FA5209-15-T-0041_Amend_0001_Cleaning_and_Inspection_of_Kitchen_Hoods_and_Exhaust_Systems_at_Yokota_AB_and_Tama_Service_Anex _Japan_.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:

1) to modify current Performance Work Statement

2) to modifiy Addendum to FAR 52.212, Evaluation.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 5

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 14-Aug-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 FA5209-15-T-0041

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

12-May-2015

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 X is extended, 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

14-Aug-2015

CODE

374TH CONTRACTING SQUADRON

UNIT 5228, BLDG 620, YOKOTA AB

FUSSA-SHI, TOKYO 197-0001 JAPAN

FA5209 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA5209-15-T-0041

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 11-Jun-2015 10:00 AM to 26-Aug-2015 10:00 AM.

The following have been modified:

LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS, OR ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 Title Date Number of Pages

1 Performance-Based Work Statement 13 Aug 15 31 of Cleaning and Inspection of Kitchen Hoods at

Yokota Air Base and Tama Service Annex, Japan

Appendix A thru C

2. Present/Past Performance Reference List N/A 1

(not part of the resulting contract)

3. Present/Past Performance Survey N/A 1

(not part of the resulting contract)

Note: Attachment 2 and 3 will not be a part of the resulting contract.

Addendum to FAR 52.212, Evaluation - Commercial Items

The following is inserted as new paragraph (d) of the provision:

“(d) BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: This is a competitive Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Parts 12 and 13 and Air Force

FAR Supplement (AFFARS) Mandatory Procedure (MP) 5315.3. By submission of its offer in accordance with the instructions provided in clause FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors –Commercial Items, the offeror accedes to the terms of this model contract. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being determined unacceptable. Award will be made to the lowest Total Evaluated Price (TEP) offer that meets the acceptability standards for non-price factors. The evaluation process will include the following:

(1) Technical Acceptability Factor. The government will evaluate technical proposals on an

Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. The Acceptable or Unacceptable rating as described in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Technical Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

file://Periwinkle/SAF_AQC_ORG/AQCP/5640%20-%20AFFARS/AFAC%20Working%20Folders%20--%20PM/far/FAR31.doc%23b522121

Qualification of Project Manager (PM) and Assistant Project Manager (APM)

The Contractor shall provide a PM and APM who shall act fully on behalf of the Contractor on all matters relating to daily operation of this contract and perform overall management of the entire work requirements.

The Project Manager shall meet the qualification as stated below:

1) Complete a training course provided by Japan Air Duct Cleaning Association (JADCA)

*Assistant Project Manager shall possess the equivalent certificate with the PM.

(2) Past Performance Factor. The Government will evaluate recent and relevant performance information on all offerors based on (i) the references provided by the offeror, and (ii) any past performance information obtained from survey (Attachment3), and (iii) any data independently obtained by the Government. If a reference identified by the offeror in accordance with 52.212-1(m)B.4(c) does not submit a survey/questionnaire, the Government will follow up with the reference POC, but it is not responsible for the failure of a reference POC to provide a survey/questionnaire.

Past performance regarding predecessor companies of the offeror and/or subcontractors, key personnel, and subcontractors that will perform major aspects as identified in PWS, Paragraph 1.1 thru 1.2, if applicable (see

52.212-1(m)B.4(d)), will be rated as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror.

(A) Recent present/past performance information includes contracts performed and/or being performed for any customer within the last three (3) years from the issuance date of the solicitation.

(B) Relevant past performance is that which involved similar scope, magnitude of effort, and complexity that this solicitation requires. The Government will assess relevancy for each contract and assign a rating as described in

Table 2 below:

Table 2. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Rating Definition

Relevant

Past performance effort involved similar scope, magnitude of effort, and complexity that this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant

Past performance effort involve little or none of the scope, magnitude of effort, or complexity that this solicitation requires.

(C) Performance Quality Assessment: For each of the recent and relevant past performance information reviewed, the performance quality of work will be assessed based on the (i) Quality Assessment Criteria evaluated under paragraph 3 of Past Performance Survey (Solicitation Attachment 3) and (ii) the evaluation ratings in the

Federal Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), if available. Each recent and relevant past performance information reviewed will be assigned a rating as described in Table 3 below:

Table 3. Quality Assessment Ratings

Rating Rating Definition

Satisfactory (S)

During the contract period, contractor performance is meeting (or met) contract requirements. For any problems encountered, contractor took effective corrective action.

Unsatisfactory (U)

During the contract period, contractor performance is not meeting (or did not meet) contract requirements. For any problems encountered, corrective action appeared only marginally effective, not effective, or not fully implemented. Customer involvement was required.

The past performance evaluation is an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. Offerors must receive a past performance rating of “Acceptable” to be eligible for award. For offerors in a teaming arrangement where two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture (JV), the following will apply: (i) for a JV at least one partner must be rated “Acceptable;” and (ii) for prime-subcontractor(s) partnerships, the prime must be rated “Acceptable” in order for the partnership to be rated “Acceptable” as a whole.

As a result of the recency, relevancy, and performance quality assessments, offerors will receive an integrated past performance rating as described in Table 4 below:

Table 4, Past Performance Evaluation Ratings

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.”

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 recent/relevant past performance or for whom past performance is not available, or so sparse that a meaningful past performance rating cannot be reasonably assigned, the offeror cannot be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR

15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror will be determined to have an unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” will be considered “Acceptable.”

(3) Price Evaluation Factor. The Government will rank all offers by Total Evaluation Price (TEP) for

Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) 0001 through 4001. The price evaluation will document the fairness and reasonableness of the TEP.

Total Evaluated Price: A TEP will be computed for each offer in order to meet the requirements of FAR Parts 6 and

17. The price of a six-month extension authorized by 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, will be added to the proposed price for each potential contract performance period.

The TEP is a two-part computation. First, the offeror’s total proposed price will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified in Price Schedule by the unit price for each CLIN x001 to confirm the extended total amount for each CLIN x001; the sum of all extended amounts will be the offeror’s total proposed price. Second, the total proposed price (total amount for CLINs x001 plus the sum of Option to Extend Services clause 52.217-8 formula

(shown below) will constitute the TEP.

The formula for the Option to Extend Services amount is as follows:

Base Year = CLIN Unit Amount x 0.5*

Option Year 1 = CLIN Unit Amount x 0.5*

Option Year 2 = CLIN Unit Amount x 0.5*

Option Year 3 = CLIN Unit Amount x 0.5*

Option Year 4 = CLIN Unit Amount x 0.5*

Note: *0.5 is the multiplicative factor used to derive the 6 months quantity value.

Evaluating the Option CLINs does not obligate the Government to exercise the Options.

(4) Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and in the format specified in 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items, of this solicitation. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposals. Exchanges conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions and the contracting officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision. The

Government intends to award a contract without discussions with respective offerors. The Government, however, reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

(5) Award will be made to the lowest priced offer, based on TEP, that meets the acceptability standards for non-price factors.

(End of Summary of Changes)