Solicitation Amendment 01.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 amendment 0001is to:

a. Answ er questions received (attachment 1 - Q&A)

b. Include QASP as attachment 2.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 14

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 04-Aug-2021

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 HC102821R0061

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

20-Jun-2021

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, 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 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

04-Aug-2021

CODE

DISA/DITCO-SCOTT-PL83

2300 EAST DRIVE, BUILDING 3600

SCOTT AFB IL 62225-5406

HC1028 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

HC102821R0061

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

QASP ATTACHMENT 2

QUALITY ASSURANCE SURVEILLANCE PLAN (QASP)

1. Contract or Task Order Title: DISA Data Center Columbus CRAH Power Diversity

2. Purpose:

This QASP provides a systematic method to evaluate performance for the stated contract. This QASP explains the following:

What will be monitored?

How monitoring will take place.

Who will conduct the monitoring?

How monitoring efforts and results will be documented.

This QASP does not detail how the contractor accomplishes the work. Rather, the QASP is created with the premise that the contractor is responsible for management and quality control actions to meet the terms of the contract. It is the Government’s responsibility to be objective, fair, and consistent in evaluating performance. In addition, the QASP should recognize that unforeseen and uncontrollable situations may occur.

This QASP is a “living document” and the Government may review and revise it on a regular basis. Updates shall ensure that the QASP remains a valid, useful, and enforceable document. Copies of the original QASP and revisions shall be provided to the contractor and Government officials implementing surveillance activities.

3. Roles and Responsibilities:

The following personnel shall oversee and coordinate surveillance activities.

Program/Project Manager (PM) – The PM provides program oversight and supports the COR’s performance assessment activities.

Contracting Officer (KO) – The KO shall ensure performance of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensure compliance with the contract terms, and shall safeguard the interests of the United States in the contractual relationship. The KO shall also ensure that the contractor receives impartial, fair, and equitable treatment under this contract. Determine the final assessment of the contractor’s performance.

Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) – The COR is responsible for providing continuous technical oversight of the contractor’s performance. The COR uses the QASP to conduct the oversight/surveillance process.

The COR shall keep a Quality Assurance file that accurately documents the contractor’s actual performance. The purpose is to ensure that the contractor meets the performance standards contained in the contract. The COR is responsible for reporting early identification of performance problems to the KO. The COR is required to provide an annual performance assessment to the KO which will be used in documenting past performance. The QASP is the primary tool for documenting contractor performance. The COR is not empowered to make any contractual commitments or to authorize any contractual change on the Government’s behalf.

Other Key Government Personnel- This may include performance monitors, inspectors, technical experts, workforce service division and center directorate level security personnel, requirements office, or others (i.e. users) who provide information that helps the COR monitor contractor performance.

4. Primary Method of Surveillance: All tasks shall be evaluated with 100% inspection as the surveillance method.

100 Percent Inspection. This is usually only the most appropriate method for infrequent tasks or tasks with stringent performance requirements, e.g., where safety or health is a concern. With this method, performance is inspected/evaluated at each occurrence. One hundred percent inspection is too expensive to be used in most cases.

Surveillance Matrix

The Surveillance Matrix (Appendix 1) is the list of performance objectives and standards that must be performed by the contractor. This matrix details the method of surveillance the COR will use to validate and inspect these performance elements. Inspection of each element will be documented in the COR file.

Performance objectives define the desired outcomes. Performance Standards define the level of service required under the contract to successfully meet the performance objective. The inspection methodology defines how, when, and what will be assessed in measuring performance. The Government performance surveillance, using this QASP, to determine the quality of the contractor’s performance as it relates to the performance element standards. The AQL performance Standard Table should be used to form the foundation of the COR’s inspection checklist.

5. Performance Standards:

Performance Standard Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) Method of Surveillance

6.1 – Detailed project schedule, shop drawings, EE Studies, and material submissions for approval by the Government.

100% schedule with complete phasing plan showing no data center operational interruptions. 100% PWS-compliant shop drawings, material submissions, and EE Studies.

100% review of schedule and submittals

6.2 – Purchase and install four (4) new 480v panels for new CRAH feeders.

Work meets equipment technical requirements 100% of the time. No unscheduled downtime of facility equipment.

100% Inspection

6.3 – Purchase and install new electrical feeders to new 480v panels.

Work meets equipment technical requirements 100% of the time.

Deficient work is corrected in a timely manner.

100% Inspection

6.4 – Purchase and install new secondary electrical circuits to CRAH units.

Work meets equipment technical requirements 100% of the time. No unscheduled downtime of facility equipment.

100% Inspection

6.5 – Purchase and install CRAH unit retrofit to provide dual power input.

Work meets equipment technical requirements 100% of the time.

Deficient work is corrected in a timely manner.

100% Inspection

6.6 – Provide start-up and testing of new CRAH retrofit package and circuits.

Work meets equipment technical requirements 100% of the time.

Deficient work is corrected in a timely manner.

100% Inspection

6.7 – Provide Close-Out documentation for Government review and acceptance.

Material submissions, Red-line drawings, Operation Manuals, Labels and Inventory require only minor modifications to comply with technical requirements. Revisions that occur are minor and resolved in a satisfactory manner.

100% completion inspection prior to acceptance for technical compliance review by the government facility management personnel.

6. Documenting Performance:

Acceptable Performance.

The Government shall document positive performance. A Performance Assessment Report (PAR) template is attached (Appendix 2). Any report may become part of the supporting documentation for fixed price payments, award/incentive fee payments, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) entries, or other actions. Government acceptance of services permits the contractor to invoice for the service fee.

Unacceptable performance.

Unacceptable contractor performance can be identified by customer complaints (Appendix 3) or upon schedule surveillance evaluations. When unacceptable performance occurs, the COR shall inform the contractor. This will normally be in writing unless circumstances necessitate verbal communication. The COR shall document the discussion and place it in the COR file and provide a copy to the KO.

When the COR determines formal written communication is required, the COR shall prepare a Corrective Action Report (CAR). The CAR is forwarded to the KO for dissemination to the contractor. A CAR template is attached to this QASP (Appendix 4).

The contractor shall acknowledge receipt of the CAR in writing. The CAR will specify if the contractor is required to prepare a corrective action plan to document how the contractor shall correct the unacceptable performance and avoid a recurrence. The CAR will also state how long after receipt the contractor has to present this corrective action plan to the KO and COR. The Government may withhold payment for services until corrective action is taken. The Government shall review the contractor's corrective action plan to determine acceptability. Upon Government acceptance of the corrected services the contractor will be permitted to invoice for the service fee.

Any CAR may become a part of the supporting documentation for contract payment deductions, fixed fee deductions, award fee nonpayment, CPARS or other actions deemed necessary by the KO.

7. Mandatory or regulatory compliance items:

The contractor will provide initial proof of compliance with regulatory and compliance items contained in the contract. The Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) and the Contracting Officer (KO) will evaluate the initial submission and will conduct ad hoc reviews of the contractor's compliance throughout the remainder of the contract.

The contractor will monitor compliance as required by FAR 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons, and report any issues to the KO.

8. Acceptable Quality Level (AQL):

The AQL for this project is 100% due to the cooling provided to the computer room environment this project supports

9. Evaluation Method:

There will be a 100% review of the submittals by Technical POC, as defined by PWS. Once the package has been approved of and all comments have been addressed, the contractor can proceed onto the installation phase.

At the close-out of the project a walkthrough will be to verify that the installation was properly done and that there are no deficiencies. Any existing deficiencies shall be added to a punch list and will be addressed in a timely manner.

10. Performance Rating

In evaluating the quality of contractor’s performance, the following performance ratings may be used (same as CPAR ratings).

Rating Definition Note

Exceptional

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

To justify an Exceptional rating, identify multiple significant events and state how they were of benefit to the Government. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

Very Good

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

To justify a Very Good rating, identify a significant event and state how it was a benefit to the Government. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

Satisfactory

Performance meets contractual requirements.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

To justify a Satisfactory rating, there should have been only minor problems, or major problems the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract/order. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. A fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be evaluated with a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract/order.

Marginal

Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being evaluated reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

To justify Marginal performance, identify a significant event in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government. A

Marginal rating should be supported by referencing the management tool that notified the contractor of the contractual deficiency (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency report or letter).

Unsatisfactory

Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains a serious

To justify an Unsatisfactory rating, identify multiple significant events in each category that the contractor had trouble overcoming and state how it impacted the Government.

A singular problem, however, could be of problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating. An

Unsatisfactory rating should be supported by referencing the management tools used to notify the contractor of the contractual deficiencies (e.g., management, quality, safety, or environmental deficiency reports, or letters).

Appendix 1 - Surveillance Matrix

Performance

Standards

Acceptable Quality Levels

Methods of Calculation

Surveillance Results/Ratings

Performance is based on timely delivery of all tasks as specified in PWS Section 6.

High level of government satisfaction with the Contractor’s work includes the successful delivery of all technical tasks on schedule as specified in PWS Section 6.

Target Criteria:

Equipment and installation work meets technical requirements 95% of the time, as specified in PWS Section 6.

Minimum Acceptable:

Deficient work is corrected in a timely manner.

Calculation:

The number of required equipment items, 100% of the total, are satisfactorily installed correctly and on schedule.

The Government technical personnel (site Facility Manager) must inspect the completed work for correct equipment installation for the results to have at least a 100% completeness rate.

Measurement Interval – The Measurement Interval is at completion of each specified task in the PWS Section 6.

Measurement Period –

The Measurement Period begins at issuance of Notice to Proceed (NTP) and ends at final acceptance of technical compliance of the contract.

Source of Measurement Data – Data will be collected from site Facility Manager inspection of the completed work for timely and correct equipment installation.

Method of Surveillance – Facility Manager on-site 100% inspection of the completed work.

Timing of Measurement

– Measurements are based on inspection of completed work when notified by the Contractor that task is complete.

Reporting Frequency: - Reporting to commence upon Contract NTP and continue throughout the Period of Performance on a monthly schedule or as needed when Contractor completes tasks.

(Exceptional Very Good Satisfactory Marginal Unsatisfactory)

(A rollup of assessment of the Surveillance Inspection Results to develop an overall rating for this objective)

Appendix 2 – Performance Assessment Report

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT (PAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

1. CONTRACT/TASK ORDER

NUMBER

2. CONTRACTOR 3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR) SIGNATURE AND DATE

5. COR PHONE 6. SUSPENSE DATE

I. PERFORMANCE

7. DEFICIENCY (CHECK ALL BOXES THAT

APPLY)

NEW

REPEAT

NO DEFICIENCY NOTED

8. SERVICES SUMMARY or PWS PARAGRAPH ITEM

REVIEWED

9. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DEFICIENCY (IF DEFICIENCY

BOX WAS CHECKED)

10. DETAILED PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

II. CONTRACTOR VALIDATION

11. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE CONCUR

NON-CONCUR

12. CORRECTIVE ACTION ESTIMATED COMPLETION

DATE

13. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE CORRECTIVE ACTION AND PREVENTION OF RECURRENCE OR REASON

FOR NON-CONCURRENCE OF COR CITED DEFICIENCY

III. ACTION CORRECTED

14. CONCUR NON-CONCUR COR SIGNATURE AND DATE

15. COR REMARKS (REQUIRED)

6. CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE REMARKS

Appendix 3 – Customer Complaint Record

CUSTOMER COMPLAINT RECORD

DATE/TIME OF COMPLAINT

SOURCE OF COMPLAINT

ORGANIZATION

BUILDING

NUMBER

INDIVIDUAL

PHONE NUMBER

NATURE OF COMPLAINT

CONTRACT REFERENCE

VALIDATION

DATE/TIME CONTRACTOR INFORMED OF COMPLAINT

ACTION TAKEN BY CONTRACTOR

RECEIVED/VALIDATED BY

Appendix 4 – Corrective Action Report

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ATTACH 1

Request for Proposal Number HC102821R0061 Questions and Answers Dated 04 August 2021

CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT (CAR)

(If more space is needed, use reverse and identify by number)

1. CONTRACTOR

2. CONTRACT NUMBER

3. TYPE OF SERVICES

4. FUNCTIONAL AREA

5. SUSPENSE DATE

6. CONTROL NUMBER

7. DEFICIENCY MAJOR MINOR

FINDING:

FINDING IMPACT:

Please respond with a written corrective action plan that details the corrective action of the cited deficiency, the cause of the deficiency, and actions taken to prevent recurrence by Suspense Date in Block 5. If date was not entered in Block 5, the contractor is not required to provide a response.

8. QUALITY ASSURANCE PERSONNEL (COR)

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

9. ISSUING AUTHORITY

TYPED NAME AND GRADE

SIGNATURE AND DATE

10. COR RESPONSE TO CONTRACTOR CORRECTIVE ACTION AND ACTION TAKEN TO PREVENT RECURRENCE

11. COR DETERMINATION

ACCEPTED REJECTED

12. CLOSE DATE

RFP Document Page/Section Question

Solicitation Page 24, #2 Question 1: Is there a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) associated with thei RFP?

Government Response to question 1: RFQ AMD 0001 updates this information. Yes, It is now being provided in the soliciation as attachment 2.

Solicitation Page 25, e Question 2: With the Maximum of 20 MB email size, is it acceptable to submit in two or more emails veing there may be an issue with the size of product sheets to inclue with the proposal?

Government Response to question 2: RFQ AMD 0001 updates this information.

Yes, emailing two or more emails is allowable. If this route is taken be sure to include in the subject line Email Number 01 out of XX.

Solicitation Page 26, c Question 3: Please verify the page count for the technical write-

up. Is it 15 pages or 20 pages?

Government Response to question 3: RFQ AMD 0001 updates this information. The technical write-up will have a maximum of 15 pages.

Solicitation Site Visit Question 4: Due to the complexity in nature of this project, Can a site visit be utilized?

Government Response to question 4: RFQ AMD 0001 updates this information. If you would like to schedule a site visit, please contact ronald.e.witt4.civ@mail.mil and cody.t.badgette.civ@mail.mil.

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

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

(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:

Evaluation Table for LPTA

Technical Ratings

Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

The Quotation shall have to meet the following subfactors in order to be considered acceptable:

(a) Subfactor 1: PWS Paragraph 6.1.1 Subtask 1.1- Develop Detailed Project Schedule. In order for this subfactor to be rated Acceptable, the contractor shall submit a draft executable schedule with stated tasks for equipment installation that identifies all milestones that include start dates, submittal dates, estimated start dates, and completion dates necessary to complete the purchase and installation of the CRAH diverse power distribution as required in PWS Paragraph 6.2 Task 2, 6.3 Task 3, 6.4 Task 4, 6.5 Task 5, 6.6 Task 6, 6.7 Task 7 and 6.8 Task 8. Tasks do not require completion in sequential order and may occur concurrent with other tasks. The draft schedule shall be prepared using Microsoft Project or similar program within the stated Period of Performance of one (1) calendar year. The subfactor will only be rated acceptable if the Government can reasonably determine the schedule is executable.

Subfactor 1 shall not exceed five (5) pages.

(b) Subfactor 2: PWS Paragraph 6.5 Task 5: Purchase and install CRAH unit retrofit to provide dual power input. In order for this subfactor to be rated Acceptable, the contractor shall provide detailed information describing the CRAH unit retrofit materials expected to be used to include the Manufacturer’s material information data sheets that meet the requirement for diverse CRAH unit power input per PWS Paragraph 6.5 and PWS attachments. The technical response shall include detailed information that allows the Government to fully evaluate the offeror’s response.

Subfactor 2 shall not exceed five (5) pages.

(c) Subfactor 3: PWS Paragraph 6.7.1 Subtask 7.1 - Install additional BAS monitoring circuitry. In order for this subfactor to be rated Acceptable, the contractor shall provide detailed information describing the Building Automation System modifications for each CRAH unit retrofit expected to be used to include the Manufacturer’s material information data sheets that meet the requirement for diverse CRAH unit power operation per PWS Paragraph 6.7.1 and PWS attachments. The technical response shall include detailed information that allows the Government to fully evaluate the offeror’s response. Subfactor 3 shall not exceed five (5) pages.

The total technical volume shall not exceed 15 pages.

(End of Summary of Changes)