FA4861-14-R-C001-0006.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to:

a. Clarify questions received due to Amendment 5.

b. Update quantities on Attachment 3-Pricing Table

c. Fix administrative errors in FAR Clause Addendums 52.212-1 and 52.212-2.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 14

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 14-Jan-2015

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 FA4861-14-R-C001

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

24-Sep-2014

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, X 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

14-Jan-2015

CODE

99 CONS/LGCC

5865 SWAAB BLVD, BLDG 588

NELLIS AFB NV 89191-7065

FA4861 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA4861-14-R-C001

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1

THIS SECTION IS FOR SOLICITATION PURPOSES ONLY. THIS SECTION WILL BE PHYSICALLY

REMOVED FROM ANY RESULTANT AWARD, BUT WILL BE DEEMED INCORPORATED BY

REFERENCE.

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1, PROPOSAL PREPARATION

INSTRUCTIONS 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--

COMMERCIAL ITEMS

PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

A. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein.

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. The response shall consist of three (3) separate parts: Part I – Technical Proposal, Part II – Solicitation/Price Proposal, and Part III – Past Performance Information.

B. The contracting officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the contracting officer will review this determination and if, in the contracting officer’s opinion, adequate price competition exists no additional cost information will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition, the contracting officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists; Offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the contracting officer to determine the reasonableness and affordability of the price.

C. Documents submitted in response to this solicitation (request for proposal or RFP) must be fully responsive to and consistent with the following:

1. Requirements of the RFP (Schedule B Contract Line Item Numbers (CLIN), Performance Work Statement (PWS), Attachment 1, Equipment and Installation Performance Specifications (EIPS) (Attachment 2), Pricing Tables (Attachment 3), and government standards and regulations pertaining to the PWS.

2. Evaluation Factors for Award in Section M of the RFP.

3. Any limitation on the number of proposal pages. Pages exceeding the page limitations set forth in this Section L will not be read or evaluated and will be removed from the proposal.

**Proposals which are incomplete or fail to meet a requirement may be considered ineligible for award or may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

D. “Confidential” projects cannot be submitted to demonstrate capability unless all of the information required for evaluation as specified herein can nonetheless be provided to the Government as part of the Offeror’s technical proposal. Offerors that include in their proposals information that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, must be clearly marked in accordance with the instructions at FAR 52.215-1, “Instructions to Offeror—Competitive Acquisition”, paragraph (3), “Restriction on disclosure and use of data”. The Government recognizes that submittals by the Offeror may contain confidential or proprietary information; however, the Government reserves the right to make inquiries into the information disclosed. The submission of false or misleading information may be grounds for disqualification of the proposal.

E. In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8, 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 unsuccessful proposals.

L-02. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSAL PARTS I, II AND III:

A. Format for Proposal:

1. Page. The proposal page size shall be 8 ½” x 11”, except for fold-outs used for charts, tables or diagrams, which may not exceed 11” x 17”. A page is defined as one face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two (2) pages. Each page shall be counted except cover pages and table of contents/glossary. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. Excess paper copies will be destroyed (except within the original proposal), which may render the Offeror’s proposal “technically unacceptable.”

2. Font/Binding. Pages shall be typed with a minimum of font pitch size 11, Times New Roman type, with minimum one-inch margins. Each part (volume) shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate the sections and subparagraphs contained therein. All required documentation shall be page numbered and bound in accordance with the table of contents submitted. Each part (volume) should be separately bound. Staples shall not be used.

Consolidated parts are acceptable provided tabs separate them. A cover sheet shall be found in each part (volume), clearly marked as to the part number(s), title, copy number, solicitation identification and the Offeror’s name. Past Performance (Part III) shall not include price or pricing information. Elaborate formats, bindings or color presentations are not desired or required.

B. Submission Requirements.

1. Submit:

One (1) original and five (5) copies of the Technical Proposal (Part I) One (1) original Solicitation/ Price Proposal, including one (1) original copy of Attachment 3 (Part II) One (1) original and five (5) copies of Past Performance Information (Part III) One (1) electronic copy of Parts I, II & III, in accordance with the following Proposal Organization Table:

Table 1 - Proposal Organization Table Part Title Page Limitations (excludes cover page and table of contents) I Technical Proposal Not to exceed 50 II Solicitation/Price Proposal Not to exceed 26 (excluding the pricing tables, (Attachment

3)) III Present/Past Performance Not to exceed 30 (excludes past performance questionnaires)

2. Submit proposal to the following address:

99 CONS/LGCC

ATTENTION: SSgt Derek Urban 5865 Swaab Blvd (Building 588) Nellis AFB, NV 89191-7063

C. Electronic Documents. The Offeror shall include a recordable, virus-free data compact disk (CD) in the original binder containing all parts. Label the CD with the solicitation number, title, Offeror’s name and marked Source Selection Sensitive/For Official Use Only. Failure to provide an electronic copy as specified may render the proposal nonresponsive. Within the CD, use a separate electronic file for each part with associated exhibit, annexes, and attachments to permit rapid search and location. Files shall not be compressed. Submit electronic proposal documents in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Office Word 1997-2003 or 2007, MS Office Excel 1997-2003 or 2007, and MS Office Power Point 1997-2003 or 2007, as applicable. In the event of discrepancy(s) between the hard copies and electronic copies of a proposal, the hard copies will take precedence and will be used for evaluation.

The completed documents should be marked Source Selection Sensitive/For Official Use Only.

D. The Contracting Officer (CO) and/or Contract Specialist (CS)/Contract Administrator (CA) are the only points of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns, in writing, you may have to the CS/CA specified in Block 10 of the SF 33 and the CO, Mr. Daryl F. Hithcock, at Daryl.Hitchcock@us.af.mil.

E. The CO/CA will control exchanges of source selection information between Government and Offerors. The Government may use email 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 & FAR 3.104” in the subject line.

Otherwise, the Government will transmit source selection information via fax or other carrier.

L-03. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS – PART I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL – Not to Exceed 50 pages. Submit information based on the requirements identified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and instructions of the factors and subfactors identified in Section M, Basis of Award of this solicitation. Identify submitted material by corresponding factor, subfactor, and paragraph herein. If an element requested has been covered previously, so state and reference the previous factor. Provide sufficient discussion/explanation of how the requirements can be satisfied. solely restating verbatim from the requirements identified in the PWS will render your technical proposal unacceptable. The technical proposals shall provide a clear distinction of functions to be performed by the prime and subcontractor to include: the nature of work, criticality of the work, and the percentage of overall effort performed by each subcontractor in each area of service provided. Failure to provide technical and past performance information (Parts I and III) on each vendor in a subcontracting/teaming arrangement shall render your proposal nonresponsive and unacceptable.

A. Factor 1 – Technical. Initially, the government technical evaluation team shall evaluate the technical proposals on a pass/fail basis, assigning ratings of Acceptable or Unacceptable. See Section M of this document for a more detailed description of each subfactor. The proposals shall be evaluated against the following subfactors:

1. Subfactor 1 – Maintenance and Workload Practices.

2. Subfactor 2 – Work Orders.

3. Subfactor 3 – Company Resources.

4. Subfactor 4 – Quality Control.

5. Subfactor 5 – Safety and Security.

L-04. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR PART II – SOLICITATION/PRICE PROPOSAL: Not to Exceed 26 pages, excluding Attachment 3.

A. Standard Form (SF) 1449 Cover Page. Complete blocks 17a, 26, 30a, 30b, and 30c. of the SF 1449. An official authorized to contractually bind the Offeror must sign Block 30a. In doing so the Offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the solicitation;

B. Standard Form (SF) 1449 Continuation Sheet. Insert proposed prices, unit prices, and extended amounts in SF 1449, for Contract Line Items (CLIN) 0001, 0002, 0003, 0004, 1001, 1002, 1003, 1004, 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 using the solicitation and attached pricing schedules (Attachments 3 Pricing Table) for your proposal. The following information on Attachment 3 is provided:

1. Pricing Table (Attachment 3 to the solicitation). The pricing table is a prepriced table for purchase, installation, relocation, removal and miscellaneous (PIRRM) unit pricing for Product Identifications (PIDs) the Offeror will use on the contract to accomplish work required in the solicitation/contract. The PID list is used for the life of the contract and is critical to the evaluation as it affects future work orders. The pricing is applied to each technical solution/work order request provided by the Offeror and subsequent work/order task order issued based on actual PIDs/quantities required for each individual work order/task order. The pricing summary contains estimated quantities to allow the Offeror to provide unit pricing for each PID. Due to the unknown factor in the work order area, all conceivable PIDs are included, however, there is no guarantee how many PIDs will be used on the contract.

The Government will evaluate the PIRRM Pricing in the evaluation of the proposal, as this pricing is the determinant that drives the number of priced work orders the Government can issue on the estimated CLIN 0005.

C. The Offeror shall comply with the following requirements and instructions:

1. Rounding. All dollar amounts (unit and extended prices and other price factors) provided shall be rounded to the nearest penny (two decimal places only). This includes base period and out-year (option) prices. Failure to round unit prices to two (2) decimals may result in rejection of the proposal.

2. Price all CLINs/ Product Identifications (PIDs). Limit unit prices and rates to two decimal places. The abbreviations Not Separately Priced (NSP) and No Charge (N/C) are not acceptable entries. Offeror must provide a a price for every green cell in Attachment 3.

3. Electronic Media Submission of Pricing Table. Submit an electronic copy using the exact file provided by the Government without changing the format of the files. Entry of PID unit prices is required for the base period and all option periods.

4. Sevice Contract Labor Standards/ Wage Rate Requirements Applicability. PWS Appendix 5.2.A & B, EIPS, provides detailed descriptions of the material and labor effort (those items that are prepriced for material and labor for purchase, installation, relocation, removal and miscellaneous) required by the Attachment 3, Pricing Table. This solicitation/contract is principally for services for O&M and work order services under the Sevice Contract Labor Standards. However, Wage Rate Requirements are also required in this solicitation/contract and is a substantial and segregable amount of construction, alteration, renovation or repair work required for some work orders.

a. The Wage Rate Requirements are applicable to work orders with an aggregate dollar value exceeding or expected to exceed $2,000.00 for construction, alteration and/or repair. Some of the PIDs on the PIRRM Pricing Schedule for installation could be both Sevice Contract Labor Standards and Wage Rate Requirements applicable, depending on the individual work order requirements. By referencing the Wage Rate Requirements, inserting the appropriate Wage Rate Requirements clauses in the solicitation and identifying the types of effort that may occur, Offerors are able to identify the appropriate Sevice Contract Labor Standards/ Wage Rate Requirements labor mix based upon their technical approach.

b. If awarded the contract, it is each Offeror’s responsibility to determine the work effort for each work order and propose the appropriate labor mix for the level of effort required to perform the work described in the PWS and associated appendices for work orders covered on CLIN 0005 based on price allocations agreed to in the PIDs in the PIRRM Pricing Table. When in doubt, an Offeror may assume that the higher prevailing wage between the Sevice Contract Labor Standards and Wage Rate Requirements wage determinations will prevail on an individual work order when it is possible a PID could be used in both situations (Sevice Contract Labor Standards and/or Wage Rate Requirements) and its price could represent either. The Government will not assume responsibility for any omission, but rather rely on the Offeror’s knowledge of the requirement and industry experiences to price each work order appropriately for the situation.

D. Contract Administrative Data. Offeror shall provide a remit to address if different from the mailing address in Block 17b of the SF1449. The remit to address will be included in Section G of any resultant contract at time of award. Do not include if remit to address does not apply.

E. Contract Clauses. Submit pages for only the clauses that require fill-ins. Ensure they are from the solicitation itself, which includes the solicitation number and page number. Other pages in this section should not be included with the proposal submission. Clauses that include fill-ins include 52.209-5, 52.212-3, and 52.212-3 Alt I.

F. Representations and Certifications. Complete all necessary fill-ins and certifications– Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors, including the provision addressed in FAR Clause 52.219-1 and 52.219-28 and return in their entirety. Provide verification that Representations and Certifications documentation can be found online at www.SAM.gov. Online Representations and Certifications can also be completed on the SAM website.

G. Acknowledge all amendments if there are any.

L-05. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR PART III - PAST PERFORMANCE: Not to Exceed 30 pages, excluding past performance questionnaires/surveys.

A. Past Performance Submission by Offeror: Part III is limited to a maximum of 10 contracts, with an overall page limit of 30 pages for the entire number of contracts submitted. If an Offeror is subcontracting/teaming with another vendor who will perform more than ten percent of the work, or if other than the prime contractor will be performing switch maintenance, technical and past performance information shall be submitted for each vendor. NOTE: The questionnaires (Attachment 5) are not counted in the 30 pages since these questionnaires will be sent back by the evaluator and the Offeror will not see these. Contractor's Past Performance will consist of the following two (2) items:

1. Pertinent Information: Provide any information currently available (letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys, etc.) which demonstrates customer satisfaction with the Offeror’s overall job performance and quality of the Offeror’s completed contract services for the same or similar type contract, Telecommunication System Services, referenced in this solicitation. The Offeror shall provide the amount of time the Offeror has been doing this type of work and a description of the work performed. In addition, explain corrective actions taken in the past, if any, for substandard performance and any current performance problems affecting performance (such as price overruns, extended performance periods, numerous incidences of re-performance of work, discrepancies, etc.).

2. Performance Data: The Offeror should select contracts from previous employers/customers which show the quality and extent of the Offeror’s performance deemed relevant to the requirements of this solicitation. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure all past performance data submitted is current and correct so that the Government can properly evaluate. Provide a list of no more than ten (10) of the most recent and relevant contracts performed for federal agencies and commercial customers. Recent is defined as within the last three (3) years. Relevant is defined as contract work in the area of Telecommunication System Services as identified in the scope of work of the Performance Work Statement (Attachment 1 to this solicitation), paragraph 1.0 and maintaining equipment listed in PWS, Appendix 5.2.A & .B. The Offeror shall provide the following information for each of their referenced contracts:

a. Company/Division name

b. Acquisition/Service Title

c. Name Contracting Agency or Commercial Customer

d. Contract Number

e. Contract Dollar Value

f. Period of Performance (POP), original POP, revised POP, and reasons for revised POP

g. Verified, up-to date name, address, fax and telephone number of the contracting officer/project owner

h. Offerors' Involvement: Prime or Subcontractor

i. Type of Contract: Fixed Price, Cost, Time and Material, etc. and original contract value (cost/price), the current value (cost/price), and the reason for any differences

j. Brief description and location where the contract took place

k. Brief description explaining aspects of contract related to the proposed requirement, BTS services

l. Two current points of contact for each contract, address, email address, facsimile and telephone number

Also, include Contracting Officer/Project owner name and number if not one of points of contact

m. Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions

n. Comments regarding any known performance deemed not acceptable to the customer or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions. Provide a copy of any cure notices or show cause notices received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action taken

o. Relevancy to the contractual requirements, operations and maintenance of equipment listed in PWS, Appendix 5.2

p. Include any information not previously covered, which will enhance the evaluators’ understanding of the Offeror or any subcontractor’s proposed qualifications

B. Past Performance Questionnaire: Attachment # 5 to this solicitation is a past performance questionnaire designed for the Offeror to reproduce and send to as many of his/her previous employers/customers as desired. The previous employers/customers should then email the filled out questionnaires directly back to the Government contract administrator as per directions on the cover letter. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to follow up with evaluators to ensure submission of questionnaires to the Government.

C. Teaming Arrangments: If a teaming arrangement is contemplated, provide complete information as to the arrangement, including any relevant and recent past performance information on previous teaming arrangements with same partner. If this is a first time joint effort each party to the arrangement must provide a list of past and present relevant contracts.

D. Subcontractors: Provide the information listed in L-05. B. for any proposed subcontractors who will perform ten percent or more of the proposed requirement or who will perform aspects of the requirement considered to be critical.

E. Subcontractor/Other Consent: Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime Offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. Submit a consent letter executed by the subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing (consenting to) release of past performance information to the Offeror and the contracting office, so the Offeror can respond to this solicitation. Additionally, the Offeror must submit a letter authorizing release of their requested information to the Government for performance on each commercial customer contract/effort identified.

F. 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 solicitation. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what present/past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in the Past Performance Part III proposal, information describing all such changes in the organization of your company (if applicable). As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/ performance confidence assessment.

READ CAREFULLY AND SUBMIT ALL REQUIREDDOCUMENTS. DO NOT EXCEED PAGE

LIMITATIONS.

YOUR OFFER MAY BE DETERMINED UNACCEPTABLE IF YOUR PROPOSAL IS INCOMPLETE.

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

THIS SECTION IS FOR SOLICITATION PURPOSES ONLY. THIS SECTION WILL BE PHYSICALLY

REMOVED FROM ANY RESULTANT AWARD, BUT WILL BE DEEMED INCORPORATED BY

REFERENCE.

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2; EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M-01. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD. This is a competitive source selection in which the Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable (LPTA) offer will be awarded the contract. This source selection will be conducted in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.3, as supplemented by the Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) 215.3, the Air Force FAR Supplement (AFFARS) 5315.3 and the Air Force Mandatory Procedure (MP) 5315.3. These regulations are available electronically at the Air Force (AF) FAR Site: http://farsite.hill.af.mil. The Government will select the lowest priced offer that meets all technical requirements.

A. To be eligible for award, the Offeror must be deemed responsible in accordance with FAR 9.104, as supplemented, and meet requirements of the solicitation. 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. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined technically unacceptable. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.

B. Technical proposals will be assessed a rating of "Acceptable" or "Unacceptable" at the subfactor level IAW the table below:

To be eligible for award, an “Acceptable” rating for all technical subfactors is required. Proposals shall meet the PWS requirements and meet the evaluation criteria requirements. Proposals that exceed the evaluation criteria will not receive higher ratings.

C. Past performance will be assessed a final rating of "Acceptable" or "Unacceptable" at the factor level IAW the Table below:

RATING DESCRIPTION

ACCEPTABLE 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. (See note below.)

UNACCEPTABLE 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.

Note: In the case of an offeror 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 offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

RATING DEFINITION

ACCEPTABLE Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation UNACCEPTABLE Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation http://farsite.hill.af.mil/

To be eligible for award, an “Acceptable” rating for the past performance factor is required. The Government will evaluate this factor to assess the Offerors’ recent and relevant present and past work record to determine each Offeror’s probability of successfully performing as proposed.

D. An Offeror’s proposed price must be determined fair and reasonable to be eligible for award. The Government will not award to Offerors with unreasonably low or high priced proposals or proposals that demonstrate a lack of understanding of the BTS requirement. This includes both original submissions and final offers.

E. The Government reserves the right to award without discussions, but may conduct discussions if the Government determines it is necessary. If the Government elects to open discussions, the competitive range may include proposals rated as “Unacceptable” at the sole discretion of the Government (i.e., minor revisions to technical subfactor(s)). The competitve range shall be established IAW FAR 15.305(a). A proposal that would require major revisions to meet the stated minimum requirements will be excluded from the competitive range. If required, the competitive range may be further reduced for purposes of efficiency pursuant to FAR 15.306(c)(2). The Government may make a final determination as to whether the Offeror’s proposal is acceptable or unacceptable solely on the basis of the initial proposal submitted.

Therefore, Offerors are advised to submit proposals that are fully and clearly acceptable without additional information.

F. The Government intends to select one contractor for this acquisition and all associated task orders.

However, the Government reserves the right not to award a contract, depending on the quality of proposal(s) submitted and the availability of funds.

M-02. EVALUATION FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS:

In evaluating proposals, the Source Selection Authority (SSA) will select the proposal that has met all requirements of the solicitation. To arrive at a decision, the SSA will assess each offer in accordance with the following evaluation factors:

Factor 1: Technical Subfactor 1 – Maintenance and Workload Practices Subfactor 2 – Work Orders Subfactor 3 – Company Resources Subfactor 4 – Quality Control Subfactor 5 – Safety and Security

Factor 2: Present/Past Performance Subfactor 1 - Recency Subfactor 2 - Relevancy

Factor 3: Price

M-03. EVALUATION PROCESS

The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

Step 1- Sort offerors by “Total Evaluated Price”

Step 2- Assess Technical Acceptability

**The Government will assess the three lowest priced offers for technical acceptability. If found acceptable, no additional offerors will be evaluated. If one (or more) of the three lowest priced offers is found technically unacceptable, the government will proceed to the next lowest priced offer until three ‘technically acceptable’ offers are identified or no more offerors remain.

Step 3– Assess Past Performance

**If the lowest priced offer does not have sufficient past performance information the Government reserves the right to refer the offeror to the SBA to obtain a Certificate of Competency (COC) IAW

FAR 19.6.

Step 4 – Assess Price

1. Step 1 – Assess Technical:

Factor 1 – Technical. Initially, the government technical evaluation team shall evaluate the technical proposals on a pass/fail basis, assigning ratings of Acceptable or Unacceptable. The proposals shall be evaluated against the following subfactors:

A. Subfactor 1 – Maintenance and Workload Practices. This subfactor is met when the Offeror provides a detailed plan that demonstrates the Offeror’s capability to perform Operations and Maintenance (O&M) of the equipment specified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) based on the following criteria:

a. Switching system O&M methodology during duty and non-duty hours, including but not limited to staffing approach and alarm response, and ability to meet the requirements listed in Attachment 1 and the PWS.

b. Ability to support Installation & Maintenance of Outside Plant (OSP) cabling listed in Attachment 1 and the PWS.

c. Measures to ensure switch access to only authorized personnel.

d. Quality Assurance Personnel (QAP) and customer notification of trouble ticket status and/or completion; how trouble tickets are received, authorized, tracked and worked by the contractor; and how multiple trouble calls will be handled during duty/on-duty hours, including but not limited to, how conflicts will be coordinated and/or resolved.

B. Subfactor 2 – Work Orders. This subfactor is met when the Offeror provides a detailed plan demonstrating the capability for ensuring adequate and timely completion of various types of work orders based on all of the following criteria:

a. Completing work orders within required time limitations listed in Attachment 1and the

PWS.

b. Planning and implementing tasks in such a manner workload conflicts will be minimized and if they do occur, specific guidelines on how these conflicts will be resolved to include coordination with base personnel.

c. Ability to manage large/special projects not generally considered routine installation requirements (e.g., large outside plant installation, manhole/hand hole system installation, building rewire of premise or ISP cable systems, etc.); addresses how delays will be avoided when completing O&M requirements or work orders during performance of these larger projects.

d. Ability to concurrently support O&M requirements (Attachment 1, PWS, para 1.3 and subparagraphs) and simultaneous work order requirements (Attachment 1, PWS Section 1.4) without compromising the quality or timeliness of either task.

C. Subfactor 3 – Company Resources. This subfactor is met when the Offeror provides a detailed plan that meets or exceeds all contractual requirements based on all of the following criteria:

a. A table of labor categories, number of on-site personnel in each category and short occupational title(s) in accordance with the designated solicitation wage determinations indicating a sufficient number of on-site personnel in each category required to meet all contractual requirements.

b. Necessary training, experience, qualifications and certifications of the proposed on-site personnel as listed in Attachment 1and the PWS.

c. Plan to ensure on-site employees will remain proficient on site specific systems listed in Appendix 5.2.A of the PWS (include the major system nomenclature, not just the manufacturer).

d. Plan to address how the Offeror will replace on-site personnel on short notice; how positions will be coved for absences of varied duration (such as leave or vacations); how Offeror will be adding employees (including the use of permanent, temporary, term employees, prime or subcontractor use), and how coverage for work load surges or base mission changes will be accomplished.

e. Procedures for ensuring sufficient quantities of parts, materials, tools, equipment are maintained on site; a complete list of equipment the Offeror will have on site to make repairs or handle O&M trouble tickets, preventive maintenance inspections (PMIs), work orders, testing and other contractual requirements.

D. Subfactor 4 – Quality Control. This subfactor is met when the Offeror provides an overview addressing how quality control will be implemented on this requirement and how quality principles will be applied to specific actions required by the PWS.

E. Subfactor 5 – Safety and Security. This subfactor is met when the Offeror provides a detailed plan addressing the following areas:

a. Company’s safety and environmental practices to include evidence of compliance with federal and OSHA citation(s) and resolution of disciplinary action(s) for the current and past two (2) years.

b. Company’s accident prevention methods including applicable resolution of any investigative findings; determination of cause; and preventive measures for similar incidents/accidents.

c. Specific procedures for ensuring the security of Government property and/or facilities to include adequate procedures for key control/lock combination measures and end-of-day security checks.

d. Process for ensuring password protection and security measures to ensure access to the switching system is restricted to authorized personnel.

2. Step 2 – Assess Performance

Factor 2 – Present/Past Performance. (Contractors' Performance Submission & Questionnaires). The Present/Past Performance evaluation assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an Offeror’s ability to perform the required services to meet users’ needs based on a demonstrated record of performance. An overall assessment of the Government’s confidence in the Offeror’s ability to fulfill the RFP requirements while meeting cost, performance and schedule constraints will be made. The performance confidence assessment will be rated at an overall factor level. The Government intends to use both data provided by the Offeror and data obtained from other sources, including any combination of present/past performance information available. This may include data gathered from Offeror-provided references/experience/ information sheets, questionnaires and through the use of interviews (if necessary).

Furthermore, the Government may use data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources; other customers known to the Government; contractor performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) information, Present/Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) information, etc.); interviews with Government customers, and, if applicable, commercial clients; and any other source that may have relevant and useful information. The evaluation process will be conducted as follows:

A. Recency Assessment. Only recent past performance information (PPI) will be evaluated. To be recent, the effort must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. On-going actions will be considered as recent so long as the effort has been performed for at least six (6) months. Present performance information which is not recent will not be evaluated for relevancy and quality.

B. Relevancy Assessment. The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of recent PPI obtained to determine how closely it relates to the technical factors, specified herein. All aspects of performance (compared to the PWS) relating to this acquisition may be considered. Relevant performance includes performance of efforts involving operation and maintenance of the base telephone system services that are similar or greater in scope, magnitude and complexity than the effort described in this solicitation, Attachment 1, PWS and Appendix 5.2. A relevancy determination of the Offeror’s present/past performance will be made based upon the aforementioned considerations, including joint venture partner(s) and major and critical subcontractor(s). In determining relevancy for individual contracts, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the Offeror, teaming partner, or subcontractor whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. The Government is not bound by the Offeror’s opinion of relevancy. The Government will use the following degrees of relevancy when assessing recent, relevant contracts:

DEGREE DESCRIPTION

RELEVANT (R) Past/present performance effort involved much of the magnitude of effort and complexities in Attachment 1, PWS, and Appendix 5.2

NOT RELEVANT (NR) Past /present performance effort did not involve any of the magnitude of effort and complexities in Attachment 1, PWS, and Appendix 5.2

a. The Government will consider an Offeror’s past performance as an entire team (where primes propose with subcontractors or in partnerships) or on an individual basis for Contractors proposing on their own. This will result an integrated Relevancy assessment of the Offeror’s provided PPI references. In order for Offerors to receive an “Acceptable” rating for Past Performance, the combination of references evaluated shall meet all of the Relevancy criteria.

b. Performance. A Performance determination of the Offeror’s present and past information will be made. The Government will assess performance on all Recent and Relevant PPI references using information obtained through one or more of the following: 1) the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS); 2) similar systems of other Government departments and agencies; 3) questionnaires tailored to the circumstances of this acquisition; 4) DCMA channels; 5) interviews with program managers and COs; and, 6) other sources known to the Government. The Government will consider Offerors’ past performance as an entire team (where primes propose with subcontractors or in partnerships) or on an individual basis for Contractors proposing on their own. All sources of PPI shall be compiled and each Offeror will receive an integrated performance assessment and shall have an overall satisfactory performance record to be determined “Acceptable”. A Satisfactory performance record is defined as “The Contractor’s performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance may have contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor were satisfactory.”

The Government is not bound by the Offeror’s opinion of its performance.

c. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports 1) a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation aspect or 2) any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system that cause evaluator concern. When a relevant performance record indicates performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any actual 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. In accordance with FAR 15.306(b), Communications must be held with any Offeror who will be excluded from competition because of adverse past performance information, unless the Offeror has previously had the opportunity to comment on such information.

d. In the case of an Offeror 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 Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “Unknown” shall be considered “Acceptable.”

e. Notice of Award: A written notice of award or acceptance of any offer (a copy of the Standard

Form 1449 signed by the Contracting Officer), 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 part. Before the offer’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer, whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

3. Step 3 – Assess Price:

Price Evaluation. The Government shall rank all technically acceptable offers by total evaluated price.

The Offerors’ price proposals will be evaluated, using one or more of the price analysis techniques defined in FAR 15.404, in order to determine fair and reasonableness. The price evaluation will document reasonableness, completeness, unbalanced pricing, and any apparent mathematical errors of the proposed total evaluated price as follows:

1. The total evaluated price will be the “GRAND TOTAL EVALUATED PRICE (ALL YEARS)”, listed in Block R26 on the “Summary” tab Attachment 3-Pricing Table. This number is derived by adding CLINs X001-X005 (for base and all options) to include the 6 Month ‘Option to Extend Services’ clause provided under FAR clause 52.217-8. Pricing for the 6 Month ‘Option to Extend Services’ will be calculated using 100% of the values listed under Option Period 2 (this number will automatically populate in Attachment 3). The Option to Extend CLIN will be used only if an extension of services is necessary at end of established period of performance for Option Period 2 IAW FAR 52.217-8.

Prices in Attachment 3-Pricing Table will be used for evaluation purposes and any work orders issued against this contract. Quantities listed in this attachment are based on historical data. By no means are these quantities a guarantee of work to be issued under this contract.

A. Evaluation of proposed prices will include a review for:

a. Reasonableness. The proposed prices will be evaluated for reasonableness. Price reasonableness will be determined through adequate price competition of the Offeror’s total evaluated price; the independent Government estimate; and may also be determined through price analysis techniques described in FAR 15.404. Unreasonable 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 the Offeror has made an unreasonable proposal. For additional information see FAR 31.201-3.

b. Completeness. Price will be considered complete when the offeror has proposed a Firm-Fixed Price for each GREEN cell in Attachment 3-Pricing Table (Revised 23 Dec). Price will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror provided complete data. Complete data means the offeror provided a proposal that contains a fully burdened unit price, the extended amount and the extended total for each ALL worksheets. Blank cells will be evaluated as “no-bid/no proposal” and may result in elimination of your proposal from competition.

c. Unbalanced Pricing: The Government may determine a proposal “Unacceptable” should the proposed Pricing Table, be significantly unbalanced. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance possess an unacceptable risk to the Government.

d. Apparent Mathematical Error. Entering text, or overriding formulas, within the Government-provided workbook may result in calculation errors and cause the proposal to be considered non-responsive. If a discrepancy exists between the information contained on the disk and the printed copy, the printed copy will prevail, unless clarifications are sought.

(End of Summary of Changes)

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2; EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD