Amend 1_H9225726RE010 SF 30.pdf

R

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.

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 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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)

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.)

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

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

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

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The reason for this amendment is to: Block 14 (Description of Amendment/Modification):

1. Extend the solicitation close date to 5 June 2026 at 12PM EST.

2. Amend Section L: Instructions to Offerors Factor III - Price (Volume IV).

3. Amend Section M: Evaluation Factors for Award Factor III - Price (Volume IV).

4. Add "Amend 1_QnA Responses_20May2026" to SAM.gov Attachments section.

5. Add updated DD254 to SAM.gov Attachments section.

Solicitation/Contract Form

The following modifications were made:

Information From To Response Due Date 29 May 2026 05 Jun 2026

Instructions, Conditions, & Notices to Offerors or Quoters

Header Miscellaneous Text (Modified):

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

(1) All questions concerning this procurement, either technical or contractual must be submitted in writing, via email, to the Contracting Office. The deadline for Responses will be provided via Solicitation/submittal of questions regarding this solicitation is 12:00 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST) on 15 May 2026.

Request for Proposal (RFP) amendment. No direct exchanges between the technical representative and a prospective Offeror shall be conducted unless it is deemed necessary by the Contracting Officer. Questions shall be submitted via email to: Betty Gonzalez (beatriz.gonzalez.civ@socom.mil) and Samuel Williams (samuel.williams1@socom.mil) referencing the RFP number and company full name in email subject line section.

(2) Proposals received after this timeframe shall not be Proposals must be received no later than 12:00 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST) on 5 June 2026.

considered for award. The Government will award the contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer is conforming to the solicitation and will be the most advantageous to the Government. The prospective offeror must be registered with the System for Award Management (SAM) website at http:// www.SAM.gov to be considered for award. The offeror agrees to hold the prices in its proposal firm for 180 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of proposals. All proposals must be submitted via email, no other form of submission will be accepted. Proposals shall be emailed to: Betty Gonzalez (beatriz.gonzalez.civ@socom.mil) and Samuel Williams (samuel.williams1@socom.mil) referencing the RFP number and company full name in email subject line section.

Offerors must provide the following information in their proposal: Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code, Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) Number, and Tax

Identification Number (TIN).

The Government office designated for receipt of the proposal is the email inbox of the addressees indicated above. Notwithstanding the provisions at FAR 52.212-1(c), delivery is not accomplished until the addressee can open the email; delivery to a server or an email inbox on a server is not considered delivery to the designated Government office and the proposal is not under the Government's control until the addressee can open the email. The email shall not be considered delivered unless the entire content of the email and all attachments can be read by the addressees indicated above. Receipt of an electronic acknowledgment from one or both of the addressees establishes that a record was received but does not establish that the content sent corresponds to the content received. Email attachments are limited to no more than 10 MB. Vendors are specifically warned that email may be subjected to spam filters or attachment stripping. Recommend Vendors confirm receipt of emailed proposals by contacting the MARFORSOC Contracting Specialist (Betty Gonzalez at beatriz.gonzalez.civ@socom.mil) and the MARFORSOC Contracting Officer Samuel Williams (Samuel Williams at samuel.williams1@socom.mil) prior to the closing date.

All transmissions must clearly state the solicitation number and the name of the Contracting Specialist and Contracting Officer on the first page to ensure proper receipt.

(3) Comprehensive responses to the requirements of this RFP are required to enable the Government to evaluate the Offeror's understanding of capability and approaches to accomplish the stated requirements. Proposals shall be submitted per the instructions herein, and non-conformance with the specified required content may be cause for rejection of the proposal. The proposal shall provide comprehensive responses to the areas provided for in this section. The proposal shall be a complete response to Attachment 1 -Statement of Work and the requirements of this RFP, taking into consideration required quantities and delivery schedules specified in this solicitation. The successful Offeror will be selected based on an evaluation of proposals as outlined in FAR 52.212-2, incorporated below.

(4) Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale in their proposal.

Proposal Format and Content

Electronic proposals shall contain separate files for each of the (4) volumes. Individual emails shall not exceed 10 MB. The proposal page format will be 8 1/2" x 11" except for foldouts used for charts, tables, or diagrams, which may not exceed 11" x 17". A page is defined as one face of a sheet of paper containing information.

Type shall not be less than 10 pitch. Margins shall be 1" all-around for all pages. Elaborate formats or color presentations are not desired or required. Cover sheets, glossaries, and Table of Contents (TOCs) are not required. If included, they will not count towards page count limits. Failure to provide all required documents may render the proposal unacceptable

Proposal submission requirements are the following:

The evaluation will consist of evaluating the Qualifying Criteria (Volume I) and the three Factors (Volumes II, III and IV), as outlined below. The Government intends to award a single award as a result of this solicitation.

H9225726RE0100001

Proposals shall not contain classified information.

All listed qualifying criteria submissions will be evaluated on a pass or fail basis. The qualifying criteria shall be submitted in Qualifying Criteria (Volume I):

accordance with the instructions contained in this solicitation.

Offerors shall submit their proposal in 4 separate volumes: Volume 1 - Qualifying Criteria, Volume 2 - Technical, Volume 3 - Past Performance, and Volume 4 - Price.

Fill out and include the information below in your Qualifying Criteria volume:

Company:

Address 1:

Address 2:

City/State/Zip Code:

CAGE Code:

UEI:

POC:

Telephone:

E-mail:

Quote Validity Period:

Documentation of current Top Secret (TS) Facility Security Clearance (Exempt from page count) Documentation of current Supplier Performance Risk System Score (SPRS) (Exempt from page count) Documentation of Level 2 (Self) Cybersecurity maturity Model Certification (CMMC) (Exempt from page count)

- Complete business address of the Offeror, the corporate name to be used on any resultant contract, and the remittance address if different from that above. If this name does not identify a "parent company" or sponsoring "corporation" name, also provide such identity, as appropriate.

- Fill-In Clauses: Provide all fill-ins or certifications required by the solicitation, for inclusion in any resulting contract.

The Offeror must include a statement that it either (a) agrees to the terms and conditions of this solicitation (which consists of the entire - Terms and Conditions:

RFP, including all documents, exhibits, and other attachments that are incorporated therein by reference and made a part thereof) and any solicitation amendments; or (b) takes exceptions to any terms or conditions of the solicitation, and clearly identifies those exceptions. Exceptions to any of the terms and conditions of this RFP may be considered by the Government to be unacceptable.

Required minimum is 180-days.- Proposal validity period:

- The Offeror shall limit the Qualifying Volume to 3 pages.

Failure to pass all Qualifying Criteria as outlined above may result in the proposal being rated Unacceptable. If the Qualifying Criteria is rated Unacceptable, no further evaluation will be conducted.

This volume shall be prepared in accordance with (IAW) the evaluation criteria below, "ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2 Factor I - Technical (Volume II):

EVALUATION-COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES (NOV 2021)". Proposals shall address the Offeror's technical capabilities to accomplish the work by providing specific narrative details and/or description of actual methods, processes and procedures for providing the services described in "Attachment 1 - Statement of Work (SOW)". General statements that the Offeror understands the requirement and shall comply with the requirements of the RFP will be considered inadequate. Offerors are cautioned not to rephrase or restate the Government's requirements in the proposal but furnish convincing narratives describing "how" they intend to meet these requirements. The Offeror shall limit the Technical Volume to 10 pages.

Subfactor I: Resumes and Qualifications Offerors shall provide resumes for all proposed personnel. Mandatory Requirement: Each resume must be accompanied by a Cross-Reference Matrix. This matrix shall explicitly map each minimum qualification and skill requirement outlined in SOW Section 5.0 (e.g., years of experience, specific operational backgrounds, required systems familiarity) to the exact location (page number and paragraph) within the resume where that qualification is demonstrated.

Subfactor II: Staffing Approach Offerors shall provide a detailed Staffing Approach describing processes to recruit, hire, on-board, and retain highly qualified personnel required by the SOW.

Offerors are highly encouraged to substantiate their approach with concrete evidence of recruitment capabilities. This evidence may include, but is not limited to:

- Signed Letters of Intent (LOIs) from fully qualified personnel (including incumbent capture efforts).

- Documented evidence of an active, vetted candidate pipeline that meets the niche skill sets required in the SOW.

- Historical retention metrics from recent contracts of similar scope and complexity.

Subfactor III: Transition Approach Offerors shall submit a detailed Incumbent Capture and Knowledge Transfer Plan to ensure full operational capability on day one. Recognizing that direct "left seat/ right seat" or "side-by-side" work with incumbents is strictly prohibited, this plan must outline:

- The offeror's strategy and timeline for recruiting incumbent personnel prior to contract award.

- Structured methods for knowledge transfer and continuity of operations that comply with the "no side-by-side" restriction (e.g., development of continuity books/ Standard Operating Procedures, post-award Q&A sessions, and systematic review of historical deliverables and government-provided documentation).

Factor II - Past Performance (Volume III):

The Past Performance volume shall not exceed five (5) pages.

Offerors shall submit at least three (3), but no more than five (5), recent and relevant contracts or agreements.

Recent is defined as efforts performed (either completed or ongoing) within the past five (5) years from the date of solicitation issuance.

Relevant is defined as efforts similar in size, scope, and magnitude to the requirements identified in the Statement of Work (SOW).

For each submitted contract/agreement, provide the following:

- Contract/Agreement Number

- Period of Performance

- Total Contract/Task Order Dollar Value (to demonstrate magnitude)

- Reference Name, Telephone Number, and Email Address

- A brief narrative explicitly describing how the prior work is relevant to the specific tasks and scope of this SOW.

The Government will accept past performance from prime contracts, subcontracts, teaming agreements, and joint ventures. NOTE: If submitting past performance as a subcontractor, the Government may have difficulty obtaining qualitative information due to a lack of privity. To mitigate this, offerors are highly encouraged to provide accurate contact information for both the Prime Contractor and the ultimate Government customer/Point of Contact.

Factor III - Price (Volume IV):

1. General Instructions & Pricing Template The Offeror must complete the attached Pricing Template in accordance with the instructions provided within the file. The Offeror is responsible for the mathematical integrity of their submission. If a formula error or inconsistency is identified within the provided template or the Offeror's internal calculations, the Offeror is authorized and encouraged to make the necessary changes to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the proposed pricing.

2. Price Volume Narrative & Supporting Documentation The Offeror shall provide a price volume narrative that explains how all rates were calculated. This must include the submission of a price list that delineates hourly costs per laborer (e.g., base rate, fringe, overhead, G&A, and profit/fee). Additionally, the Offeror shall include documentation that supports the proposed pricing, which may include but is not limited to published pricing lists, historical invoices, etc. The Price (Volume IV) narrative has no page limit.

3. Total Compensation Plan (TCP) In accordance with FAR provision 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees, the Prime Contractor and all proposed Subcontractors providing professional services must submit a Total Compensation Plan detailing proposed salaries and fringe benefits. The submission must clearly demonstrate that the proposed compensation is adequate to obtain and keep suitably qualified professional personnel required for mission performance.

Subcontractors: Must submit a TCP equivalent in scope to the Prime Contractor. This may be included in the Prime's volume. If a subcontractor considers their TCP data proprietary, they shall submit an unsanitized TCP directly to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist via email prior to the solicitation closing date and time.

4. SOFARS 5652.215-9010 Cost and Pricing Data Not Required (1998) It is anticipated that adequate price competition will be available to determine price reasonableness. In the event that price reasonableness cannot be determined based on adequate competition, the Contracting Officer may require the submittal of data other than certified cost or pricing data in accordance with FAR 15.403-3.

(End of provision)

Evaluation Factors for Award

Header Miscellaneous Text (Modified):

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION-COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES (NOV 2021)

(a) 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: Qualifying Criteria (Volume I), Technical (Volume II), Past Performance (Volume III), and Price (Volume IV). Qualifying Criteria will be evaluated first on a Pass/Fail basis. If the proposal does not pass, no further evaluation will be conducted, and the proposal will not be considered for award. Factor I - Technical will be evaluated next. If the proposal is rated Unacceptable/Red, Past Performance and Price will not be evaluated, and the proposal will not be considered for award.

(b) The Government intends to award a single, Firm Fixed Price type contract to the responsible vendor whose overall proposal represents the after Best Value evaluation in accordance with (IAW) the factors in the solicitation. To arrive at a selection decision, the Contracting Officer will perform an integrated assessment using the evaluation factors described in this solicitation. This may result in awards being made to the higher rated, potentially higher priced proposal(s) where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors. This is a competitive, best value trade-off selection that will be conducted IAW with FAR parts 15 and 12, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) and Special Operations Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (SOFARS). The following factors will be used to evaluate proposals and are in descending order of importance; Technical, Past Performance and Price. The order of importance for the evaluation factors is 1) Technical, 2) Past Performance, and 3) Price. When combined, Technical and Past Performance are more important than price.

(c) The Government intends to award without discussions if the evaluation shows that it is in the Government's best interest. However, if deemed necessary, the Government may (but is not obligated to) make a competitive range determination to hold discussions with the offerors IAW FAR 15.306. If made, the determination will be based on an initial evaluation of the Factors listed below. The competitive range will include only those proposals most highly rated after initial evaluation.

(d) Evaluation Criteria:

Factor I - Technical Acceptability (Volume II): The offeror's approach to performing contract requirements and its capability to successfully perform the contract in accordance with the Statement of Work (SOW). Evaluation of this factor will focus on the significant strengths, strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies of the proposal.

Subfactor I: Resumes and Qualifications

The Government will evaluate the offeror's proposed resumes against the mandatory skills and qualifications listed in SOW Section 5.0. The Government will utilize the offeror-provided Cross-Reference Matrix to verify compliance. The burden of proof rests with the offeror; failure to clearly and explicitly demonstrate that a proposed candidate meets all minimum SOW qualifications will result in a deficiency and may render the proposal unawardable.

Subfactor II: Staffing Approach The Government will evaluate the realism and effectiveness of the offeror's methodology to recruit, hire, and retain the highly specialized personnel required for this effort. The Government will favorably evaluate (e.g., assess as a Strength or Significant Strength) proposals that reduce performance risk by providing concrete, verifiable evidence of recruitment readiness. Such evidence includes signed Letters of Intent (LOIs) from qualified candidates, demonstrated access to active/vetted niche talent pipelines, and proven high retention rates on comparable contracts.

Subfactor III: Transition Approach The Government will evaluate the realism, comprehensiveness, and compliance of the offeror's Incumbent Capture and Knowledge Transfer Plan. The evaluation will assess how effectively the offeror mitigates transition risk and ensures uninterrupted mission support on day one. Proposals that present realistic, well-defined strategies for incumbent capture and structured knowledge management--while strictly adhering to the prohibition on "side-by-side" transition activities--will be evaluated favorably and associated with a lower risk of unsuccessful performance.

Technical Ratings - The following ratings will be applied to Factor 1 during evaluations. These ratings will also be assigned as an overall evaluated rating of the proposal.

Combined Color / Risk Ratings

Blue (Outstanding) - Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements, contains multiple strengths and / or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple (Good) - Proposal demonstrates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

- Proposal demonstrates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than Green (Acceptable) moderate.

- Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and / or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.Yellow (Marginal)

- Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is un-awardable, and / or risk of Red (Unacceptable) performance is unacceptably high.

When conducting evaluations of Factor 1, the definitions below will be utilized:

- An aspect of an Offeror's proposal with appreciable merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the considerable Significant Strength advantage of the Government during contract performance.

- An aspect of an offeror's proposal with merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the advantage of the Government during Strength contract performance.

- A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.Weakness

- A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.Significant Weakness

- A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of Deficiency unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Risk, as it pertains to source selection, is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an offeror's proposed approach to achieving the technical factor or subfactor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. (For Firm-Fixed-Price contracts, the reference to increased cost may be removed from the risk definition.)

Factor II - Past Performance (Volume III):

The Government will evaluate the offeror's past performance based on the references provided to determine recency, relevance, and the quality of performance.

This evaluation assesses the offeror's probability of successfully completing the requirements of this acquisition.

In addition to the provided references, the Government reserves the right to obtain and evaluate past performance information from other sources, including, but not limited to, the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and the System for Award Management (SAM.gov / FAPIIS).

When making relevancy determinations, the definitions below will be utilized:

- Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.Very Relevant

- Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.Relevant

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

- Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.Not Relevant

To be considered Recent, past performance must have been performed whole or in part during the past five (5) years of the closing date of this RFP with at least 6 months of performance. Only those that meet the recency criteria will be assessed for relevancy. For those efforts determined Somewhat Relevant or higher, a performance evaluation will be conducted based on the data gathered by interviews with those references provided in the Offeror's PPI sheets, Offeror's PPQ, or as available through the Contract Performance Assessment Rating System (CPARS) or similar systems of other Government departments and agencies, questionnaires tailored to the circumstances of this acquisition, Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) channels, interviews with Program Managers and Contracting Officers, or other sources known to the Government, including commercial sources. Offerors should note that, in conducting this assessment, the Government reserves the right to use both data provided by the Offeror and data obtained from other sources; however, the Government is not limited to these resources. A performance rating will be established for each effort for which a performance evaluation is conducted utilizing the same performance rating definitions contained within the CPARS.

- The following ratings will be applied to Factor 2 during evaluations.Past Performance Ratings

- Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully Substantial Confidence perform the required effort.

- Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully Satisfactory Confidence perform the required effort.

- No recent/relevant performance record is available, or the offeror's performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence Neutral Confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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

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

Factor III - Price (Volume IV):

1. Price Evaluation & Reasonableness The evaluated price will be determined using the total price for the base period and all option years, including the 6-month extension. The Offeror's proposed price will be evaluated per FAR Part 15 to determine price reasonableness. Offerors are advised that, prior to award, the Government may request information/data to support price reasonableness, such as copies of paid invoices for the same or similar items, sales history, price lists with effective dates, and/or copies of catalog pages along with any applicable discounts. Failure to submit the requested information may result in disqualification of the submitted proposal.

2. Total Compensation Plan (FAR 52.222-46) The Government will evaluate the Offeror's (and applicable Subcontractors') Total Compensation Plan to determine if it reflects a clear understanding of the requirement and is adequate to attract and retain suitably qualified professional employees. The Government will evaluate the proposed salaries and fringe benefits to assess whether they are realistic for the professional categories required. Proposals that indicate unrealistically low professional employee compensation may be assessed as demonstrating a lack of understanding of the requirement, representing a high performance risk, and may be rejected.

3. Evaluation of Options & Unbalanced Pricing The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced.

FAR 52.217-8 (Option to Extend Services): Included in the solicitation and resulting contract is FAR Clause 52.217-8. The price of exercising this clause will be evaluated using the prices of CLINs 5001-5008 submitted in the Offeror's proposal.

4. Discussions & Relative Importance of Price The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award solely on the information contained in the initial proposal without conducting discussions. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed necessary by the Contracting Officer.

Although price is not the most important evaluation factor, it has the potential to become more significant during the evaluation process. The degree of importance of price will increase with the degree of equality of the proposals in relation to the non-price factors on which selection is based. The importance of price will also increase when an Offeror's price is so significantly high as to diminish the value to the Government that might be gained under the other aspects of the offer. If, at any stage of the evaluation, all vendors are determined to have submitted equal, or virtually equal proposals, price could become the determining factor for award.

(End of provision)

400 RR (BLDG), RIFLE RANGE ROAD, CAMP LEJEUNE ATTN G4 CONTRACT

SNEADS FERRY, NC 28460-0101

UNITED STATES

Beatriz Gonzalez, Email: beatriz.gonzalez.civ@socom.mil Telephone: 0000000000 AdminBy:

SCD: PAS: