Solicitation Amendment FA483025Q00790001 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:

02 Sep 2025, 14:14 PM Central Daylight Time

SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

Solicitation/Contract Form

The following modifications were made:

Information From To Reference Description Header only - Purchase Requisition Number Reference Value F3E2305164AW01

Evaluation Factors for Award

Header Miscellaneous Text (Modified):

ADDENDUM TO FAR PROVISION 52.212-2: Paragraph (a) is tailored as follows:

Evaluation:

IAW FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation -Commercial Products and Commercial Services, the Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible contractor whose solicitation response conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, and judged to represent the best value to the Government based on the following factors:

1. Price

2. Technical

3. Past Performance

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: This is a competitive, best value continuum using the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection process.

Technical elements will be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable for each solicitation response.

Qualifications will be clear, and objectives will be outlined in the RFQ. Past Performance will be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable for each solicitation response. The evaluation process shall proceed as indicated below.

Evaluation Approach:

Step 1: All contractors will be evaluated for responsiveness. Responsiveness is determined by verifying compliance with FAR 52.212-1 and its addendum.

Step 2: All responsive contractors will be ordered, by price, from the lowest to the highest Total Evaluated Price (TEP). A contractor's TEP is depicted in Attachment 4, Pricing Schedule Worksheet, on the Price Schedule Tab. The TEP is comprised of the total contract value (base and all options) plus the 6-month option available at FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services. Pricing for FAR 52.217-8 is determined by taking the "amount" of the most recent option year exercised and dividing it by two (2).

Step 3: Technical evaluations will start with the lowest TEP offer and continue until two (2) solicitation responses are determined to be technically acceptable, or until all solicitation responses have been evaluated.

Step 4. The solicitation responses determined to be technically acceptable will then be evaluated for past performance until two (2) technically acceptable solicitation responses have been determined to have acceptable past performance. Steps three (3) and four (4) will continue until two (2) solicitation responses have been determined acceptable in both technical and past performance, or until all solicitation responses have been evaluated.

Step 5. The Government will make a determination of price fair and reasonable.

Evaluation Factors for Award:

Price Foreword: The government will evaluate offers for award purposes based on their TEP. The government may determine that a solicitation response is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the government to exercise the option(s).

1. Price:

a.) Initially, solicitation responses shall be ordered from lowest to highest TEP, as previously defined.

b.) For evaluation purposes, FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options will be evaluated and applied to this evaluation. To evaluate the impact of clause FAR52.217-8, the pricing proposed for option four (4) will be utilized to calculate a six (6) month extension price. Evaluation of options will not obligate the government to exercise the option(s).

c.) The TEP will be evaluated to determine whether it is reasonable. A reasonable price/cost represents a price/cost that provides best value to the government, considering market prices, the technical and functional capabilities of the contractor, and risk. Additionally, the government reserves the right to, but is not required to, conduct a price realism analysis on offers that appear to be exceptionally low and not supported by the contractor's technical approach. In instances where a contractor's proposed price(s) appears exceptionally low, contractors may be requested to address this disparity by providing evidence of their capability and/or performance at similar price(s). The burden of proof as to price credibility rests with the contractor. An exceptionally or unrealistically low offer that's left unexplained may pose an unacceptable risk to the government and may be a reason to reject a contractor's solicitation response.

d.) The government anticipates adequate price competition and intends to award a contract without exchanges with respective contractors. The Government, however, reserves the right to conduct exchanges if deemed in its best interest.

FA483025Q00790001

2. TECHNICAL:

a.) The technical volume will be evaluated as either acceptable or unacceptable for each subfactor.

i. Acceptable is defined as: "Required documents clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation".

ii. Unacceptable is defined as: "Required documents do not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation".

b.) The technical volume is comprised of five (5) subfactors, as listed below. An overall technical volume rating will be assigned; failure to be assigned an acceptable rating in any technical subfactor will render the entire technical volume unacceptable and, therefore, ineligible for award.

Only those solicitation responses determined to be technically acceptable, either initially or as a result of interchanges, will be considered for award. However, the contractor is reminded that the government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial solicitation response, as received, without interchanges, and may conduct interchanges with all, some, or none of the contractors.

Instructions to Offerors Evaluation Criteria

1. : Technical Approach - Shall clearly explain how the Offeror intends to ensure successful Subfactor 1 contract performance IAW the PWS. Solicitation responses shall provide convincing rationale addressing how the technical portion of the proposal meets solicitation requirements.

1. Effectively and sufficiently details and summarizes the offeror's technical approach in ensuring performance per the PWS and solicitation requirements. The standard is met when the conditions accurately describe performance in accordance with the PWS.

2. : Staffing Plan - Subfactor 2 The Staffing Plan shall include the assessments and analyses conducted by the employees, including a concrete number of required personnel needed and identify any factors impacting personnel availability. The Staffing Plan shall also include a transition phase. The transition phase will outline the phase-in/phase-out periods of contractor personnel during the performance of the contract, and it is essential that attention be given to minimize interruptions or delays to work in progress that would impact the mission. The Contractor must plan for the transfer of work control, delineating the method for processing and assigning tasks during the phase- in/phase-out periods of contractor personnel during the performance of the contract.

2. A clear and effective summary of how assessments and analyses are conducted, an unambiguous number of required personnel, and identification of factors that can impact personnel availability. Also sufficiently outlines the offeror's transition phase that most effectively minimizes interruptions or delays during the performance of the contract.

3. : Qualification Documentation -Offerors shall submit documents verifying Offeror is a Subfactor 3 manufacture authorized vendor and certified to perform all service listed in the PWS.

3. Accurate documentation of each position's qualifications to meet requirements specified in the PWS.

4. : Quality Control Plan - Offerors shall submit a Quality Control Plan that addresses all Subfactor 4 requirements of the PWS. The plan must address methods to be used for identifying and preventing deficiencies before the performance becomes unacceptable. The plan shall also include procedures to identify unfavorable performance trends, problem areas, and the corrective actions that would be taken.

4. Effective and logical processes for Quality Control to identify and prevent deficiencies during contract performance. Functional procedures for identifying unfavorable performance trends, problem areas, and corrective actions.

5. : The Offeror shall provide a written plan describing how it will provide reactive maintenance Subfactor 5 within 96 hours to get the equipment up and running, In the event of an emergency.

5. Sufficiently and clearly demonstrates the offeror's ability to perform emergency Contractor services.

3. :PAST PERFORMANCE

a.) The Government will seek recent, relevant past performance and will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable scale as defined below.

Information will be based on one (1) past effort provided in the proposal utilizing Attachment 7 and two (2) data independently obtained from other government or commercial sources in order to determine the contractor Acceptable/Unacceptable.

DEFINITION RATING

Based on the Offeror's performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the Offeror's performance record is unknown.

Acceptabl e

Based on the Offeror's performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Unaccept able

(a) An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. Recent contracts are contracts which have been performed within the last five (5) years from the date of the issuance of this solicitation.

(b) Relevant performance includes performance efforts involving HAAS-OMAX Machinery Services that involved similar scope/complexity, magnitude of effort, contract type, and contract environment this solicitation requires, as identified in the table of Relevancy Definitions below:

RELEVANCY

DEFINITIONS

ASSESSMENT AREA RELEVANT NOT REL

EVANT

SCOPE/

COMPLEXITY

Responsible for HAAS-OMAX machinery services on similar federal installations, which is relevant to Moody AFB Performance Work Statement, performed as a Prime Contractor or Subcontractor.

All Others

MAGNITUDE Performed on contracts/task orders concurrently or consecutively with a combined value of at least $600K. All Others

CONTRACT TYPE Performance under a FFP task order or purchase order. All Others

CONTRACT

ENVIRONMENT

Contract performance on a DoD installation within the United States All Others

(c) In the case of a contractor without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the contractor may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance IAW FAR15.305(a)(2)(iv). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. Unknown or neutral past performance, in the context of acceptability/ unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered acceptable.

(End of Provision)

4380 B ALABAMA RD BLDG 932, CP 229 257 2737

MOODY AFB, GA 31699-1700

UNITED STATES

SAMANTHA ELIA, Email: samantha.elia@us.af.mil Telephone: 460-5588 AdminBy:

SCD: PAS:

1.Attached HAAS/OMAX Preventative Maintenance Questions with Answers 02 September 2025.

2.Revised solicitation with highlighted changes in Subfactor 2: Staffing Plan.

3.Added clause 52.209-10.