FA7000-R-0021-0001.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 amdnedment is to update the Davis Bacon Wage Decision, and incorporate changes to Sections L and M.

A. Delete Davis Bacon Wage Decsion CO100006, Modif ication Number 10, dated 29 July 2011.

B. Add Davis Bacon Wage Decision CO100006, Modif ication Number 12, dated 19 August 2011.

C. Section L, Part L-1, Paragraph C.2(a) is changed from "total proposed amount" to "total subcontracted dollars."

D. Section M, Part M-1, Paragraph A.1 is changed from "total proposed amount" to "total subcontracted dollars."

E. All other terms and conditions remain the same.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 9

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 25-Aug-2011

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 FA7000-11-R-0021

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

04-Aug-2011

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

24-Aug-2011

CODE

10 CONS - FA7000

VOLLBRACHT, A.

8110 INDUSTRIAL DRIVE, STE 200

LGCA

USAF ACADEMY CO 80840-2315

FA7000 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

FA7000-11-R-0021

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The Issued By organization has changed from

10 CONS - FA7000

ATTN: AARON VOLLBRACHT

8110 INDUSTRIAL DRIVE, STE 200

LGCA

USAF ACADEMY CO 80840-2315

to

10 CONS - FA7000

VOLLBRACHT, A.

8110 INDUSTRIAL DRIVE, STE 200

LGCA

USAF ACADEMY CO 80840-2315

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The Table of Contents has changed from:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 01 Specifications Phase 7 &

776 29-JUL-2011

Attachment 02 Drawings Phase 7 204 29-JUL-2011 Attachment 03 Drawings Phase 8 190 29-JUL-2011 Attachment 04 Davis- Bacon Wage

Decision

6 15-JUL-2011

Attachment 05 Past Performance Questionnaire

8 29-JUL-2011

to:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 01 Specifications Phase 7 &

776 29-JUL-2011

Attachment 02 Drawings Phase 7 204 29-JUL-2011 Attachment 03 Drawings Phase 8 190 29-JUL-2011 Attachment 04 Davis Bacon Wage

Decision 8-19-11

6 19-AUG-2011

Attachment 05 Past Performance Questionnaire

8 29-JUL-2011

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

L-1. PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

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. The government intends to award a contract without discussion with respective offerors. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Proposals must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this solicitation; alternate proposals will not be accepted. The response shall consist of three (3) separate parts; Part I - Price Proposal, Part II - Technical 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 data 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 cost data to the extent necessary for the contracting officer to determine the reasonableness and affordability of the price.

C. Specific Instructions:

1. PART I – PRICE PROPOSAL – No page limit. Submit original and two (2) copies and 1 compact disk with electronic data files, in accordance with paragraph D4 below.

(a) Complete blocks 14 through 20C of the RFP Section A, SF1442. In doing so, the offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP Sections A through J. These sections constitute the model contract.

(b) Insert proposed unit and extended prices in Section B for each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) for CLIN 0001 and CLIN 0002.

(c) Complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications in Sections I and K. Section K shall be returned in its entirety.

For Section I, the offeror shall submit only those pages that require a fill-in.

(d) If applicable, provide a copy of the letter from the Small Business Administration (SBA) showing proof of Section 8(a) status.

(e) A letter of authorization for the Contracting Officer to verify offeror’s financial responsibility. Include financial institution’s name, address, and primary point of contact and phone numbers for financial institutions.

(f) A letter from the offeror’s bonding company, stating the offeror’s bonding ability to meet the bonding requirements of the contract listed in Section F and the requirements of FAR clause 52.228-15. The letter will include the contractor’s ability to obtain bonding for the amount proposed in the offer.

2. PART II – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL - Limited to no more than 40 pages. Submit original plus two (2) copies and one (1) compact disk with the electronic data files.

http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/formslibrary.do?viewType=DETAIL&formId=4E179AB32AF6652285256A260054D101�

(a) Subfactor – Small Business Subcontracting Plan: The offeror is required to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan in conformance with criteria established in FAR 19.7. Submit a small business subcontracting plan, if applicable, in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 Alt II.

An offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be considered Technically Acceptable if the offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan meets or exceeds the following Small Business Subcontracting goals:

Small Business: 40.0% of the total subcontracted dollars Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business: 3.0% of the total subcontracted dollars Small Disadvantaged Business: 5.0% of the total subcontracted dollars

(b) Subfactor – Glass Manufacturer/Installer Certification: Submit Glass Installer Certifications for all of the following products: Viracon, Kawneer and Elward Panels.

3. PART III – PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION - Limited to no more than 60 pages, excluding completed past performance questionnaires. Only references for relevant past efforts/contracts are desired. Submit original plus two (2) copies and one (1) compact disk with the electronic data files.

(a) Quality and Satisfaction Rating for Contracts Completed in the Past Three Years: Provide any information currently available (letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys, etc.) which demonstrates customer satisfaction with overall job performance and quality of completed product for relevant past efforts/contracts (similar in scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires). In addition, explain corrective actions taken in the past, if any, for substandard performance and any current performance problems such as cost overruns, extended performance periods, numerous warranty calls, etc.

(b) Performance Surveys: The government will evaluate the quality and extent of offeror's performance deemed relevant to the requirements of this RFP. The government will use information submitted by the offeror and any other sources of information available to the Government to assess past performance. Provide a list of no more than ten (10), of the most relevant contracts performed for Federal agencies and commercial customers within the last three (3) years from the issue date of this solicitation. Recent past performance is defined as past performance on contracts within the last three years from the issue date of this solicitation. Past performance for contracts exceeding the timeframe for this definition of recency will be excluded from evaluation. Relevant performance includes performance of efforts involving building construction and renovation in an occupied building, curtain wall systems and a broad range of renovation projects to include performance or management of renovation or modernization that is similar or greater in scope, magnitude and complexity than the effort described in this solicitation. Relevance will be determined based in part on the specific work the contractor is proposed to perform on this RFP. In the past performance information, directly link the past performance information submitted to the contractor having performed the effort, and tie the information to the work the contractor is proposed to perform on this effort.

Describe management experience that demonstrates ability to manage, construct and renovate a large facility with an estimated value between $25,000,000 and $100,000,000. Describe why the listed contract/project is relevant. The evaluation of past performance information will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition. Furnish the following information for each contract listed:

(i) Company/Division name

(ii) Product/Service (type of renovation or construction)

(iii) Contracting Agency/Customer

(iv) Contract Number

(v) Contract Dollar Value

(vi) Period of Performance

(vii) Verified, up-to-date name, address, FAX & telephone number of the contracting officer or point of contact

(viii) Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions

(ix) Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions. Describe mitigating circumstances or actions taken to correct the unacceptable condition and preclude recurrence.

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 relevant contracts.

(c) Subcontractor Consent: Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. Provide with the proposal a letter from all subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, consenting to the release of their past performance information to the prime contractor.

(d) In addition to the above information, the offeror shall mail Attachment 5 of this solicitation, Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), to the list of most relevant contract references. Instruct these references to complete the Past Performance Questionnaire and return directly to:

10 CONS/LGCA

Attn: Aaron Vollbracht, FA7000-11-R-0021 8110 Industrial Drive, Suite 200

USAFA, CO 80840

or via email to aaron.vollbracht@usafa.af.mil. or james.anderson@usafa.af.mil.

(e) Any past performance questionnaires sent directly from a proposing offeror will not be accepted or evaluated. For the purpose of expediency of evaluation, please instruct references to respond to the past performance questionnaire as soon as possible. The questionnaire need not be sent to customers where past performance records exist in the government’s Construction Contractor Assessment Systems (CCASS). Not more than ten (10) questionnaires may be submitted. It is the sole responsibility of the offerors to ensure questionnaires are submitted by the solicitation closing date. The offerors are encouraged to follow-up with respondents for completed questionnaires, but are not required to.

D. Documents submitted in response to this RFP must be fully responsive to and consistent with the following:

1. Requirements of the RFP, drawings, specifications, and government standards and regulations pertaining to the specifications.

Evaluation Factors for Award in Section M of this 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.

4. Format for proposal Parts II and III shall be as follows:

(a) The proposals will be 8 1/2” x 11” paper 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 an 8 ½” X 11” sheet of paper (white or ivory in color) containing information. Charts, tables, or diagrams, may not exceed 11” x 17” and each face will be counted as one page.

Includes all appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, etc. Covers for volumes, table of contents, indices, title pages, cross reference indices, and section dividers/tables will not be included in the page count if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating volumes/sections of the proposal. They will be counted if they contain any other information, (e.g. diagrams, extraneous data, etc). Pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” will not be counted.

(b) A page is defined as one face of a sheet of paper containing information.

(c) Typing shall not be less than 12 font, with 1” margins. Smaller, legible font size may be used for charts and tables.

(d) Elaborate formats, bindings or color presentations are not desired or required. Company Name and solicitation number shall be included in the header of each page. Submit the proposal using three ring binders; all binders shall be capable of lying flat when opened. Submit a separate binder for each Part I, Part II, and Part III of the proposal.

(e) Electronic copies of all data submitted with the proposal shall be submitted on 1 (one) compact disk. Compact disks will be CD ROM in MS Word 2007, MS Excel 2007, any Microsoft Office 2007 product unless otherwise specified, or Adobe Acrobat. The paper or hard copy of the offeror’s proposal shall control any conflict between the electronic version and the paper copy submitted in response to this solicitation.

L-2 The estimated magnitude of this contract is between $25,000,000 and $100,000,000. Funds are not currently available for this project. The Government’s obligation under this contract is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds from which payment for contract purposes can be made. No legal liability on the part of the Government for any payment may arise until funds are made available to the Contracting Officer for this contract and until the Contractor receives notice of such availability, to be confirmed in writing by the Contracting Officer.

No award will be made under this solicitation until funds are available. The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation, either before or after the closing date. This project is a Straddle A effort. The Government intends to award a contract for CLIN 0001. If funds are not available during the current fiscal year, we will fund an awardable project no later than 30 December 2011. Option CLIN 0002 may be awarded during the performance of CLIN 0001 subject to the availability of funding.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M-1 BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: This is a competitive best value source selection in which competing offerors' past performance history will be evaluated on a basis significantly more important than cost or price considerations. 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. All technically acceptable offers shall be treated equally except for their prices and performance records. 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. The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

A. Technical Acceptability. 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:

1. SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN: The offeror is required to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan in conformance with criteria established in FAR 19.7. Submit a small business subcontracting plan, if applicable, in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 Alt II.

An offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be considered Technically Acceptable if the offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan meets or exceeds the following Small Business Subcontracting goals:

Small Business: 40.0% of the total subcontracted dollars

Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business: 3.0% of the total subcontracted dollars Small Disadvantaged Business: 5.0% of the total subcontracted dollars

2. GLASS MANUFACTURER/INSTALLER CERTIFICATES: (g) Submit Glass Installer Certifications for all of the following products: Viracon, Kawneer and Elward Panels.

B. Price Evaluation. Next, the government shall rank all Technically Acceptable offers (and Unacceptable proposals that are correctable) by price, including any option prices if applicable. For proposal evaluation purposes, contract line items numbers (CLINs) shall be evaluated as follows:

CLIN 0001 + CLIN 0002 = Aggregate of Total extended Prices.

The government intends to award based on the aggregate of all CLINs. Multiple contracts will not be awarded as a result of this solicitation.

When applicable, the price evaluation adjustment for HUBZone small business concerns will be applied in accordance with FAR 52.219-4, Notice of Price Evaluation Preference for HUBZone Small Business Concerns, to arrive at an evaluated price. The price evaluation will document reasonableness and affordability of the proposed total evaluated price.

C. Performance Confidence Assessment. The contracting officer shall seek recent and relevant performance information on all offerors based on (1) the past efforts provided by the offeror and (2) data independently obtained from other Government and commercial sources.

1) Using questionnaires and information submitted under Section L, Volume II, Past Performance, the contracting officer shall seek relevant performance information on all offerors based on (1) the past and present references provided by the offeror and (2) data independently obtained from other government and commercial sources as well as questionnaires. Relevant performance includes performance of efforts involving building construction and renovation in an occupied building, curtain wall systems and a broad range of renovation projects to include performance or management of renovation or modernization that is similar or greater in scope, magnitude and complexity than the effort described in this solicitation. Past Performance that does not meet the recency requirement in Section L will be excluded from evaluation.

2) Past performance will address areas pertaining to the following attributes to which an assessment will be made:

a) Quality: The quality of work can be measured by how well the offeror conformed to or met contract requirements, specifications and standards of good workmanship (e.g. commonly accepted technical professional, environmental, or safety and health standards.)

b) Technical: Technical can be measured by the offeror’s ability to perform a project to meet technical, specifications, contract terms and conditions, and all local, state, and federal regulations as related to performing projects.

c) Schedule: Schedule can be measured in terms of the timeliness in which a contractor completes, or has completed, milestones, delivery schedules, and strict adherence to phased schedules, administrative requirements, contract requirements (e.g. efforts that contribute to or effect the schedule variance).

d) Business Relations: Business relations can be measured by the offeror’s integration and coordination of activity needed to execute the contract; working in occupied living quarters, i.e. dorms, hotels, hospitals, etc.; the timeliness, completeness and quality of problem identification, and corrective action plans; proposal/modification submittals;

the contractor’s history of reasonable and cooperative behavior; and customer satisfaction.

D. Relevant performance includes performance of efforts involving building construction and renovation in an occupied building, curtain wall systems, and a broad range of renovation projects to include performance or management of renovation or modernization that is similar or greater in scope, magnitude and complexity than the effort described in this solicitation. The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to allow the government to assess the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements based on the offeror’s demonstrated past performance. The assessment process will result in an overall performance confidence assessment of Substantial Confidence, Satisfactory Confidence, Limited Confidence, No Confidence, or Unknown Confidence as defined in DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 5. Past performance regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement will be rated as highly as past performance information for the principal offeror. Offerors with no recent/relevant performance history or if the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned shall receive the rating "Unknown Confidence," meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably (neutral).

E. In evaluating past performance, the Government reserves the right to give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in this RFP. For each effort evaluated, a relevancy determination of the offeror's present and past performance, including joint ventures, subcontractors and/or teaming partners, will be made. 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. Relevancy will be assessed for contracts that are most similar to the effort, or portion of the effort, for which that contractor is being proposed, and may contribute to an overall higher relevancy determination for the offeror. The Government is not bound by the offeror's opinion of relevancy. The definitions in DoD Source Selection Procedures Table 4 apply:

Table 4. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition

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.

TABLE 5. PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENTS

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.

Limited Confidence

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

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral)

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.

Somewhat Relevant

Present/past performance involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

F. Recent past performance is defined as past performance on contracts within the last three years from the issue date of this solicitation. Past performance for contracts exceeding the timeframe for this definition of recency will be excluded from evaluation.

G. If the lowest priced evaluated technically acceptable offer is judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” performance confidence assessment, that offer represents the best value for the government and the evaluation process stops at this point. Award shall be made to that offeror without further consideration of any other offers.

H. If the lowest priced offeror is not judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” performance confidence assessment, the next lowest priced offeror will be evaluated and the process will continue (in order by price) until an offeror is judged to have a “Substantial Confidence” performance assessment or until all offerors are evaluated. The Source Selection Authority shall then make an integrated assessment best value award decision.

I. Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information and in the format specified in Section L. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (for example, the relevance of past performance information) or respond to adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Communication 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.

J. 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. The government reserves the right to award one or no contract at all, depending on the quality of proposals submitted. Failure to propose for any item in the Schedule B may cause the offeror’s proposal to be rejected as non-responsive.

(End of Summary of Changes)