16RA300_Amendment_01.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:

1. Add the choice of submitting a Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) report rather than a Past Performance Questionnaire; Section L, para 4.3(c)

2. Correct the Past Performance Relevancy Assessment magnitude from $100,000 to $350,000; Section M, para 3(f)(2)(i)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 15

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 05-Aug-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 FA4861-16-R-A300

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

20-Jul-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, 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 1 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

05-Aug-2016

CODE

99 CONS/LGCA

5865 SWAAB BLVD, BLDG 588

NELLIS AFB NV 89191-7063

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA4861-16-R-A300

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INFORMATION TO OFFERORS

INFORMATION TO OFFERORS & INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION

1. PROGRAM STRUCTURE AND OBJECTIVE

The Government intends to award a single paving Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract for Nellis Air Force Base, Creech Air Force Base, and the southernmost portions of the Nevada Test & Training Range (NTTR).

The Government reserves the right to award without discussions with offerors. Award will be made on the basis of “best value” utilizing subjective tradeoff source selection procedures where past performance is significantly more important than price. Awarded contract will be for five (5) years with each year being an “ordering period.”

2. GENERAL INFORMATION

(a) This section of the Instructions to Offerors (ITO) provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested by this ITO and be submitted in accordance with these instructions. Evidence of experience, capability, and qualifications that clearly demonstrate and support the offeror’s claims are essential. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in the ITO may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

(b) The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror’s proposal.

(c) Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

(d) The proposal acceptance period is a minimum of 180 calendar days from date of submission. The offeror shall make a clear statement in the proposal Volume I that the proposal is valid until this date.

(e) In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one (1) electronic copy of all proposals. Unless the offeror requests otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of proposals.

(f) Offerors should submit any questions they may have in writing to Steve Stone (Administrator) at steven.stone.12@us.af.mil and Patrick Mock (Administrator) at patrick.mock.1@us.af.mil, and/or Gil Cano (Contracting Officer) at gilbert.cano.2@us.af.mil. Responses to questions shall be posted to the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) web site at http://www.fbo.gov. NOTE: Offerors are encouraged to submit all questions and requests for clarifications no later than close of business ten (10) days prior to the solicitation closing date. The decision whether to respond to questions and requests for clarification made less than ten (10) days prior to the solicitation closing shall be at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer (CO).

(g) A pre-proposal site visit will be held at 8:00AM PST on 3 August 2016 in the large conference room of the 99th Contracting Squadron, located at 5865 Swaab Blvd, Bldg 588, Nellis AFB, NV 89191. All prospective offerors are encouraged to attend this pre-proposal site visit. Prospective offerors are advised that the pre-proposal site mailto:steven.stone.12@us.af.mil mailto:patrick.mock.1@us.af.mil mailto:gilbert.cano.2@us.af.mil http://www.fbo.gov/ visit will be held solely for the purpose of providing an opportunity to view examples of the typical type of work (road, sidewalk, gutter, parking lot, and an intersection) required prior to submitting questions. Due to space limitations, each offeror is limited to no more than three (3) attendees. To ensure access for the pre-proposal site visit, offerors wishing to attend will be required to send the following information for each attendee who does not already posess Nellis AFB access priviliges no later than 28 July 2016 at 1:00 PM PST:

(i) Company Name, Individual’s Full Name, Country of Citizenship, Date of Birth, Social Security Number, Driver’s License # and State of Issue. Any individual(s) listing a country other than the United States for citizenship must include a copy of a second form of identification. (i.e. passport, visa, work permit, resident alien card, etc.).

(ii) A background check [e.g., National Crime Institute Center (NCIC)] will be conducted on each person requesting access to Nellis AFB. Adverse information may result in such individual being prevented from entering the installation. Persons found to be undocumented or illegal aliens will be remanded to the proper authorities.

(iii) Information for base access should be sent to Patrick Mock at Patrick.Mock.1@us.af.mil AND Steve Stone at Steven.Stone.12@us.af.mil.

3. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

(a) Proposals must be completed and submitted prior to the time and date specified in Block 13 of the SF 1442. The “original” proposal shall be clearly identified, shall be addressed to the Contracting Officer, and be submitted to the following address:

99 CONS/LGCA

ATTN: STEVE STONE/ GIL CANO / PATRICK MOCK /

5865 Swaab Blvd, Bldg 588 Nellis AFB, NV 89191

Early submission of proposals is encouraged. A representative of the 99th Contracting Squadron will be available from 10:30AM – 11:00AM PST in the parking lot of the Nellis AFB main gate Visitor’s Center to accept “last-minute” proposals on the date specified in Block 13 of the SF 1442.

(b) 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, and representations and certifications, 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 proposal shall consist of three (3) separate volumes, Volume I – Price Proposal, Volume II – Technical, Volume III – Past Performance, and 1 electronic copy of entire proposal.

(c) Debriefings: The CO will promptly notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range, whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505. The CO will notify unsuccessful offerors in accordance with FAR 15.503. Upon such notification, unsuccessful offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

(d) Point of Contact: The Contracting Officer (CO) and Buyer are the sole points of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the CO and Buyer. Written requests for clarification may be sent to the CO and Buyer at the addresses located in paragraph 2(f) or 3(a) above.

(e) Discrepancies: If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the CO and Administrators in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the offeror is asking the CO to consider as related to the omission or error.

The offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions.

mailto:Patrick.Mock.1@us.af.mil mailto:Steven.Stone.12@us.af.mil

(f) Electronic Reference Documents: All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) web site at http://www.fbo.gov. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications from the website for this solicitation.

(g) Amendments to Solicitation: If this RFP is amended, the terms and conditions that were not amended remain in full force and effect. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment and provide confirmation upon submission of the offeror’s proposal. Any unacknowledged amendments in the offeror’s proposal will be considered as non-acceptance and will negatively affect their evaluation.

(h) Submission, Modification, Revision, and Withdrawal of Proposals: Proposals and modifications to proposals shall be submitted on paper media and electronic media in sealed envelopes/packages, addressed to the CO and Administrators at the address shown in Block 7 of the SF 1442, and showing the time and date specified for receipt, the solicitation number, and the name and address of the offeror.

(i) Page Limitations: Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. Page limitations may also be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs), if any. The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the offerors. Each page shall be counted except the following: blank pages, title pages, tables of contents, tabs, glossaries and those parts of the proposal noted as unlimited.

(j) Page Size and Format: A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Pages shall be single-spaced. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the font size shall be no less than 12 point. Tracking, kerning, and leading values shall not be changed from the default values of the word processing or page layout software. Margins shall be set at a minimum of 1 inch at the top and bottom and 3/4 inch at each side of each page. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. These page format restrictions shall also apply to responses to ENs, if any. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals. Solicitation attachments shall not be altered and are exempt from stated formating.

Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated and shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume, and count as a single page. Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics, not for pages of text. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the font size shall be no smaller than 10 point. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals.

(k) Electronic Copies: One (1) electronic copy of the entire proposal will be submitted on CD or DVD. The content and page sizes contained on the electronic copy must be identical to the hard copies. When discrepancies exist between the hard copies and the electronic copy, the hard copy will take precedence in all cases. For electronic copies, label the CD/DVD with the volume numbers and titles included on the disc, the solicitation number, the date of submission and the name of the offering firm; do not solely label the disc packaging as the packaging may become separated from the disc itself. Use separate files on the disc to permit rapid location of all portions, including required plans, exhibits, appendices and attachments, if any. Uncompressed files are preferred, but if files must be compressed, the necessary decompression program must be included. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Word 2013®, MS Excel 2013®, MS Power Point 2013®, and Adobe Acrobat® as applicable.

(l) Cost or Pricing Information: All cost or pricing information shall be addressed ONLY in the Price Volume. Work-hour estimates and material kinds and quantities may be used in other volumes only as appropriate for presenting rationale.

(m) Cross Referencing: Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with no cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation that is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal.

http://www.fbo.gov/

(n) Indexing: Each volume shall contain a table of contents to delineate the sections and any subsections within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

(o) Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms: Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with an explanation for each. Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

(p) Binding and Labeling: Each volume of the proposal should be separately bound to permit the volume to lie flat when open. Staples shall not be used. Three-ring binders are acceptable but not required. The volume cover, or a cover sheet, shall be bound in each volume, clearly marked as to volume number, title, original or copy number, solicitation identification, and the offeror's name. The same identifying data should be placed on the spine of each volume, if applicable. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

4. OFFERS

(a) The proposal and other information shall be submitted in hard copies and an electronic copy (CD or DVD) format. The proposal shall consist of the following volumes:

Volume I – Price (2 each hard copies) Volume II – Technical (3 each hard copies) Volume III - Past Performance (3 each hard copies) CD/DVD – Electronic copy of entire proposal (1 each)

(b) The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Therefore, only a limited amount of pricing information is required in the initial proposal. Upon examination of the initial proposals, the CO will review this determination and if, in the CO's opinion, there is adequate price competition, no additional price information will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However if, at any time during this competition, the CO 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.

4.1 VOLUME I – PRICE (FACTOR 1)

Offerors shall submit two (2) hard copies: one (1) original plus one (1) copy. Page Limitation: unlimited unless otherwise noted.

VOLUME I PRICE VOLUME

TAB #1 Executive Summary, four (4) page limit

TAB #2

Section A, Solicitation, Offeror and Award (Standard Form 1442), with amendments, if any, acknowledged, signed, and dated by a person legally authorized to bind the company.

• If an agent signs the proposal, ensure legal evidence of their authority is included.

• Complete blocks 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 20a, b, c.

• Original hard copy must be clearly marked as original. Electronic copy may be scanned but must be legible

TAB #3

Section B, Supplies or Services and Prices (Completed Bid Schedule) and Line Item Pricing Schedule (attachment 51). Electronic copy of Line Item Pricing Schedule shall be in Microsoft EXCEL 2013 (or earlier) format.

TAB #4

Section I, Contract Clauses (Standard Form 1442)

• Only those pages that require offeror responses

• Electronic copy may be scanned but must be legible; electronically-generated documents are preferred.

TAB #5

Section K, Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors (Standard Form 1442)

• If the offeror is a small business Joint Venture (JV), include a copy of the JV Agreement. If the JV Agreement requires approval by the SBA, furnish SBA supporting documentation.

• Ensure company’s data is current and up-to-date in the System for Award Management (SAM) (https://www.sam.gov/portal/SAM/#1) to include Representations and Certifications.

• Electronic copy may be scanned but must be legible; electronically-generated documents are preferred.

TAB #6 Financial information:

• Financial Responsibility Letter

(a) Each offeror shall submit an Executive Summary of no more than four (4) pages total that summarizes the key points from the offeror’s Price and Past Performance areas. Summary shall begin with company/division’s street address; CAGE Code; DUNS Number; and size of business, socioeconomic status if applicable, and a summary of the key points from the offeror’s Price and Past Performance volumes.

(b) Offerors shall submit the SF 1442 on paper with an original signature of a person legally authorized to bind the company. Offerors shall provide the name, title and telephone number(s) of the company/division point(s) of contact regarding decisions made with respect to the proposal and who can obligate the company contractually.

Offerors shall identify those individual(s) authorized to negotiate with the Government for this solicitation. All amendments, if any, must be included and signed by a person legally authorized to bind the company.

(c) Financial Responsibility Letter: Offerors shall provide a letter from the offeror's financial institution(s) that authorize the Contracting Officer to verify the offeror's financial responsibility. Included in the letter shall be the financial institution(s) name, address, Point of Contact and telephone numbers for the financial institution. Offerors shall coordinate with their financial institution and give them authority to release the following information to this office:

(a) How long the offeror has maintained an account with their institution;

(b) Current balance and average six month balance maintained;

(c) An affirmative statement that the offeror is in good standing.

4.2 VOLUME II – TECHICAL (FACTOR 2)

Offerors shall submit three (3) hard copies: one (1) original plus two (2) copies. Page Limitation: unlimited unless otherwise noted.

VOLUME II TECHNICAL VOLUME

https://www.sam.gov/portal/SAM/%231

TAB #1

Bonding Capability:

• Provide information, from an acceptable surety in accordance with FAR 28.202

Acceptability of Corporate Sureties, reflecting sufficient bonding capability to meet the maximum task order amount of $5,000,000, as well as a potential aggregate amount of $15,000,000.

• Electronic copy may be scanned but must be legible

TAB #2

Quality Control Plan:

• Provide a quality control plan.

• Electronic copy may be scanned but must be legible; electronically-generated and -signed documents are preferred.

TAB #3

Ability to Obtain Materials

• Provide evidence of ability to obtain materials that meet the specifications required by this contract; including but not limited to: concrete, asphalt, base course and subbase aggregate.

• Electronic copy may be scanned but must be legible; electronically-generated and -signed documents are preferred.

(1) Quality Control Plan: Offerors shall submit a Quality Control Plan which provides a detailed narrative, to include any graphic representations of the offeror’s plan, to ensure successful execution of the paving IDIQ program and subsequent task order projects. The offeror’s proposal shall clearly convey the following:

a. Overall understanding of submittal review, construction management, and closeout processes and logical measures to ensure the successful execution of the task order projects;

b. Clear processes for the logical, effective, and expedient documentation and resolution of quality problems;

c. Logical measures to identify poor performing subcontractors, to include appropriate corrective action, management tools, methods, and documentation;

d. Key quality control personnel (with no overlapping duties and responsibilities) and the extent of their authority;

e. Methods and frequency of inspection for ongoing projects; and

f. Methods the offeror will utilize to update the Government on project status and how interface with Government inspectors will be accomplished (status updates shall be a minimum of weekly).

4.3 VOLUME III – PAST PERFORMANCE (FACTOR 3)

Offerors shall submit three (3) hard copies: one (1) original plus two (2) copies. Page Limitation: 8 pages per Past Performance Information Sheet, unlimited for all else.

VOLUME I I I PAST PERFORMANCE VOLUME

TAB #1

Completed Past Performance Information Sheets:

• Ensure the primary points of contact for references are currently available to provide past performance information on attached questionnaire.

• Electronic copy may be scanned but must be legible; electronically-generated and -signed documents are preferred.

TAB #2 Past Performance Questionnaires and/or CPARS reports: Electronic copy may be scanned but must be legible; electronically-generated and -signed documents are preferred.

TAB #3 Adverse Information (if any): Electronic copy may be scanned but must be legible;

electronically-generated and -signed documents are preferred.

TAB #4 Teaming/Partnership Agreements (if any): Electronic copy may be scanned but must be legible; electronically-generated and -signed documents are preferred.

TAB #5 Consent Letters /Authorization Letters (if any): Electronic copy may be scanned but must be legible; electronically-generated and -signed documents are preferred.

TAB # 6 Organizational Structure Change History (if any): Electronic copy may be scanned but must be legible; electronically-generated and -signed documents are preferred.

(a) Offerors shall submit information on up to five (5) recent contracts from the prime contractor considered most relevant in demonstrating performance abilities on the Paving IDIQ contract. In addition, offerors shall include up to three (3) recent contracts performed by each teaming partner and/or joint venture partner considered most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the paving IDIQ contract. Recent past performance is defined as any work completed within the past three (3) years to include on-going contracts. Relevant past performance includes performance of any of the items listed on the Paving IDIQ Line Item Pricing Schedule (attachment 51 of this solicitation). The recent/relevant past performance information submitted for evaluation must be valued at no less than $350,000 with a minimum performance length of 60 calendar days to be considered for evaluation.

(b) Each offeror shall submit completed Past Performance Information Sheets (PPIS) (attachment 52 of this solicitation) for each past performance effort the offeror wishes to be considered in this offer/proposal. Each PPIS shall not exceed eight (8) pages.

This information is required on the offeror, all teaming partners and/or joint venture partners proposed to perform the work outlined in the solicitation. Offerors are advised that the Government will use data provided by each offeror in this volume along with data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past performance. All past performance information shall be evaluated in accordance with the Past Performance factor as defined in Section M, Evaluation Criteria, of this solicitation.

(c) The offeror shall provide either a completed Past Performance Questionnaire (attachment 53 of this solicitation) or a Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) report for each past performance effort the offeror wishes to be considered in this offer/proposal.

The offeror is responsible for ensuring the Past Performance Questionnaire is completed by the customer’s project manager for the respective project. Offerors shall complete Section 1 of the Past Performance Questionnaire and distribute it to the customer’s project manager. The customer’s project manager shall complete Sections 2 thru 5 of the Past Performance Questionnaire and return it to the offeror. ***THE OFFEROR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR

SUBMITTING ALL COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRES AND/OR CPARS REPORTS WITH THEIR PAST

PERFORMANCE VOLUME***

(d) Offerors shall provide any adverse information they or the teaming partner received in the past 3 years, such as Letters of Concern, Cure and or Show Cause Notices, Terminations for Cause/Default and a narrative explaining the circumstances resulting from its receipt and corrective actions taken, if applicable. This may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the Offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk.

Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a limited or no confidence rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an Offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The Offeror shall clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified.

Submittal of quality performance indicators or other management indicators that clearly support that an Offeror has overcome past problems is required

(e) Offeror shall include any written contract/teaming arrangement agreements. All written contract teaming arrangements and letters of intent shall be signed by all parties.

Joint Venture (JV) relationships are not assumed IAW 13 C.F.R. 121.103(h). Therefore, offerors shall identify whether they are bidding as JVs, and if so, the organization of the relationship.

Small Business Administration (SBA) Mentor/Protégé or JV Agreements require SBA approval prior to award of this effort. It is imperative that offerors intending to perform as a Mentor/Protégé or JV submit their SBA-approved Mentor/Protégé or JV Agreement upon, or as soon as possible after, submission of their proposal. At the time of award, the Government will notify all offerors who have declared their intent to apply for SBA approval of a SBA Mentor/Protégé or JV that they must submit their approved Agreement. From an offeror’s receipt of this notice, offeror has three (3) days to submit their approved Agreement to the CO. Receipt of this notice does not, in any way, imply that the Government will make award to any particular offeror. The Government will not withhold award of this effort pending receipt of any offeror’s approved SBA Mentor/Protégé or JV Agreement beyond the three-day notice period.

(f) If the offeror submits any past performance information on teaming partners, joint venture partners and/or subcontractors, it must be accompanied by a Consent Letter (sample contained in attachment 54 of this solicitation), executed by each partner/subcontractor authorizing release of the past performance information by the offeror to the government. For each identified effort for a non-government customer, the offeror shall also submit a Client Authorization Letter (attachment 55 of this solicitation) authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the offeror’s performance.

(g) 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 the conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, offerors shall include a "roadmap" describing any/all such changes in their organization. A pamphlet or other commercial document describing such reorganizations may suffice. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts identified for past performance evaluation/ performance confidence assessment. Since the Government intends to consider past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the offeror(s), the "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts identified, yet general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

5. SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS, TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors. 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.

6. EXCEPTIONS TO SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements. 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. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. This information shall be provided in the format and content of the below example Table 1. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being removed from consideration for award.

Table 1—Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements Example

SOLICITATION

Document

Paragraph/ Page

Requirement/ Portion

Rationale

01010, Technical Specifications, etc.

Applicable Page and Paragraph Numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Offeror justifies why the requirement will not be met

7. ALTERNATE PROPOSALS

No alternate proposals will be accepted.

8. INCURRED EXPENSES

The Government is not responsible for any costs incurred or associated with preparation and submission of a proposal in response to this solicitation. NO OFFERORS WILL BE COMPENSATED FOR SUBMITTING A

PROPOSAL.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

This acquisition will utilize subjective tradeoff source selection procedures to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision. Tradeoffs will be made between past performance and price only among those offerors whose proposals have been determined technically acceptable and conform to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by evaluation factors of this request for proposal). A contract shall be awarded to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 9, as supplemented, and is judged, based on the evaluation factors and subfactors, to represent the best value to the Government.

While the Government source selection evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process by its nature is subjective and, therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process. The Government reserves the right to award without discussions, therefore each initial offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary.

2. NUMBER OF CONTRACTS TO BE AWARDED

The Government intends to award one (1) contract for the Nellis/Creech/NTTR Paving Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) as a small business set-aside.

3. EVALUATION FACTORS

(a) Proposals: The basis of award will be a subjective tradeoff with past performance being significantly more important than price, when evaluating proposals. Award will be made to the offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors described below.

• Factor 1: Price

• Factor 2: Technical

• Factor 3: Past Performance

(b) Order of Importance: In the subjective tradeoff, technical acceptability is a prerequisite to the trade-off between price and past performance. The Order of Importance is used to explain how the other factors will be traded off on technically acceptable proposals.

(c) Evaluation Methodology: The Government shall evaluate offers to make one (1) award. The specific steps for evaluations follow:

(d) Factor 1 – PRICE (Volume I): The Government shall evaluate all offerors’ price proposals for completeness and accuracy. Failure to provide complete pricing as required by Section B of the solicitation may cause the Government to determine that the offer is nonresponsive. The Government will then rank all offers from lowest to highest price.

(1) The offeror’s total price will be evaluated for award purposes. To determine Total Proposed Price, each line item ‘Item Cost’ (the product of the offeror’s proposed Unit Cost multiplied by the government-supplied estimated quantity as listed on the Pricing Schedule) will be added together to provide a total for each annual Ordering Period. The totals for each Ordering Period will then be added together to identify each offeror’s Total Proposed Price. All five one-year Ordering Periods will be considered in determining the offeror’s total evaluated price.

(2) Analysis of price proposals will be performed using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404-1. Price analysis will be performed to determine the reasonableness of the offeror’s price proposal.

Reasonableness will be determined by comparison of all proposed prices received in response to the solicitation, by comparing each offeror’s evaluated price to historical actuals for similar effort(s), as well as comparison to the Independent Government Estimate (IGE). For a price to be reasonable, it must represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business. Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through cost and price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404. For additional information, see FAR 31.201-3.

(3) The offeror’s Executive Summary will be evaluated for completeness; at a minimum, it must contain the offeror’s street address, CAGE code, DUNS number, size of business, socioeconomic status if applicable, and a summary of the key points from the offeror’s Price and Past Performance volumes.

(4) The offeror’s submitted SF 1442 Section A, Solicitation, Offeror and Award will be evaluated for completeness; at a minimum, it must be signed by a person legally authorized to bind the company, with all appropriate blocks completed and all, if any, amendments included and signed by a person legally authorized to bind the company.

(5) The offeror’s submitted SF 1442 Section B, Supplies or Services and Prices (Completed Pricing Schedule) will be evaluated for completeness; at a minimum, all ‘Unit Price’ blocks must be completed for all five ‘ordering periods.’

(6) The offeror’s submitted SF 1442 Section I, Contract Clauses will be evaluated for completeness; at a minimum, all clauses that require offeror responses must be completed.

(7) The offeror’s submitted SF 1442 Section K, Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors will be evaluated for completeness; at a minimum, all Representations and Certifications that require offeror responses must be completed. If the offeror is a small business Joint Venture (JV), a copy of the JV Agreement must be included. If the JV Agreement requires approval by the SBA, SBA supporting documentation must be included.

(8) The offeror’s Financial Information will be evaluated for completeness; at a minimum, offerors shall provide:

a. A financial capability letter from the offeror's financial institution(s) that authorize the Contracting Officer to verify the offeror's financial responsibility. Included in the letter shall be the financial institution(s) name, address, Point of Contact and telephone numbers for the financial institution. Offerors shall coordinate with their financial institution and give them authority to release the following information to this office:

i. How long the offeror has maintained an account with their institution;

ii. Current balance and average six month balance maintained; and

iii. An affirmative statement that the offeror is in good standing.

(e) Factor 2 – TECHNICAL (Volume II): The technical evaluation team will evaluate all proposals on a pass/fail basis, assigning ratings of Acceptable or Unacceptable.

The technical factor will receive one of the ratings described below based on the criteria listed. An unacceptable assessment in any of the technical elements will result in an overall technically unacceptable rating.

(2) Bonding Capability: At a minimum, an acceptable proof of Bonding Capability will provide information, from an acceptable surety in accordance with FAR 28.202 Acceptability of Corporate Sureties, reflecting sufficient bonding capability to meet the maximum task order amount of $5,000,000 as well as a potential aggregate amount of $15,000,000.

(3) Quality Control Plan: At a minimum, an acceptable Quality Control Plan must provide a detailed narrative to include any graphic representations of the offeror’s plan to ensure successful execution of the paving IDIQ program and subsequent task order projects. The offeror’s proposal shall clearly convey the following:

a. Overall understanding of submittal review, construction management, and closeout processes and logical measures to ensure the successful execution of the task order projects;

b. Clear processes for the logical, effective, and expedient documentation and resolution of quality problems;

c. Logical measures to identify poor performing subcontractors, to include appropriate corrective action, management tools, methods, and documentation;

d. Key quality control personnel (with no overlapping duties and responsibilities) and the extent of their authority;

e. Methods and frequency of inspection for ongoing projects; and

TABLE 1 - TECHNICAL RATINGS

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

f. Methods the offeror will utilize to update the Government on project status and how interface with Government inspectors will be accomplished (status updates shall be a minimum of weekly).

(4) Ability to Obtain Materials: At a minimum, offerors must provide evidence of ability to obtain materials that meet the specifications required by this contract, including but not limited to:

concrete, asphalt, base course and subbase aggregate. This requirement can be satisfied by providing a signed letter or a quote from the source of supply listing the specifications of the material being provided. The specifications of the materials listed shall meet the specifications included in this contract to be considered acceptable.

(f) Factor 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE (Volume III): The Government will perform a Past Performance evaluation on all offers to determine a Performance Confidence Assessment rating and then perform a best value trade-off.

The Past Performance evaluation assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in the offeror’s ability to successfully perform the requirements of this effort. The evaluation is based on recency, relevancy and a demonstrated record of performance quality.

Performance confidence is assessed at the overall Past Performance factor level after evaluating aspects of the offeror’s past performance, focusing on recency, relevancy and quality of performance. The Government may consider aggregate past performance in addition to past performance on an individual contract basis. In conducting the Past Performance evaluation, the Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the offeror’s Past Performance proposal volume and in the information obtained from other sources, such as the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or similar systems, the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) and commercial sources.

(1) Recency Assessment - An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Efforts that have not yet been completed must have at least six (6) months of performance from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails to meet these conditions may not be evaluated. NOTE: If any part of the performance falls within the above timeframe, the information in its entirety may be evaluated for past performance.

(2) Relevancy Assessment – The Government will conduct an evaluation of all recent performance information to determine how closely the services performed under those contracts relate to the contemplated Paving IDIQ contract. Relevant efforts/projects are defined as construction efforts/projects meeting the following:

(i) (Magnitude) – Efforts/projects valued at $350,000 or greater.

(ii) (Scope) – Efforts/projects involve performance of any of the items listed on the line item Pricing Schedule (attachment 51 of this solicitation).

All past performance information will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance.

Construction efforts/projects showing the capability to perform and manage a wide range of paving tasks as well as the ability to manage multiple relevant efforts simultaneously will be considered for the degree of relevancy.

For example, contractors that demonstrate their ability to manage multiple relevant efforts/projects concurrently might be more relevant than a contractor that manages efforts/projects non-concurrently.

Additionally, a contractor who performed a project valued at $600K involving multiple paving-related tasks might be more relevant than a contractor who performed a project valued at $350K involving a single paving-related task.

The Government will use the following degrees of relevancy when assessing recent, relevant contracts:

TABLE 1 – Relevancy Assessment

Rating Description

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

(3) Performance Quality - The quality review consists of an evaluation of the Past Performance Questionnaire responses, CPARS or other similar systems, interviews with Government customers and fee determining officials, and if applicable, commercial clients. It may also include interviews with DCMA officials or other sources known to the Government. Particular attention will be paid to the following areas, which are addressed in the Past Performance Questionnaire and/or CPARS reports: management;

schedule; cost control, and quality. The quality assessment may result in positive or adverse findings.

Adverse is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comment received from sources without a formal rating system.

For adverse information identified, the evaluation will consider the number and severity of the problem(s), mitigating circumstances, and the effectiveness of corrective actions that have resulted in sustained improvements. Process changes will only be considered when objectively measurable improvements in performance have been demonstrated. The Government will review all past performance information collected and determine the performance confidence assessment. The past performance confidence assessment rating is based on the offeror’s overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance.

(4) Assigning Ratings - As a result of review of all three aspects of past performance, offerors will receive an integrated Performance Confidence Assessment rating. Although the Past Performance evaluation focuses on performance that is relevant to the areas addressed by the Past Performance Questionnaire and/or CPARS reports (management, schedule, cost control, and quality control), the resulting Performance Confidence Assessment rating is made at the factor level and represents an overall evaluation of contractor performance. Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and, as a result, will receive a "Neutral Confidence" rating for the Past Performance factor. More relevant performance will have a greater impact on the Performance Confidence Assessment than a less relevant effort. A strong record of relevant past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than a "Neutral Confidence" rating.

The Past Performance factor will receive one of the Performance Confidence Assessments listed in Table 2:

TABLE 2 – Performance Confidence Assessments Adjectival Rating Description

SUBSTANTIAL CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

SATISFACTORY CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

NEUTRAL CONFIDENCE No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

LIMITED CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required…