CO Clarification Statement and Extension.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

OKLAHOMA CITY AIR LOGISTICS COMPLEX (OC-ALC)

TINKER AIR FORCE BASE OKLAHOMA

24 February 2022

MEMORANDUM FOR SOLICITATION FA8125-22-Q-0031

FROM: SHERIDAN ROBISON, AFSC/PZIMA

SUBJECT: Contracting Officer’s Clarification Statement and Extension for Solicitation FA8125- 22-Q-0031263

1. This procurement is utilizing Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) PART 13, Simplified

Acquisition Procedures. In accordance with (IAW) FAR 13.104:

“The contracting officer must promote competition to the maximum extent practicable to obtain supplies and services from a source whose offer is most advantageous to the Government considering the administrative cost of the purchase.”

2. In addition, IAW FAR 13.106-3(a):

“Basis for award. Before making award, the contracting officer must determine the price is fair and reasonable (1) Whenever possible, base the price reasonableness on competitive quotations and offers.”

This procurement is a competitive, small business set-aside for brand name 3M 425 Aluminum tape. The fully executed justification and approval for the brand name specification was posted on 8 February 2022 along with the solicitation for industry.

The purpose of this letter is to clarify that the Government does not dictate prices from subcontractors or vendors with any procurement and will not dictate whether an individual vendor is allowed to receive special pricing. Pricing made available to vendors is between the vendor and the manufacturer, and the Government has no influence on the pricing a manufacturer offers its’ authorized distributors. For this specific procurement, the pricing is dictated between 3M representatives and its’ authorized distributors. If you have questions regarding the pricing you have received and the validity of your quote, you will need to contact your local 3M representative.

3. Per Solicitation FA8125-22-Q-0031, Addendum 52.212-2 –Evaluation of Commercial items, 2.0 states the following:

“2.0 Evaluation Factor:

2.1. Factor 1 – Price

Price quotations will be evaluated as follows:

2.1.1 Completeness

Quotations will be reviewed for completeness. Incomplete quotes will be considered ineligible for award.

2.1.2 Price Reasonableness

The proposed prices will be evaluated for reasonableness. Reasonableness must represent a price to the Government 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 price analysis techniques as described in FAR 13.106-3(a)(2).

2.1.3 Price Realism

The Government intends to determine price realism based on adequate price competition.

In the event the Government cannot determine price realism based on adequate price competition, the Government reserves the right to conduct a more detailed price realism evaluation using one or more of the price analysis techniques described in FAR 13.106- 3(a)(2). The Government may also use other evaluation techniques, as needed. To be realistic, the proposed price must demonstrate an adequate understanding of the requirement. Quoted prices that are determined to be unrealistically low due to an inadequate understanding of the requirement will make the quotation ineligible for award.

2.1.4 Unbalanced Pricing

Vendors’ quotations will be reviewed for unbalanced pricing. The Government will evaluate any supporting information provided by the vendor explaining variances that appear unbalanced. Evaluated quotes that are determined to be unbalanced may be deemed ineligible for award by the Contracting Officer if a determination is made that lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total price, the price of one or more line items (including sub line items) is significantly over or understated as demonstrated by application of price analysis techniques, such that:

a) There is reasonable doubt the quote would result in the lowest overall cost to the

Government, even though it is the lowest priced quote; or

b) The quote is so grossly unbalanced; its acceptance would be tantamount to allowing an advanced payment.

2.1.5 Total Evaluated Price (TEP)

The TEP will be calculated as the sum of the total proposed prices for all separately priced line items (including sub line items). The total proposed price for each separately priced line item shall be calculated as the proposed unit price multiplied by the corresponding quantity.

The total proposed price for all options will be added to the total proposed price for the basic requirement as a part of the TEP calculation.

The TEP will be used for evaluation purposes only. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options.

The TEP will be calculated as the sum of the vendor’s proposed prices for the base period and all option periods. “

4. The Government is requiring clarifications from each vendor that their pricing is current, accurate, and complete. As per 2.1.1 of Addendum to 52.212-2, if you fail to have all option years priced, you will not be considered eligible for award. Please provide an updated quote and/or confirmation of your current quote as being current, accurate, and complete by 28 February 2022 at 12:00 PM CST to:

Sheridan Robison Contracting Officer sheridan.robison@us.af.mil

And

Shanita Manuel Contract Specialist shanita.manuel@us.af.mil.

Additionally, please email any questions regarding this clarification to the above mentioned contracting personnel.

Sheridan Robison Contracting Officer

AFSC/PZIMA

Sheridan.robison@us.af.mil mailto:sheridan.robison@us.af.mil mailto:shanita.manuel@us.af.mil