REVISION__1_FINAL_RFP_Jeep_J8_16Jun16.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

Please see the Summary of Changes for all changes to the RFP. In addition, this amendment incorporates changes to Attachment 1, Subfactor 3 - OCONUS Scenario and Attachment 2 - Performance Work Statement; all changes are highlighted in yellow .

1 CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 8

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 16-Jun-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 FA4890-15-R-0019

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

06-Jun-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 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

16-Jun-2016

CODE

ACC AMIC/PKD

11817 CANON BLVD, STE 306

NEWPORT NEWS VA 23606

FA4890 7 ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4 REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ NO

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMA L:TEL:

FA4890-15-R-0019

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 1009

The CLIN extended description has changed from:

General specifications are provided IAW PWS para 3.2. Quantity and delivery location will be specified in the

D/Os.

To:

General specifications are provided IAW PWS para 3.2. Quantity and delivery location will be specified in the

D/Os. NTE Amount: $1,000,000.

CLIN 2009

General specifications are provided IAW PWS para 3.2. Quantity and delivery location will be specified in the

General specifications are provided IAW PWS para 3.2. Quantity and delivery location will be specified in the

CLIN 3009

General specifications are provided IAW PWS para 3.2. Quantity and delivery location will be specified in the

General specifications are provided IAW PWS para 3.2. Quantity and delivery location will be specified in the

CLIN 4009

General specifications are provided IAW PWS para 3.2. Quantity and delivery location will be specified in the

General specifications are provided IAW PWS para 3.2. Quantity and delivery location will be specified in the

CLIN 5009

General specifications are provided IAW PWS para 3.2. Quantity and delivery location will be specified in the

General specifications are provided IAW PWS para 3.2. Quantity and delivery location will be specified in the

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Table of Contents has changed from:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION DATE

Attachment 1 Attachment 1 - OCONUS

Scenario

02-MAY-2016

Attachment 2 Attachment 2 -

Performance Work

Statement

06-JUN-2016

Attachment 3 Attachment 3 - PWS

Appendix C

27-MAY-2016

Attachment 4 Attachment 4 - PWS

Appendix D

27-MAY-2016

to:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION DATE

Attachment 1 REVISION #1 Subfactor

3 - Scenario

16-JUN-2016

Attachment 2 REVISION #1

Attachment 2 -

Performance Work

Statement

16-JUN-2016

Attachment 3 Attachment 3 - PWS

Appendix C

27-MAY-2016

Attachment 4 Attachment 4 - PWS

Appendix D

27-MAY-2016

The following have been modified:

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

This competitive best value source selection will be conducted using the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable

(LPTA) source selection process IAW FAR Part 12, Acquisition of Commercial Items and FAR Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation, Department of Defense (DoD) Source Selection Procedures effective 1 July 2011 and Air Force

Federal Acquisition Regulation (AFFARS) Mandatory Procedures (MP) 5315.3 for Source Selection as revised 6

April 2015. Award will be made to responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to all required terms and conditions, includes all required representations and certifications, meets all requirements set forth in the RFP and also provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation as described in below. Contract terms and conditions consistent with customary commercial practices are specified in the solicitation/contract, which otherwise tailored terms and conditions specified in the Addendum to the solicitation/contract.

The Government intends to award only one contract as a result of this solicitation. However, the Government reserves the right to award more or no contracts at all, if the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines it is in the best interest of the Government. If the Government determines to not award a contract, the Government will not be liable for any cost incurred by the offeror(s).

The Government reserves the right to award without discussions and make award based on initial proposals, but may conduct discussions if the Government determines it is necessary. If it is determined to be in the best interest of the

Government to hold discussions, the SSA, with CO concurrence, will make a Competitive Range determination, evaluation notices may be issued to Offerors in the competitive range, responses will be requested from applicable

Offerors, and discussions will be opened. The competitive range may include proposals rated as “Unacceptable” at the sole discretion of the Government. Offerors should be aware that a complete understanding as to price, technical, and all other terms and conditions of the proposed contract must exist between the Offeror and the

Government at the conclusion of discussions.

Award will be made to Offeror(s) deemed responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9.1, whose proposals conform to the solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, with the lowest total overall evaluated prices and with an “Acceptable” rating in all Technical subfactors. If an Offeror fails to meet all solicitation requirements, the Government may not make an award to that Offeror.

If the Government conducts and concludes discussions, the Government will request a Final Proposal Revision

(FPR) from all Offerors remaining in the competitive range once discussions are closed. Formal responses to FPRs will be considered in making the award decision.

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

Hence, such new or revised terms and conditions are not solicited and, if submitted in the FPR, may render the offer unacceptable to the Government.

If, upon submission of the FPR, an Offeror materially changes its proposal such that the price is no longer fair and reasonable or sufficient to keep them among the lowest priced Offeror, or other factor inputs change their ranking among other Offerors, the Offeror may be removed from consideration for award.

EVALUATION FACTORS AND METHODOLOGY

Proposals will be evaluated using two (2) evaluation factors: (1) Technical and (2) Price.

Evaluation Methodology.

Initial Proposals. The Government will evaluate the minimum number of proposals for efficiency and to maintain adequate competition, as specified in this section. Upon receipt of the Technical, and Price proposals, the

Government will:

Step 1: Rank by Initially Proposed Total Price. The Government intends to initially rank all proposals by the initially proposed total price, from lowest to highest. The initially proposed total price includes the sum of all performance years and the minimum guarantee. Evaluation and determination of the proposed Total Overall

Evaluated Price as fair, reasonable and balanced will occur as specified in Step 2 below. For the purposes of the

ID/IQ evaluation the Government intends to establish an initial evaluation pool of the three (3) lowest price proposals. The Government will evaluate technical proposals of offerors in the initial evaluation pool. Those outside the initial evaluation pool will NOT be evaluated, unless necessary to obtain the desired effective competition of three (3) offers rated as “acceptable” in all technical sub factors or until all offerors have been evaluated. The Government reserves the right to not evaluate all offerors once three (3) offers in the initial pool are determined technically acceptable.

Step 2: Factor Evaluations. Upon establishment of the evaluation pool as described above, the Government will evaluate each factor simultaneously, as follows:

Technical Evaluation. The Government will evaluate the technical proposals of Offerors in the evaluation pool as specified below under Factor 1: Technical. If any of the proposals receives any “Unacceptable” ratings and these proposal(s) are not determined to be easily correctable, the Government reserves the right to pull in the next lowest priced proposal(s) to ensure adequate competition, or until all proposals are evaluated.

Price Evaluation. The Government will evaluate the price proposals of Offerors in the evaluation pool.

Award Decision. If at least one (1) of the lowest priced proposals is technically “Acceptable”, and is fair and reasonably priced, the Government may award with or without discussions. The Government reserves the right to award with or without discussions to more than the target number of Offerors with an “Acceptable” rating for each technical subfactor and fair and reasonable pricing, based upon SSA determination that it is in the Government's best interest.

Factor 1: Technical. The Technical Factor evaluation provides an assessment of each Offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements. The Technical Factor consists of three (3) subfactors: (1) Quality

Management, (2) Maintenance, Operations Support, and Training (MOST) Process/Certifications, and (3) OCONUS

Scenario. Technical proposals will be assessed a rating of "Acceptable" or "Unacceptable" at the subfactor level

IAW Table A-1 of the DoD Source Selection Procedures effective 1 July 2011, as revised below:

In assessing the acceptability of each subfactor, any weakness or deficiency will be noted in accordance with

Chapter 5 of the DoD Source Selection Procedures. Proposals that receive deficiencies or weaknesses in a subfactor will receive an “Unacceptable” rating. The Government will not search for data to cure problems or address inconsistencies in an Offeror’s proposal. Proposals that exceed the evaluation criteria will not receive higher ratings. To be eligible for award, an “Acceptable” rating for all technical subfactors is required. The Government may incorporate into this contract, by reference or full text, portions of the successful Offeror’s proposal submitted in response to this solicitation as revised and supplemented through the final proposal revision.

RATING DEFINITION

ACCEPTABLE Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation

UNACCEPTABLE Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation

Subfactor 1: Quality Management.

Demonstrate an effective and efficient quality management structure and processes that are compliant with

ISO 9001:2008 and meets the requirements of PWS paragraphs 4.10, 7.4.2, and Services Summary.

Additionally, the offeror shall demonstrate its ability to maintain and integrate its quality management and inspection system into the overall management approach and operations, maintenance and training services.

Subfactor 2: Maintenance, Operations Support, and Training (MOST); Process/Certifications.

Demonstrate the capability to provide sound management, maintenance, operations support, and training in a safe, serviceable, and mission capable manner to satisfy the contract mission IAW PWS Section 3.3, technical manuals, original equipment manufacturer (OEM) and local nation regulations or equivalent standards to satisfy up to 12 one or two-week deployments per year to the SOUTHCOM AOR or other locations as identified.

Demonstrate the ability to provide Technical Assistance Agreements (TAAs) and ensure TAAs are in place before performing MOST OCONUS support as required IAW PWS 4.3 and 7.4.7.

Demonstrate the ability to ensure MOST team composition is capable of providing operator/driver training, workshop technical/maintenance training and support for the tactical vehicles and equipment set forth in this PWS and D/O requirements.

Demonstrate the ability to ensure trainers are bilingual and possess and maintain language proficiency level

3 for Latin American Spanish and English as defined by the US Department of State (Do's) language proficiency training (http://careers.state.gov/gateway/lang prof def html).

Demonstrate the ability to ensure each MOST Team consists of at least one member being a Chrysler OEM certified technician capable of providing troubleshooting and repair support IAW PWS paragraph 3.3.1.

Subfactor 3: OCONUS Scenario.

Demonstrate effective approach for meeting scenario (representative work) requirements (see Attachment

1) by demonstrating:

- The ability to meet cost, schedule, and performance parameters.

- A comprehensive integrated master schedule for the scenario that adequately addresses timelines / milestones for: delivery lead times; approvals, clearances, export compliance and licensing timelines;

documentation and deliverables; OCONUS travel processing; and shipment/delivery/post-delivery requirement timelines for all scenario requirements.

- Experience procuring, shipping, and delivery of equipment and materials (similar in size and scope to the requirements of this scenario) to the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility.

Factor 2: Price. Price will be evaluated using techniques established in FAR 15.404-1 to ensure the Government receives a fair, reasonable and balanced price. This source selection is conducted with the expectation of adequate price competition and rely on market forces and price competition to ensure awarded price is reasonable.

The Government will evaluate prices to determine whether prices reflect a clear understanding of the requirements.

An offeror may be determined unawardable if its prices is evaluated as unfair or unreasonable.

(A) Reasonableness: The existence of adequate price competition is expected to support a determinate of price reasonableness. Price analysis techniques may be used to further validated price reasonableness. If adequate price competition is not realized or if price reasonableness cannot be determined using price analysis of Government obtained information, additional information in accordance with FAR 15.4 may be required to support the proposed price. The Government reserves the right to ask for additional information from technically acceptable offerors with proposed prices that appear exceptionally low. The Government plans on addressing any apparent exceptionally low prices by evaluating the offerors experience and/or capability in providing similar services/commodities at similar prices. An exceptionally or unrealistically low offer may pose an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be the reason to reject an offeror’s proposal without entering discussions.

(B) Balance: Offerors are cautioned against submitting an offer that contains unbalance pricing. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable Total Evaluated Price, the price of one or more contract line items, including the

Basic ordering period and remaining four ordering period, is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of analysis techniques. The Government shall analyze offers to determine whether there are unbalance separately priced line items or sub-line items. Prices submitted will be compared and evaluated to assure that a logical progression exists as related prices within each offeror’s response to the pricing structure in Section B.

Offers that are determined to be unbalanced may be rejected as the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the

Government.

(C) Total Evaluated Price (TEP): Total evaluated price will consist of the sum of all labor, material and other direct costs for the ordering periods and fifty percent (50%) of the last ordering period price to cover the option to extend services in accordance with FAR clause 52.217-8. Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price proposal meeting the minimum technical acceptable criteria in accordance with PWS.

There is a great expectation of competition for this requirement; thus Offerors are cautioned to present their best price proposals up-front. The Offeror’s price proposal shall represent the Offeror’s best effort to respond to the solicitation. In instances where an Offeror receives “Acceptable” Technical ratings, yet proposed prices appear exceptionally or unrealistically low, Offerors may be requested to address this disparity, providing evidence of capability and/or experience providing similar service(s) at similar price(s). An example of an unrealistically low proposed price would be proposed labor rates that were so low that the Government could not make a reasonable determination that an Offeror could successfully provide and/or retain qualified personnel for the labor categories proposed. An exceptionally or unrealistically low offer may pose an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition.

(End of provision)

(End of Summary of Changes)