Amend 3 Caprine RFP.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 purposes of this amendment are to correct the quantity on subCLIN 3001AB and revise the Phase II Site Survey of FAR 52.212-2 (Evaluation of Commercial Items)

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 5

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 02-Jul-2020

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 H9223920R0002

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

04-Jun-2020

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

02-Jul-2020

CODE

HQ US ARMY SPECIAL OPERATIONS CMD, DCSC

ATTN: AOCO (CONTRACTING)

BLDG E-2929

DESERT STORM DRIVE

FORT BRAGG NC 28310

H92239 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

H9223920R0002

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

SUBCLIN 3001AB

The pricing detail quantity has decreased by 4,660.00 from 4,690.00 to 30.00.

DELIVERIES AND PERFORMANCE

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 3001AB has been changed from:

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

POP 15-SEP-2023 TO

14-SEP-2024

N/A 1/160TH SOAR

BLDG 8013 198 NIGHT STALKER WAY

HUNTER ARMY AIRFIELD GA 31409

FOB: Destination

W583FW

To:

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

POP 15-SEP-2023 TO

14-SEP-2024

N/A 1/160TH SOAR

BLDG 8013 198 NIGHT STALKER WAY

HUNTER ARMY AIRFIELD GA 31409

FOB: Destination

W583FW

The following have been modified:

52.212-2

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

(a) Evaluations will be conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 12.6, Streamlined Procedures for Evaluation and Solicitation for Commercial Items, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), and the Special Operations Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (SOFARS). 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. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Factor 1: Technical Capability Factor 2: Past Performance Factor 3: Price

An award will be made on a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable basis. The Government will evaluate the offerors’ technical offer to determine whether it satisfies the minimum for successful contract performance. In order to be considered for award, an offer must be assessed an “acceptable” rating in every non-priced factor.

The Government will evaluate proposed prices for price reasonableness in accordance with FAR 15.404. Proposed prices evaluated as unreasonable may be grounds for eliminating an offer from competition.

The Government intends to evaluate offers and award one (1) contract without discussions with offerors. However, the Government reserves the right to make clarifications, request revised offers, or hold discussions, if later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary. The Government may reject any or all offers, if such actions are in the public interest and/or waive informalities and minor irregularities in the submitted offers.

FACTOR 1: Technical Capability. Technical Capabilities will be evaluated in the following two (2) phases. Only those offerors that receive an "acceptable" rating during Phase I will proceed and be evaluated in Phase II.

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method.

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

The Government will evaluate and assess the offeror’s ability to satisfy the Government’s requirements in the SOW.

Failure to demonstrate capability, provide requested documentation, or meet regulatory compliance will result in an unacceptable rating. The following factors will be evaluated as follows:

EVALUATION FACTORS

Technical Capability:

Phase I – Written Proposal

Phase II – Site Survey

Factor 1

Acceptable/Unacceptable

Past Performance Factor 2 Acceptable/Unacceptable

Price

Factor 3

Total Price (All Years and FAR 52.217-8)

Phase I: Written Proposal

1) Health Program. Proposals will be evaluated to determine whether the narrative clearly demonstrates that the offeror’s health program meets the SOW’s minimum requirements. The source of supply, vaccination program, veterinarian support, and capability to provide fermented haylage must all clearly meet the minimum requirements as specified in the SOW. For offerors that will obtain their caprines from sources of supply other than their own farms, the provided source of supply will be contacted to confirm its ability to provide the offeror with caprines; if the source of supply responds that they are not able to supply the offeror with caprines, then the offeror will be evaluated as UNACCEPTABLE for this subfactor.

Additionally, the animal health and enrichment program and any low-stress animal handling equipment must clearly meet the minimum requirements of the SOW.

2) Facilities. Proposals will be evaluated to determine whether the narrative demonstrates that their facility is managed and compliant with Title 9 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 3, subpart F, paragraphs 3.125 through 3.142, and all applicable USDA regulations as specified in the SOW. Additionally, proposals will be evaluated to determine whether the offerors facilities meet or exceed standards for size, usage and ventilation. The diagrams, written descriptions and photos of all animal (including quarantine) facilities will be evaluated to determine whether they are capable of housing a minimum of 500 animals and comply with quarantine requirements.

3) USDA License. In order for an offeror’s proposal to be evaluated as acceptable, the offeror must provide a copy of either their USDA Class A or Class B license. All licenses must be current and in good standing.

Any license that is expired, suspended or encumbered in any way, will be evaluated as unacceptable and will no longer be considered for award. The USDA will be contacted to confirm the status of the license provided.

PHASE II: Site Survey

1) Upon completion of Phase I evaluations, the Government will conduct a site survey of the apparent successful offeror’s facility. each acceptable offeror’s facility. To be considered for Phase II evaluations, the offeror's proposal must receive an ACCEPTABLE rating or higher in each of the three Phase I subfactors. Projected dates for site surveys are mid to late July 2020. The Government will not be able to accommodate requests for alternate dates.

2) All Phase I criteria will be confirmed during the site survey. The results of the site survey must clearly demonstrate that the offeror’s statements regarding all Phase I criteria are in accordance with the solicitation and all cited USDA regulations. No new information will be provided during the site survey.

FACTOR 2: Past Performance. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s past performance information and assign a past performance rating of acceptable or unacceptable as described below:

Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method.

To be considered acceptable, based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government would have to have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. To be considered unacceptable, based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government would have to have no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort. The offeror’s past performance information will be evaluated based on the following:

(a) The Government reserves the right to obtain and evaluate past performance information from any source it deems appropriate. The Past Performance evaluation will assess the relative risks associated with an offeror’s likelihood of success in performing the solicitation’s requirements as indicated by that offeror’s record of past performance experience. The purpose of the past performance evaluation is to allow the Government to determine/assess how the offeror will perform the effort described in the solicitation and SOW, based on the offerors demonstrated recent, relevant, and quality of performance.

(b) Recency Assessment. An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be further evaluated.

(c) Relevancy Assessment. To be relevant, the effort must be of similar in nature of work, size, magnitude, complexity, and scope. A relevancy determination of the offeror’s past performance will be made. The Government reserves the right to give greater consideration to information on those contracts deemed most relevant to the effort described in this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be further evaluated.

Relevancy Criteria

Adjectival 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 does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Relevant (R)

Present/Past Performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant (NR)

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

(d) In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror will be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of cceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating will be considered “acceptable.”

FACTOR 3: Price. Price will be evaluated in order to determine that it is fair and reasonable utilizing the price analysis techniques found at FAR 15.404(b). Price proposal evaluations will consider the basic price and all option year prices (including FAR 52.217-8 for the maximum potential extension period of 6 months) for a total overall evaluated Price. The Government will roll-up CLIN/SubCLIN prices into an overall total price for the overall evaluated price. Price will not receive a color rating or score. The Government price team will evaluate Offeror’s price submission based on the following:

Reasonableness: Reasonableness will be determined by comparing the Offeror’s total price proposed to the total price proposed by the other Offerors. Comparisons will focus on the price of base period and all ordering periods combined. Additionally, total proposed prices may be compared to the Independent Government Estimate (IGE) to determine the reasonableness of price. A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business.

Balance: The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced, as defined under FAR 15.404-1 (g).

Options. As part of price evaluation, the Government will evaluate its option to extend services (see FAR Clause 52.217-8) by adding six (6) months of the offeror’s final ordering period price to the offeror’s total price.

Offerors shall not submit a price for the potential six month extension of services period. The Government may choose to exercise the Option to Extend the Term of the Contract at the end of any performance period, utilizing the rates of that performance period. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(End of provision)

(End of Summary of Changes)