraft-specific technical charts/performance data that demonstrates ability to perform the following requirements:

a. Minimum service ceiling of FL 230.

b. Pressurized and capable of maintaining a cabin altitude of less than 10,000 MSL while at service ceiling.

c. Aircraft must have a stall speed (clean configuration) of not greater than 110 KIAS.

d. At ISA +10C, 15,000 ft. MSL while carrying 739 lbs. useful load plus required fuel: a cruise speed of

230 KTAS.

e. At ISA +10C, 15,000 ft. MSL while carrying 739 lbs. useful load plus required fuel: a range of 800 nm.

f. At ISA +10C, 15,000 ft. MSL while carrying 739 lbs. useful load plus required fuel: capable of 45 degree bank level turns.

3. Technical Characteristics and Specifications: Each aircraft used for the performance under this contract must meet the aircraft technical characteristics and mission specific requirements as outlined in

PWS Para 1.4 and 1.5. For the government to give the offeror an “acceptable” rating, the offeror must provide technical documentation to prove their aircraft have or will have the capacity to install the following equipment/capabilities. If unable to produce technical documentation, offeror will make a written declaration affirming its capability to accomplish the below requirements:

a. Transmit & receive on the UHF radio frequency band (225 MHz to 399.975 MHz) to include simultaneous monitoring of 2.43.0 MHz (guard).

b. Transmit/receive on FAA VHF frequency bands, (118.000 MHz to 136.950 MHz). This radio must be approved for IFR flight at altitudes up to and including the aircraft service ceiling.

c. VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR)/Distance Measuring Equipment (DME).

d. Radar transponder with 4096 code capability.

e. Encoding altimeter.

f. Instrument Landing System (ILS) receiver.

g. Area navigation system.

h. Capable of providing traffic positioning and targeting data for aircraft within a 20 NM radius.

i. Capable of operating in a decentered mode and provide bearing/range data to traffic based on a common point (bulls eye).

j. Provide the Data Link Subsystem (DLS) antenna(s), cabling, and aircraft power connections

[Airborne Tracking Instrumentation System (ATIS) mission support aircraft only].

k. Aircraft shall have a minimum of four (4) forward-facing seats. One (1) seat for the pilot and an additional three (3) seats for students and/or instructors.

l. Aircraft shall have a working intercom system allowing headset communication between the minimum of four seats.

(ii) Subfactor 2, Technical Program Management: Provide an organizational chart showing staffing positions with a title and location for each position, and describe in detail how the proposed staffing concept will meet all PWS requirements. Describe the process to recruit, hire, and retain personnel necessary to meet PWS requirements and also describe the way the offerors structure will interface with the Government. For the government to give the offeror an “acceptable” rating, the offeror must provide an acceptable staffing plan with proposed workforce resumes to meet following requirements below:

1. All contractor employees shall have the following current and valid professional certifications before starting work under the contract:

a. Maintenance Supervisor: FAA Airframe and Propulsion (A&P) License

b. Pilots: Commercial Pilot License with instrument ratings

c. Pilots: A minimum of one (1) Certified Flight Instructor to support internal/contractor pilot training

2. All contractor employees shall have the following:

a. Certified in accordance with the applicable FAA directives for their respective duties

b. Able to operate aircraft within FAA, USAF, and host unit regulations

c. Able to operate aircraft within FAA flight time and crew duty time limitations

d. Pilots: A minimum of one (1) year experience in a fighter type aircraft, flight line operations, and Battle Management Command and Control (BMC2) procedures

e. Maintenance Personnel: Training and experience in aircraft towing, refueling/defueling

3. Executing tactical air-to-air and air-to-surface mission planning, briefing, mission execution, and debriefing requirements to include:

a. Executing tactical intercepts, tactical formations, and mutual support philosophies

b. Understand the intercept phases of an air-to-air mission from the air weapons officer/weapons director perspective.

c. Executing up to 2v3 non-maneuvering/maneuvering launch and decide and launch and leave live mission using general aviation aircraft.

d. Applying positive identification (PID) and collateral damage estimation (CDE) ROE constraints in the execution of live, simulated air-to-surface mission execution.

(iii) Subfactor 3, Quality Control: For the government to give the offeror an “acceptable” rating, the offeror must provide an effective approach that adequately addresses quality control and transition plan requirements as outlined in the PWS. The offeror must provide a Quality Assurance Plan in accordance with FAA regulations for all services and materials rendered in addition to the following criteria:

1. Flight and ground safety program

2. Training program for aircrew and ground crew

3. Quality control and quality assurance plan

(iv) Subfactor 4, Transition Plan: The offeror must clearly demonstrate how their transition plan meets the objective of becoming one hundred percent self-sufficient by the contract start date. For the government to give the offeror an “acceptable” rating, the offeror must provide an effective approach that adequately addresses the transition plan requirements as outlined in the PWS para 1.16.

b. Factor 2: Price. The government will rank all offers by TEP, including all option prices. The price evaluation will document the fairness and reasonableness of the total evaluated price.

(i) Complete the first tab of the Price Matrix (Attachment 2).

(ii) Total Evaluated Price: A TEP will be computed for each offer in order to meet the requirements of FAR

Parts 6 and 17. FAR clause 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, authorizes the government to extend the contract more than once but shall not exceed 6 months. The CO may exercise this clause one time only during the life of the contract at any option period. The price of a 6-month extension authorized by 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, will be added to the contract; it will consist of the price listed in Pricing Band 1 (1-2000 flight hours) of CLIN 4001

(which is considered the maximum number of hours needed during a potential extension); it will be included in the

TEP.

(iii) The Government will solely rely on the Price Matrix for the TEP. The base period and each of the option year periods will be separated into five different CLINs and each CLIN will be further broken down by

Pricing Bands per the Bid Schedule (2,000 – 4,000 hours increased by 500 hour increments). The TEP will be calculated using probability factors (0.1 for 2000 hours, 0.2 for 2500 hours, 0.4 for 3000 hours, 0.2 for 3500, and 0.1 for 4000 hours) based on historical and projected hours required for the CTFS contract. For example, because the

USG projects 3,000 hours to be the most probable task order size, it is weighted the heaviest. Therefore, the TEP will be the corresponding factor multiplied by the summation of: the contractor’s proposed prices for the base and all option periods (including the six-month extension of services calculated by the government) and the cost of fuel using the offeror’s provided average fuel burn per hour with the current price of a gallon of jet fuel (JP8) from the

Defense Logistics Agency (price dated 1 Oct 2016). Evaluation of options and/or extensions shall not obligate the government to exercise such options or extensions. FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, is not to be considered part of any option period and will be a separate option exercised if it is utilized. Offerors will not be required to submit pricing for a six-month extension of services or associated flight hours. The government will develop a TEP, which will include this pricing, based on the offeror’s proposed pricing for CLIN 4001 Pricing Band

1 (1-2000 flight hours). Please see sheet two of the Price Matrix labeled “Unprotected Sheet (FORMULAS)” for the specific formula used to calculated this six-month extension.

c. Factor 3: Past Performance. The government will evaluate recent and relevant performance information on all offerors based on (i) the references provided by the offeror, and (ii) any past performance information obtained from the past performance questionnaire (Attachment 4), and (iii) any data independently obtained by the government to include, but not limited to, Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), etc. If a reference identified by the offeror in accordance with 52.212-

1(m) 2.d (ii), does not submit a survey/questionnaire, the government will follow up with the reference POC, but it is not responsible for the failure of a reference POC to provide a survey/questionnaire.

Past performance regarding predecessor companies of the offeror and/or subcontractors, key personnel, and subcontractors that will perform aspects of the requirement, if applicable (see 52.212-1(m) 2.d (ii)), will be rated as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror.

(i) Recent past performance information includes contracts performed and/or being performed for any customer within the last five (5) years prior to the issuance date of the solicitation.

(ii) Relevant contracts performance effort involved similar scope, magnitude of effort, and complexities to that required by this solicitation. The government will assess relevancy for each contract and assign a rating as described in Table 2 below:

Table 2. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating 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) Performance Quality Assessment: For each of the recent past performance information reviewed, the performance quality of work will be assessed based on the (i) Quality Assessment Criteria evaluated in the Past

Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 4) and (ii) the evaluation ratings in the Federal Past Performance

Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), if available.

(iv) The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to assess the degree of confidence the government has in the offeror’s ability to meet the solicitation requirements based on the offeror’s demonstrated record of performance.

As a result of the relevancy and performance quality assessments, offerors will receive an integrated past performance confidence assessment rating as described in Table 3 below:

Table 3. Past Performance Confidence Assessment Ratings Past Performance Confidence Assessment Ratings

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 performance record, the government has no expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Note: In evaluating past performance, the government reserves the right to give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in this solicitation.

(v) Integrated Assessment. In order to be considered for award, the offeror’s technical proposal must be rated as “Acceptable.” The government reserves the right to award a contract to other than the lowest price offer if the

SSA determines that the difference in the Past Performance Confidence Rating of another offeror justifies the higher price premium. In that event, the Source Selection Authority will make an integrated assessment best value award decision comparing the TEP and the Past Performance Confidence Rating.

(vi) In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance information is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past contract performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv).) In this case, the offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of “neutral.” Although the SSEB may not rate an offeror that lacks recent, relevant past performance favorably or unfavorably with regard to past performance, the SSA may determine that a

“Substantial Confidence” or “Satisfactory Confidence” past performance rating is worth more than a “Neutral

Confidence” past performance rating in a best value tradeoff.

(End of Addenda)

52.216-18 ORDERING. (OCT 1995)

(a) Any supplies and services to be furnished under this contract shall be ordered by issuance of delivery orders or task orders by the individuals or activities designated in the Schedule. Such orders may be issued from 01 March

2017 through 28 Feb 2022.

(b) All delivery orders or task orders are subject to the terms and conditions of this contract. In the event of conflict between a delivery order or task order and this contract, the contract shall control.

(c) If mailed, a delivery order or task order is considered "issued" when the Government deposits the order in the mail. Orders may be issued orally, by facsimile, or by electronic commerce methods only if authorized in the

Schedule.

(End of clause)

(End of Summary of Changes)