SF30.pdf

Offers 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 or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication 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 letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, 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)

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.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

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

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

FA8601

The purpose of this amendment is to post second Questions/Answers document and to make the following changes:

1. The Service Summary Tables have been changed to have performance objectives coincide with appropriate CLINs.(PWS)

2. Follow-Me signs were added to GFE (Maintenance) listing in Appendix 2-E of the PWS.

3. The Golf Cart was removed from the GFE (Maintenance) listing in Appendix 2-E of the PWS.

4. CLINs 0011,1011,2011,3011,4011 unit of issue have been changed to Lot with a quantity of 1.

5. Changes were made to Section M Addendum 2 related to unbalanced pricing.

Contacts: Gene Wollet, gene.wollet@us.af.mil, 937-522-4604 / Toxie Courtney, toxie.courtney.1@us.af.mil, 937-522-4567

AFLCMC/PZIB-B-BASE SUPPORT

POC: Gene G. Wollet

1940 ALLBROOK DRIVE, ROOM 109

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OH 45433-5344

See Item 6

FA860119R0002

1 8

12/07/2018

10/26/2018

FA860119R0002

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

Global Changes

CLINs 0011, 1011,2011,3011,4011

The pricing detail quantity 1.00 has been added. The unit of issue has changed from Months to Lot.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Table of Contents has changed from:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 1 Performance Work 191 23-NOV-2018

Statement (PWS)

Attachment 2 Wage Determination 11 25-JUL-2018

Attachment 3 2015-4731, Rev 6 DD 254 DOD Contract 4 24-AUG-2018

Security Classification

Specification

Attachment 4 RESERVED 0 05-NOV-2018

Attachment 5 Wage Determination 34 09-AUG-2018

CBA-2018-11529, Rev 1

Attachment 6 Wage Determination 34 09-AUG-2018

CBA-2018-11530, Rev 1

Attachment 7 Pricing Matrix 1 20-NOV-2018

Attachment 8 Essential Contractor 1 28-SEP-2018

Services Information to:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment 1 Performance Work 192 7-DEC-2018

Statement (PWS)

Attachment 2 Wage Determination 11 25-JUL-2018

FA860119R0002

Attachment 3 2015-4731, Rev 6 DD 254 DOD Contract 4 24-AUG-2018

Security Classification

Specification

Attachment 4 RESERVED 0 05-NOV-2018

Attachment 5 Wage Determination 34 09-AUG-2018

CBA-2018-11529, Rev 1

Attachment 6 Wage Determination 34 09-AUG-2018

CBA-2018-11530, Rev 1

Attachment 7 Pricing Matrix 1 20-NOV-2018

Attachment 8 Essential Contractor 1 28-SEP-2018

Services Information

ADDENDUM 2 ADDENDUM 2

EVALUATION FACTORS

1. The Government will use procedures described in FAR 12.602, Streamlined Evaluation of Offers, as well as FAR 15.300 and DFARS 215.300, Source Selection, to evaluate offers submitted in response to the solicitation. The Government will award to the responsible offeror with the lowest total evaluated price (TEP) among those that are found technically acceptable.

The Government reserves the right to award no contract at all depending upon the quality of offers received and whether proposed prices are determined to be fair and reasonable. The factors that will be used to evaluate proposals are as follows and as expounded below: Technical Acceptability and Price.

(a) The evaluation does not permit tradeoffs between price and non-price factors. The contract will be awarded to the offeror:

(i) That is deemed responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9.1, Responsible Prospective Contractors, as supplemented;

(ii) That has submitted a proposal that conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by the Instructions to Offerors (ITO) of this solicitation);

(iii) Receives a rating of “Acceptable” on the Technical Acceptability evaluation factor;

AND

(iv) That has been determined, based on the evaluation factors and sub-factors, to represent the proposal with the lowest TEP, provided that the TEP is not significantly unbalanced and does not contain otherwise unbalanced pricing that poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and is determined to be fair and reasonable. While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective. Therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

(b) Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as factors or sub-factors. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the offeror being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to determine any such exceptions unacceptable and the proposal, therefore, ineligible for award.

(c) The Government will initiate concurrent Technical Acceptability evaluations on all proposals. Throughout the evaluation of Technical Acceptability, the Government will consider "correction potential" of a proposal, including whether any proposal deficiencies may be rectified. The judgment of such "correction potential" is within the sole discretion of the Government. If an aspect of an offeror's proposal does not meet the Government's technical requirements in full and is not considered correctable, the offeror may be eliminated from the competition.

(d) During the evaluation period for Technical Acceptability, if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision. If the offeror’s proposal has been evaluated as ‘Acceptable’ at the time discussions are closed, any changes or exceptions in the FPR are subject to

FA860119R0002

Addendum 2 Changed to:

evaluation and may introduce risk that the offeror’s proposal be determined ‘Unacceptable’ and ineligible for award.

(e) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the timeframe for acceptance specified in the proposal, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the proposal's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer regardless if there are negotiations after that offer’s receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

EVALUATION FACTORS

FACTOR I - Technical Acceptability: The Government’s technical evaluation team shall evaluate the technical proposals on a pass/fail basis, assigning one of the ratings described in the table below for each sub-factor. Any sub-factor evaluated as ‘Unacceptable’ will render the entire proposal unacceptable and, therefore, ineligible for award. Only those proposals determined to be technically acceptable, either initially or as a result of discussions, will be considered for award. However, offerors are cautioned that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions.

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

Proposals shall be evaluated against the following technical sub-factors:

Sub-factor 1: Transition Planning

Description: This sub-factor will assess the offeror’s Transition Plan, to include staffing, management, equipment, supplies, and security considerations.

FA860119R0002

Measure of Merit: This sub-factor is met when the offeror’s proposed Transition Plan demonstrates a sound approach for transitioning the services from the incumbent contractor, while maintaining continuity of all contracted services throughout the Transition Period.

Sub-factor 2: Staffing Approach Description: This sub-factor will assess the offeror’s overall approach to manning each functional area of the PWS.

Measure of Merit: This sub-factor is met when:

a) The offeror’s organizational chart reflects a sound manning approach to properly staff, manage, and maintain all the PWS requirements, and the organization chart demonstrates a complete understanding of each functional area of the PWS.

b) The narrative demonstrates a complete understanding of the positions, training qualifications, and contractor provided equipment, supplies, materials, etc., necessary to execute each functional area of the PWS.

Sub-factor 3: Continuation of Essential Contractor Services

Description: This sub-factor will evaluate the offeror’s proposed plan to meet the Continuation of Essential Contractor Services during periods of crisis.

Measure of Merit: This sub-factor is met when the offeror’s proposed Continuation of Essential Contractor Services Plan demonstrates a sound approach for performing those services identified as essential contractor services during crisis/contingency situations.

Sub-factor 4: Prior Experience

Description: This factor will evaluate whether an offeror and proposed subcontractors, if applicable, have current or recent prior experience in performing services that are comparable in scope to the services described in the

PWS.

Measure of Merit: This factor is met when:

a) Services are currently being performed by the offeror as a prime contractor or a subcontractor on at least one Government contract, or have been performed

FA860119R0002

by the offeror as a prime contractor or a subcontractor on at least one Government contract within five years of the issue date of the solicitation;

or if the offeror is proposing a subcontractor/partnership agreement, services are currently being performed by some combination of the offeror and subcontractor(s) as prime contractors or subcontractors on at least one Government contract, or have been performed by some combination of the offeror and subcontractor(s) as prime contractors or subcontractors on at least one Government contract within five years of the issue date of the solicitation;

and

b) Services performed are/were comparable to all major functional areas as described in the PWS attached to this solicitation.

FACTOR II - Price: Price proposals will be evaluated for (1) completeness, (2) unbalanced pricing, (3) reasonableness, and (4) Total Evaluated Price (TEP). Offerors whose price is determined to be incomplete, significantly unbalanced or contains otherwise unbalanced pricing that poses an unacceptable risk to the Government, or unreasonable will not be considered for award.

Completeness: The Government will review the pricing submissions for completeness and compliance with:

a) FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items; and

b) Addendum 1 - Additional Instructions to Offerors.

Unbalanced Pricing: The Government will analyze each proposal to determine whether it is unbalanced with respect to prices proposed on different Contract Line Items Numbers (CLINs) for the same or similar services and/or supplies in the same or similar quantities and with respect to option pricing. An offer may be rejected if the Contracting Officer (CO) determines that the prices are significantly unbalanced or that otherwise unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

Reasonableness: The offeror’s Price proposal will be evaluated using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404, Proposal Analysis, in order to determine if it is reasonable.

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 price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404-1(b), Price analysis for commercial and non-commercial items. For additional information, reference FAR 31.201-3, Determining Reasonableness.

Total Evaluated Price (TEP): The Government will add the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement to arrive at the TEP. The TEP will be calculated as follows:

FA860119R0002

a) The sum of the extended prices (unit quantity multiplied by unit price) for CLINs 0001 through 4012 for the Base period and option periods I through IV; and

b) To account for the maximum six (6) month extension possible under the clause at FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, the Government will use the sum of the proposed prices of the final option period (CLINs 4001 through 4012), prorate it to a six (6) month value, and add that amount to the sum of all CLINs (Base performance period and option periods I through IV). Please note that this calculation is used for evaluation purposes only. After award, the Government reserves the right to exercise the Option to Extend Services at any time allowed by 52.217-8, and at the price allowed by 52.217-8.

The resulting amount will be the TEP. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise any option(s).

The table below illustrates the calculation of a proposal’s TEP using the methodology described above. This is for illustrative purposes only. Prices reflected in the table are notional and in no way reflect the actual value of the requirement or an actual evaluation of proposed prices submitted in response to this, or any other, solicitation for the same or similar requirements.

Performance Period (POP) POP Length CLINs Proposed Price

Base 12 Months 0001-0011 $ 1,000,000.00

Option I 12 Months 1001-1011 $ 1,000,020.00

Option II 12 Months 2001-2011 $ 1,000,030.00

Option III 12 Months 3001-3011 $ 1,000,040.00

Option IV 12 Months 4001-4011 $ 1,000,050.00

Total Proposed Price for Base Period and Option I through IV $ 5,000,140.00

Evaluated Value - Six (6) Month Option to Extend Service IAW FAR 52.217-8 $ 500,025.00

Total Evaluated Price (TEP) $ 5,500,165.00

FA860119R0002