Solicitation Amendment FA485521R00080001 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

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The purpose of this amendment is to:Block 14 (Description of Amendment/Modification):

1. Administrative change to section M, Volume III, paragraph 3 -- Critical Subcontractors: The evaluation of the offeror's/joint venture members' present/past performance WILL include the present/past performance of any subcontractor(s) even though they may perform major or critical aspects of this requirement.

2. Add FAR clause 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

3. Update Attachment 3 - Reconstruct Taxiway Mike 100% Specifications dated 8 June 2021 to update section 01 01 00, 1.7 Utilities and section 01 45 00, 3.4.2 CQC System manager.

4. Update Attachment 5 - Reconstruct Taxiway Delta 100% Specifications dated 8 June 2021 to update section 01 01 00, 1.7 Utilities and section 01 45 00, 3.4.2 CQC System manager.

5. Update Attachment 12 - Construction Cost Estimate.

6. Extend the proposal due date to 14 June 2021 no later than 2PM (MDT).

Section A - Solicitation/Contract Form

The following changes have been made:

INFORMATION FROM TO

Response Due Date 11 Jun 2021 14 Jun 2021

Section I - Contract Clauses

Miscellaneous text in this section has been modified to:

FAR Clauses Incorporated by Reference

52.219-9 Small Business Subcontracting Plan 52.228-1 Bid Guarantee 1996-09 52.228-5 Insurance-Work on a Government Installation 1997-01 52.228-11 Individual Surety-Pledge of Assets 2021-02 52.228-12 Prospective Subcontractor Requests for Bonds 2014-05 52.232-16 Progress Payments (Deviation 2020-O0010) 2020-06 52.236-17 Layout of Work 1984-04 52.246-21 Warranty of Construction 1994-03 52.249-2 Alt 1 Termination for Convenience of the Government (Fixed-Price)--Alternate I 2012-04

DFARS Clauses Incorporated by Reference

252.204-7000 Disclosure of Information 2016-10 252.204-7020 NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Requirements 2020-11 252.219-7009 Section 8(a) Direct Award 2018-10 252.219-7010 Notification of Competition Limited to Eligible 8(a) Participants-Partnership Agreement 2019-10 252.219-7011 Notification to Delay Performance 1998-06 252.223-7001 Hazard Warning Labels 1991-12 252.232-7004 DoD Progress Payment Rates (Deviation 2020-O0010) 2014-10 252.246-7004 Safety of Facilities, Infrastructure, and Equipment for Military Operations 2010-10

FA485521R00080001

Section J - List of Attachments

Miscellaneous text in this section has been modified to:

Attachment 1 - SOW Repair Taxiway Mike_Delta 7 April 2021 Attachment 2 - SOMs Twy Mike & Delta Material Register 14 April 2021 Attachment 3 - Reconstruct Taxiway Mike 100% Specifications 8 June 2021 Attachment 4 - Reconstruct Taxiway Mike Final Plans August 2020 Attachment 5 - Reconstruct Taxiway Delta 100% Specifications 8 June 2021 Attachment 6 - Reconstruct Taxiway Delta Final Plans 20181219 Attachment 7 - CAFB 32-201 Cannon AFB Fire Protection Program Attachment 8 - AEC CAD Standards 6.1 Aug 2019 Attachment 9 - As-Built Submittal Guidelines-2014 Attachment 10 - New Mexico Wage Determination NM20210036_1 Jan 2021 Attachment 11 - Past Performance Information Attachment 12 - Construction Cost Estimate Breakdown Attachment 13 - Past Performance Cover Letter Attachment 14 - Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment 15 - Subcontractor Consent letter Attachment 16 - DD 1354 Taxiway Mike Attachment 17 - DD 1354 Taxiway Delta Attachment 18 - AF Form 3064 Attachment 19 - AF Form 103 Attachment 20 - AF Form 3065 Attachment 21 - AF Form 3000

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

Miscellaneous text in this section has been modified to:

SECTION M: EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

BASIS FOR AWARD.

A. Source Selection Methodology. This acquisition will utilize the Past Performance Tradeoff (PPT) source selection technique in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3, Source Selection, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS). These regulations are available electronically at acquisition.gov website. The Government intends to make a single award contract for the Reconstruction of Taxiway Mike and Delta at Cannon AFB, NM. The offeror must receive a rating of "acceptable" on all technical factors and subfactors in order to be eligible for award. The competitive best value source selection will evaluate offerors' technical, past performance and price to award to the best overall offer. While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the tradeoff process, by its nature, is subjective; therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the selection process. Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to all required terms and conditions, includes all required representations and certifications, meets all requirements set forth in the RFP and also provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation as described in paragraph II below. Failure to meet a requirement, or failure to include all information required by Section L of this solicitation, may result in an offer being determined unacceptable.

B. Factors, Subfactors and Relative Importance.

1. Factors and Subfactors: A detailed and complete analysis of each offeror's proposal will be performed. The Government's evaluation will be based on the following factors and subfactors:

Factor I: Technical Subfactor One: Management Plan Subfactor Two: Technical Approach Factor II: Past Performance Factor III: Price

2. Relative Importance: Past Performance is more important than Technical. IAW FAR 15.304(e), all evaluation factors other than Price, when combined, are significantly more important than Price.

II. PROPOSAL EVALUATION The evaluation process will be accomplished as follows:

A. GENERAL

Discussions: The Government intends to award without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary. Any discussions will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer, with the concurrence of the Source Selection Authority, may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

B. VOLUME I. COMPLETED RFP AND PRICE

Volume I, Completed RFP shall consist of the completed and signed RFP, to include any amendments issued, with a cover letter delineating any exceptions taken to the RFP terms and conditions with accompanying rationale. However, offerors are cautioned that any noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the RFP may cause their proposal to be determined unacceptable and therefore not considered eligible for award.

1. Price Analysis. The offeror's proposal will be reviewed for completeness and compliance with the requirements specified in Section L of the RFP to include the Construction Cost Estimate Breakdown (Attachment 12).

2. Price Evaluation. The total evaluated price will be calculated as the sum of the offeror's proposed prices for all CLINS. The price evaluation will document the reasonableness of the proposed total evaluated price.

3. Reasonableness. Price reasonableness will be determined based on the offeror's total evaluated price. For a price to be reasonable, it shall represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay when consideration is given to prices in the market. The pricing proposal will be evaluated for completeness on each CLIN. The Government will evaluate proposed prices to determine whether prices are consistent with the CLINS required for the work to be performed and reflect a clear understanding of the requirements.

4. Unbalanced. The Government will analyze offers to determine whether they are unbalanced with respect to prices or separately priced line. Offers that are determined to be materially unbalanced may be rejected.

C. VOLUME II. WRITTEN TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

The technical rating reflects the evaluation of the acceptability of the offeror's Management Plan and Technical for meeting the Government's requirement set forth in the Statement of Work (SOW), Specifications, and Plans identified in Section J The offeror's proposal shall be evaluated to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable, using the ratings and descriptions outlined in the table below. One technical rating will be assigned to each technical subfactor. In order to be considered awardable, there must be an "acceptable" rating in every subfactor.

Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

1. Subfactor 1 - Management Plan

Standard. The management plan is acceptable when it successfully meets the following criteria:

a. Organizational structure - The offeror provides an organizational chart and the area(s) of responsibility for each position. The offeror outlines a realistic approach to support contracting decisions that must be made on short notice. The offeror identifies key positions, with their qualification and certifications, with contract responsibilities and decision making authority and associated minimum qualifications.

b. Personnel - The offeror provides personnel staffing plan required to complete the contractual task. The plan shall include the education, training, skills, experience required for each position. The staffing plan must include a detailed position description for each position, to include, job title, job duties, skills, abilities, professional certifications, required minimum years of experience and degrees.

c. Program management - The offeror provides an organizational chart and supporting narrative describing the management office the contractor establishes to manage the contractual commitments. The plan should demonstrate direct lines of control, responsibilities, functional relationships and authority between the management office and the contractor's other organizational elements.

2. Subfactor 2 - Technical Approach

Standard. The management plan is acceptable when it successfully meets the following criteria:

a. Methodology - The offeror successfully demonstrates a thorough understanding and comprehensive knowledge to execute the project. The narrative successfully includes a comprehensive work plan that follows all the requirements specified in the contract specifications and drawings, coordination for airfield closures, material submittals, required pavement section, testing, density requirements, temporary traffic controls measures, and signs. The offeror successfully demonstrates a realistic phasing plan that demonstrates an approach and understanding of the required activities to execute the project while minimizing disruption to active airfield activities. The plan successfully defines the project's critical path, provides a description of all work, and sequencing activities required to complete each phase within the given period of performance. This will be demonstrated by including a Gantt chart showing all activities and the critical path.

Provide a phasing plan for services that includes specific details of the timelines needed to meet all Government requirements. The plan must provide an explanation for start-up, mobilization, and transition depicting the chronological sequence of events which will be accomplished starting at contract award in order to meet all requirements of the SOW. Plan must discuss mobilization of the workforce in a remote area.

b. Equipment Approach - The offeror provides an equipment list required by the specifications. The offeror also identify if they possess the equipment or provides an approach on how they will obtain the equipment by the required performance period.

D. VOLUME III. PAST PERFORMANCE

General: The past performance assessment will assess the offeror's/joint venture members' ability which includes, if applicable, the extent of its critical subcontractors' involvement -- to successfully accomplish the proposed effort based on the offeror's demonstrated present and past work record. A critical subcontractor is defined as an entity (subcontractor and/or teaming contractor), other than the offeror itself, that will perform task to Repair Taxiways Mike and Delta. The Government will evaluate the offeror's/joint venture members' and if applicable, the critical subcontractors' demonstrated record of contract compliance in supplying products and services that meet users' needs, including cost and schedule. The recency and relevancy of the information, the source of the information, context of the data and general trends in the contractor's performance will be considered. For purposes of this evaluation, recency is defined as active or completed efforts performed within the past five (5) years from the issuance date of this solicitation. The Government will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies (if used), affiliates, other divisions, or corporate management if such was provided for evaluation and if the offeror's past performance volume demonstrates the company, affiliate, or division will provide the offeror with resources for the instant proposed effort, such as workforce, management, facilities, or other capabilities demonstrating direct and meaningful involvement in the performance of the proposed instant effort.

Past Performance Assessment: In assessing present and past performance, the Government will employ several approaches, including, but not limited to:

1. Other Sources of Information: Pursuant to FAR 15.305(a)(2)(ii), the Past Performance Team evaluation is not limited to review of the information provided in the offeror's Present/Past Performance volume. Present/Past performance information may be obtained from the Government's Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) and the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). The Government reserves the right to use performance information from other sources such as Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), Fee Determining Officials, or commercial sources. Data from previous source selections may be used if the data is recent and relevant.

2. Adverse Past Performance: Offerors shall be given an opportunity to address adverse past performance information if the offeror, joint venture member and/or critical subcontractor has not had a previous opportunity to respond to the information. Recent contracts will be examined to ensure that corrective measures have been implemented. The past performance evaluation assessment will consider issues including but not limited to the number and severity of the problems, the appropriateness and/or effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised), and the overall work record. Prompt corrective action in isolated instances may not outweigh overall negative trends.

3. Critical Subcontractors: The evaluation of the offeror's/joint venture members' present/past performance WILL include the present/past performance of any subcontractor(s) even though they may perform major or critical aspects of this requirement.

4. Key Personnel: For offerors/joint venture members or critical that are newly formed entities (in existence less than three (3) years from the issuance date of this solicitation) who either have no prior contracts or do not possess relevant corporate past performance, but have key personnel with relevant past performance while employed by another company, the quality of such key personnel's performance as verified by the Past Performance Team will be considered if the submitted contract involves the key personnel performing the same role currently being proposed on the instant acquisition and this performance occurred during the past three (3) years from the issuance date of this solicitation. Any such key personnel must already be employed by the offeror/joint venture member, or in the case of a critical subcontractor, must already be employed by the critical subcontractor. Offerors are reminded that a letter of intent to hire does not constitute employment.

Relevancy Definitions: The Government will perform an independent determination of relevancy of the data provided or obtained. A relevancy determination will be made for each of the recent three (3) submitted contracts. The Government is not bound by the offeror's opinion of relevancy. The following relevancy criteria apply and will be assigned to each effort identified in an offeror's Volume III of its proposal:

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.

Past Performance Evaluation Ratings: As a result of the recency, relevancy and quality assessments of the contracts evaluated, one of the ratings as described in the DoD Source Selection Procedures will be assigned to the Past Performance factor. The performance confidence assessment ratings are excerpted below.

Adjectival Rating Definition

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.

Small Business Compliance in Past Performance Efforts: Pursuant to DFARS 215.305(a)(2), the assessment will consider whether the past performance demonstrated the offeror's/joint venture members' (and critical subcontractor's, if applicable) compliance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, or FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, when these clauses were contained in the submitted contracts.

That is, on the three (3) respective contracts submitted for evaluation by the offeror/joint venture member and critical subcontractor, when subcontracting possibilities existed, did the offeror/joint venture member (and critical subcontractor, if applicable) award subcontracts to small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance. (Please note that FAR 52.219-8 does apply to ALL offerors, whereas FAR 52.219-9 only applies to large businesses.) If none of the contracts submitted by the offeror/joint venture members and critical subcontractor included these clauses, when subcontracting possibilities existed in the performance of these contracts, address whether or not it was the offeror/joint venture member and critical subcontractor's policy to utilize small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance.

110 E ALISON AVE BLDG 600

CP 575 785 2321

CANNON AFB, NM 88103-5321

UNITED STATES

REGENIA GOLDSMITH, Email: regenia.goldsmith.2@us.af.mil Telephone: 575-784-1661

Email: arthur.morales@us.af.mil Telephone: 904-5155