HQ072723R0007 0001.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

A. Revises Local Clause S16-003 B. Removes Local Caluse S16-004 C. Revises Proposal Instructions in Section L, sections 2.2, 3.1.2, and 3.3 D. Revised Evaluation Instructions in Sectino M, sections 2.1.2, and 2.1.3

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

U 1 18

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 08-Jun-2023

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 HQ072723R0007

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

23-May-2023

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 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

07-Jun-2023

CODE

DEFENSE MICROELECTRONICS ACTIVITY (HQ)

MEC 4234 54TH STREET

MCCLELLAN CA 95652

HQ0727 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

HQ072723R0007

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION H - SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

The following have been modified:

Equipment and Supplies (DMEA #S16-003)

The Contractor shall be required to supply the necessary tools and equipment for accomplishing the services under this contract.

(a) Equipment shall be kept in operating order and designed to perform the kind of work prescribed in specifications.

(b) All electrical equipment used by the Contractor shall meet all OSHA safety requirements and shall be UL approved. This equipment must operate using existing building circuits.

(c) The Contractor shall prevent the operation or attempted operation of electrical equipment or combination of equipment that require power exceeding the capacity of existing building circuits.

The following have been deleted:

S16-004 Emergency or Special Event Services (DMEA #S16-004) MAR 2016

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 General Information

For proposal purposes, the estimated date of contract award is August 2023. The Government reserves the right to award sooner or later. The start and end dates will be updated accordingly upon contract award.

The Government will not entertain any proposed revisions to the terms and conditions contained in this solicitation submitted as part of the Offeror’s proposal, including any attachment or exhibit referenced therein. Therefore, any offer that includes “redlines,” condition(s) of offer, or any other deviation from the requirements of the solicitation shall be rejected by the Government and found non-responsive and therefore unawardable.

Each Offeror is required to submit a proposal that is sufficiently detailed and complete to fully demonstrate an understanding of, and compliance with, all of the requirements of the solicitation.

Proposals shall contain only material directly related to this acquisition. Offerors shall submit all information required by this solicitation.

Offeror’s proposal shall be based on the requirements contained in this solicitation (including those documents, exhibits, and other attachments to the solicitation identified in Section J).

Offerors shall submit a proposal encompassing all of the line items listed in Section B of this solicitation. FAILURE TO FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS OR CONFORM TO ALL

REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN THIS SOLICITATION SHALL RESULT IN A

FINDING THAT THE OFFEROR’S PROPOSAL IS UNAWARDABLE.

Proposals submitted in response to the solicitation must contain a complete description of all pertinent aspects of the effort proposed by the Offeror. Offerors shall not assume that previously submitted data or prior experience presumed to be known to the Government (e.g., previous projects performed for the Government) will be considered as part of the proposal.

General statements such as, “the Offeror understands,” “the Offeror can or will comply with the requirements,” “standard procedures will be used,” “well-known techniques will be used,” or statements which merely paraphrase the solicitation in whole or in part do not constitute compliance with the requirements for proposal content. Data previously submitted, or presumed to be known (e.g., data or services previously submitted or performed for the Government) cannot be considered as part of the proposal unless explicitly incorporated into the proposal.

Discussions of each topic in the proposal shall exhibit continuity and logical progression.

1.1 Government Point of Entry (GPE)

This solicitation will be made available only through the World Wide Web on the Government-wide point of entry (GPE), at https://sam.gov/. From time to time, the Government may post additional information to the GPE relating to this solicitation (e.g., responses to questions, solicitation amendments, etc.). It is the responsibility of prospective Offerors to monitor the GPE for any such information.

1.2 Communications with Government

Unless otherwise specified, the Defense Microelectronics Activity Contracting Officers listed below are the sole points of contact for this acquisition (hereafter “Government Points of Contact”).

Mr. Nicholas Roberts Contract Specialist nicholas.s.roberts8.civ@mail.mil

Mr. Robert Crandell Contracting Officer robert.d.crandell.civ@mail.mil

1.3 Submission of Questions and Comments

Offerors shall submit written questions and comments related to this solicitation using the Offeror’s Question Submittal Form (Attachment J-02) for this solicitation. For ease of Government review and to minimize response time, Offerors shall submit this form in the original file format. Do not convert the form to Portable Document Format (PDF). To ensure the Government understands the context of the question, Offerors shall detail the applicable document name, document date or version, page, paragraph, clause or other specific citation to which the question applies. Information contained in the Government’s responses to Offeror’s question shall not supersede any information contained in the solicitation (including amendments). In the event of a discrepancy between a response to a Offeror’s question and the content of the solicitation, the latter shall take precedence.

Offerors shall not submit comments, questions, or inquiries to any Government representative other than the Government Points of Contact identified in Section 1.2 above.

The Government intends to distribute Offeror’s questions and associated responses via public posting to the sam.gov website. Offerors shall not include any proprietary or competition sensitive information in their question submission.

Offerors shall submit in accordance with this section any questions or suggestions related to the terms and conditions of this solicitation prior to the deadline for questions.

The deadline for receipt of questions is 10:00 AM PST, June 15, 2023. Any questions received after this date may not be answered prior to receipt of proposals.

1.4 Solicitation Security Classification

Offerors must meet all clearance requirements detailed in the DD Form 254 (Attachment 20) by the date of contract award. The Government does not anticipate a need for Offerors to submit classified material in any proposal volume. OFFERORS SHALL NOT INCLUDE ANY

CLASSIFIED INFORMATION IN ANY PORTION OF ITS PROPOSAL.

1.5 Award without Discussions

Pursuant to the provision under this section entitled FAR 52.215-1, “Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition” the Government intends to award a single contract on the basis of a proposal submission without conducting discussions with Offerors, but reserves the right to conduct discussions per FAR 15.306 “Exchanges with Offerors After Receipt of Proposals” if determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary. Each Offeror shall submit only one proposal. No alternate proposals will be accepted. Therefore, each Offeror’s proposal submission shall contain the Offeror’s best terms from a cost and technical standpoint. However, the Government may contact any, all, or a limited number of Offerors for clarifications concerning their proposals as permitted under FAR Part 15. Upon the conclusion of discussions, if they occur, the Government will request Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs) from all Offerors still within the competitive range.

2.0 General Proposal Instructions

The completion and submission to the Government of an offer shall indicate the Offeror’s unconditional acceptance of the terms and conditions in the solicitation.

The Government encourages Offerors to contact the Government Points of Contact (see Section 1.2, above) via email to request an explanation of any aspect of these instructions as outlined in Section 1.4 above.

Offerors shall submit all representations, certifications, and other statements requested in Section K of the solicitation.

Offerors shall take care to submit a legible, neat, orderly, concise and comprehensive proposal.

Elaborate brochures or artwork, or expensive visual or presentation aids beyond those sufficient to present a complete and comprehensive proposal are unnecessary. Clarity is essential. The use of brochures shall be minimized and if used will count against page limits.

2.1 Proposal Structure, Format and Page Counts

Offerors shall structure proposal submittals such that the required content is organized as follows:

VOLUME TITLE PAGE LIMIT ELECTRONIC

COPIES

I Cover Letter and Other Submittal

Requirements 45 page limit 1

II IDIQ and TO1 – Technical Capabilities

120 page limit 1

III Past Performance 50 page limit 1 IV Cost None 1

Offerors are advised that the quality of information contained in a proposal is significantly more important than quantity. In this respect, Offerors shall strictly observe the page count limitations for each volume. Pages in excess of the applicable page count limit will be removed by the Contracting Officer from the back of the respective volume prior to evaluation and will not be read or evaluated by the Government. It is not necessary to supply the maximum number of pages allowed for each volume; fewer pages may be submitted. Offerors shall organize proposal content sections using index pages or tabbed index divider pages with clear cross-referencing to the table of contents. All pages shall be consecutively numbered within each volume (e.g., 1,2,3,…), with the exception of the Cost Volume. For the Cost Volume only, pages must be numbered consecutively within each section, but page numbering may restart at the beginning of each section.

The below content will exempt from the page count limitations:

Cover letter Table of contents Title pages Index pages Tabs Glossary List of Figures List of Tables List of Acronyms

When evaluating an offer, the Government will consider how well the Offeror complied with these instructions. The Government will consider any failure on the part of an Offeror to comply with these instructions to be an indication of how the Contractor will comply with contract requirements during contract performance. Therefore, the Government encourages Offerors to contact the Government in accordance with Section 1.4 to request an explanation of any aspect of these instructions.

2.2 Page Size and Format

The narrative material in each proposal shall be formatted with the following requirements:

Single-spaced, typed in 12-point Times New Roman font 8 1/2 × 11 inches (standard letter size), excluding charts and graphs Minimum margin of 1 inch around the page External hyperlinks are not permitted Photographs, Pictures, Diagrams, Charts, and Tables are permitted Text within tables, diagrams, pictorial charts, or graphic material may use no smaller than

8-point font in Times New Roman or Arial typeface Volume organizational pages (intentionally blank pages used for tabbing purposes or to separate sections) do not count against the maximum page limit.

Every section, figure, and table shall be numbered; paragraphs within sections do not need to be numbered Each Volume shall have page numbers consecutively numbered for that individual volume Each Volume shall include a table of Contents Each Volume shall include a List of Figures Each Volume shall include a List of Tables Each Volume shall include a List of Acronyms All file names shall include the Volume number and the evaluation factor (if applicable)

Proposal material shall be formatted for double-sided pages only and in a single column on each page in accordance with FAR 52.204-4.

Submitted electronic files shall not be compressed. All content submitted as part of Volumes I through V shall be submitted in Adobe Acrobat format (.pdf extension) as this will be the basis for page count. The offeror may include additional files to clarify, provide details, or demonstrate capability which cannot be depicted when presented in Adobe Acrobat format. Such additional files shall be limited to Microsoft Word (.docx extension) and Microsoft Excel (.xlsx extension) formats. For any additional files submitted, the Government will review the content which is correspondingly submitted in the Adobe Acrobat format submission for basis of page count; anything in the additional files beyond the printed and submitted area may not be considered part of the proposal. Schedules created in Microsoft Project or other software shall be submitted in in Adobe Acrobat format (.pdf extension) using graphical, tabular, or any other layout preferred by the offeror.

Legal (8 ½ × 14 inches) or Tabloid size (11 × 17 inches) formatting may be used for charts and graphs where necessary to depict organization, layout, or implementation schedules. Charts and graphs shall be uncomplicated to preserve clarity. Extensive written text or tabular data, beyond that reasonably required for clarity, shall not be included in the charts and graphs. Each nonblank side of a legal-size or tabloid-size page will count as two (2) pages for page count purposes.

Pricing information for the supplies and services solicited here shall only be included within the files containing Volume IV: Cost Proposal. Inclusion of pricing information on any other volume may result in the Offeror’s proposal being rejected, and the Offeror being determined ineligible for award. If doubt exists as to what constitutes pricing information, Offeror’s are strongly encouraged to submit a question in accordance with Section 1.4.

2.3 Proposal Submission

The Government requests one (1) electronic copy of the Offeror’s complete proposal to be sent through email to the Contract Specialist Nicholas Roberts nicholas.s.roberts8@mail.mil and Contracting Officer Robert Crandell at robert.d.crandell.civ@mail.mil.

3.0 Proposal Content Requirements

Offerors shall provide the information requested in the following paragraphs in the volumes indicated.

An Offeror’s proposal shall be sufficiently detailed to enable Government evaluation board members to make a thorough evaluation against specific factors established in Section M, and to arrive at a sound determination as to whether or not the prospective Offeror will be able to perform in accordance with the stated requirements.

Discussions of each topic in the proposal shall exhibit continuity and logical progression. Data shall be organized to enable Government personnel to thoroughly evaluate the proposal. A concise, legible, neat, orderly and comprehensive proposal is required. The Government does not assume the duty to search for data to cure problems it finds in proposals. Failure to conform to all requirements of this solicitation may form the basis for rejection of the proposal.

3.1 Volume I – Cover Letter and Other Submittal Requirements

Note: Do not include cost information in this volume.

This Volume shall contain the Offeror’s Cover letter, company information and other submittal requirements as listed below:

3.1.1 Solicitation Section A

The solicitation Standard Form (SF) 1449 will be used to award a contract resulting from this solicitation. The Offeror shall complete Blocks 30a through 30c of the SF 1449. The Offeror shall submit an executed SF 1449 bearing the original signature of a representative who is authorized to contractually bind the company submitting the offer. In the event the Government needs to amend the solicitation, the Government issue a SF 30. As with the SF 1449, the representative who signs the SF 30 cover pages must be authorized to contractually bind the company submitting the offer.

3.1.2 Solicitation Section J

Offeror shall provide the following completed attachments, which will be incorporated into the contract at award:

Attachment J-01 DD Form 254

3.1.3 Solicitation Section K

Offeror shall complete and submit the Offeror’s information sheet and all applicable provisions under the Representation, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors section of the solicitation.

3.3 Volume II – IDIQ and TO1 - Technical Capabilities Proposal Note: Do not include cost information in this volume.

Where use of subcontractors is proposed, the proposal shall clearly distinguish between the offeror's and the subcontractor's work and responsibilities. The Government may incorporate offeror's proposed approaches to meeting the requirements into the awarded contract.

The non-cost proposal shall be organized into sections by factor and shall address the following:

Factor 1 – IDIQ and TO1 Technical Capabilities The offeror shall provide a detailed narrative, which clearly demonstrates the offeror’s proposed approach to successfully manage and meet all SOW requirements for both the IDIQ and TO1 as more specifically detailed below:

The Government will evaluate the following subfactors:

A1: IDIQ/Task Order Program Management Experience: Describe contractor’s program management experience with IDIQ contracts, including experience on similar type of work as described in PWS for both the IDIQ and TO1.

A2: Personnel: Describe the processes used to provide DMEA with the proper personnel having the skillsets and clearance level to accomplish DMEA’s requirements for both the IDIQ and TO1; including how contractor will address supporting programs (i.e. Training, Certification, Employee Health Monitoring, etc.). Discuss how contractor will address each key personnel’s ability, past performance or work experience, responsibilities and work schedule to accomplish DMEA requirements and provide maximum coverage.

A3: Supplier Strategy: Discuss contractor strategy to establish relationship and interact with semiconductor suppliers and vendors; including how contractor will address supply ordering and service requests for low to high priority vendors and subcontractors. Discuss contractor strategy to establish new vendors. For TO1, discuss contractor strategy for how to transition the foundry sustainment seamlessly and with low to no impact.

A4: Work Experience: Discuss contractor work experience in or related to semiconductor manufacturing environments, including cleanroom, packaging, assembly, electrical testing and radiation testing. Discuss past projects similar to this effort, the outcome of the projects with customer feedback and lessons learned. For TO1, describe contractor’s maintenance experience with Foundry equipment and how contractor will address tool availability and response time to issues. Discuss subcontract strategy with tool vendors.

A5: Security and Data Right: Describe how contractor addresses security requirements (DFARS, ITAR, etc.) for both the IDIQ and TO1. Discuss rights in technical data and computer software developed during performance period and protection protocol.

Subfactors will be evaluated for significant strengths, strengths, significant weaknesses, weaknesses, deficiencies, risks, and uncertainties and a combined technical/risk rating will be assigned to the overall Technical factor based on sub-factor assessments. If an offeror does not submit information for one of the subfactors that subfactor will be assessed with significant weakness.

3.4 Volume III – Past Performance

Note: Do not include cost information in this volume.

Factor 2 – Past Performance The past performance proposal must clearly articulate the Offeror’s past performance. The past performance proposal shall address the following areas:

Performance History For the technical services referenced in section 3.3 and 3.4, the contractor shall describe past examples of performance. The contractor shall provide at least two (2) (at least one (1) for the IDIQ scope and one (1) for TO1 scope) but no more than five (5) examples of past or current contracts (including Federal, State, and local government and private) for efforts similar to the Government requirement.

Past Performance Contract References

When providing these references, the Offeror shall include a summary table using a format similar to the Past Performance Matrix below:

Past Performance Matrix

Purchase Order Number

Reference #1 Reference #2 Reference #3 Reference #4 Reference #5

Contract # Dollar Value Location Prime or Sub Period of Performance

Description of Services

Recency of Past Performance Offerors shall provide sufficient information for the Government to determine the recency of the referenced work (above). Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant, and is one of the criteria to establish the Relevancy of past performance information. Past performance submittals determined to be not within the Recency thresholds will be discarded and not be evaluated. This solicitation will consider only work experience already performed. Generally, performance data will only be assessed for those references demonstrating at least six (6) months of completed performance prior to the closing date of the solicitation and work completed prior to the last five (5) years will be considered as less relevant than similar but more recent experiences. The burden is on the Offeror to demonstrate the recency of the Offeror’s referenced contract(s) to the Government’s requirements.

Relevancy of Past Performance Offerors shall provide sufficient information, including descriptions of how the work is similar, to facilitate the Government’s determination of relevancy. Relevant contracts are defined as those in which the work performed are considered to be similar in scope, magnitude, and complexity when compared to the requirement described in this solicitation, including but not limited to the SOW and contract type. The burden is on the Offeror to demonstrate the relevancy of the Offeror’s referenced contract(s) to the Government’s requirements.

Quality, Schedule, and Safety Record of Past Performance Offerors shall provide sufficient information for the Government to determine the quality of the referenced work. The burden is on the Offeror to demonstrate the quality of the Offeror’s referenced contract(s). Quality, schedule adherence, and safety record of past performance will include the quality of work performance, schedule performance against contract requirement, reported safety mishaps and similar areas of interest associated with the requirements of this solicitation. Such information may include, but is not limited to, customer satisfaction surveys, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) evaluations, inspection & acceptance records (DD250), or any of the past performance data. At its sole discretion, the

Government may also review any and all CPARS records to either validate or discover further past performance experiences, trends, and/or any other performance data, considering the same relevance measures as used with the references provided with the proposal. The Government at it’s sole-discretion contact may elect to contact the Focal Point, Alternative Focal Point, Assessing Official Representative, and/or Assessing Official for CAPRs references. The Government may elect to consider any CPARS record in the system in regard to recency.

Additionally, the Government may also incorporate data from the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) to supplement other CPARS information and past performance information provided with the proposal.

No Past Performance If the Offeror does not have any past performance, provide a statement affirming you have no past performance.

3.5 Volume IV – Cost Proposal

Factor 3 – Cost

Offeror shall provide a fully developed proposal for the TO1. Period of performance is for a base year plus four option years.

Both “sanitized” and “unsanitized” cost proposals will be required. “Unsanitized” cost proposals are complete cost proposals which include all required information. “Sanitized” cost proposals shall exclude all company proprietary or sensitive data, but must include a breakdown of the total labor categories and hours proposed and a breakout of the types and associated costs of all proposed ODCs. Sanitized proposals will be provided to the technical evaluation team.

The Contracting Officer is responsible for the determination of cost reasonableness for the prime contract, including subcontracting costs IAW FAR 15.404-3, as supplemented by DFARS 215.404-3. Prime contractors shall conduct appropriate cost or cost analysis to establish the reasonableness of proposed subcontract costs and to include the results of these analyses in the cost proposal; and when required by FAR 15.404-3(c), the prime contractor shall submit subcontractor certified cost or pricing data to the government as part of its own cost or pricing data. In the event the contractor is denied access to subcontractor records, the Contracting Officer shall be notified immediately.

An electronic pricing spreadsheet shall be delivered to the Contracting Officer, to be delivered concurrently with the task order proposal for the purposes of calculating the government negotiation objective and documenting the final negotiated cost. Electronic spreadsheets shall be compatible with the computer system used by the Contracting Officer at the time of proposal submission. Spreadsheets shall be interactive to the level of detail that the Contracting Officer requires, based on anticipated proposal exceptions. For example, if bid rates are proposed for two different calendar years, the spreadsheet shall be interactive such that the government objective for labor can be derived by multiplying labor hours by the objective rate for each labor category in each calendar year. In all cases, the number of labor hours shall be interactive such that the government negotiation objective can be derived for each individual labor category.

Spreadsheets shall have no concealed formulas and be designed for simplicity and ease of use.

The Contracting Officer reserves the right to request a written user guide with complete instructions and/or a tutorial, in order to better understand the pool and bases of the rates.

IAW 10 U.S.C. 2306, the proposed CPFF fee rate shall not exceed 10%.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 BASIS FOR AWARD

1.1 The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, represents a best value to the Government, cost and other factors considered.

1.2 The best value tradeoff source selection evaluation procedures found in FAR 15 will be used to select the offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government. Pursuant to FAR 15.101-1, “(a) tradeoff process is appropriate when it may be in the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror. This process permits tradeoffs among cost and non-cost factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest cost proposal or other than the highest technically rated offeror. The perceived benefits of the higher cost proposal shall merit the additional cost, and the rationale for tradeoffs must be documented in the file in accordance with

FAR 15.406.”

1.3 The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In addition, if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

1.4 The Government’s evaluation of the offeror’s proposal will be based upon the information submitted by the offeror and for past performance, any other relevant information available to the Government. The offeror’s proposal must demonstrate to the Government that the offeror will satisfy all requirements for each evaluation factor. The Government will evaluate each factor on a stand-alone basis.

1.5 In determining the best value to the Government, proposals will be evaluated on the basis of cost and the non-cost factors:

1) IDIQ and TO1 Technical Capabilities;

2) Past Performance

3) Cost

For this solicitation, Other Submittal Requirements is an acceptable/unacceptable criteria, and therefore, will not be weighed in terms of importance relative to the evaluation factors.

For the non-cost evaluation factors, the relative importance of the factors are as follows:

Technical Capabilities are equal to Past Performance.

All non-cost evaluation factors (technical and past performance), when combined, are significantly more important than Cost.

Technical and Past Performance factors will be evaluated and assigned adjectival ratings. Cost will be evaluated for fair and reasonableness, balance, and cost realism.

1.6 Evaluation of Offerors' proposals will occur in two phases as summarized below:

In Phase 1, the Government will first evaluate Other Submittal Requirements. Other submittal requirements will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis based on the offeror’s submission. Evaluation on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis will use the Acceptable/Unacceptable ratings in Table 1 of Section 3.0 below.

Offerors receiving an “Acceptable” rating shall move on to Phase 2. Offerors receiving an “Unacceptable” rating will no longer be considered for award and no further evaluation will be conducted.

In Phase 2, the Government will evaluate cost and non-cost factors 1 –Technical Capabilities and 2 - Past Performance, in accordance with the evaluation process described in Section 3.0 below.

1.7 To be eligible for award, the offeror’s proposal must meet all solicitation requirements, conform to all required terms and conditions, and include all the information required by Section L of this solicitation. Failure to comply with any terms and conditions of this solicitation may result in the offeror being ineligible for award.

2.0 EVALUATION FACTORS

2.1 Non-cost Evaluation Factors

2.1.1 Other Submittal Requirements

The Government will evaluate whether the offeror, as the prime contractor, has submitted a completed DD254.

The Government will evaluated whether the offeror, has submitted a complete proposal with the technical, past performance and cost volumes as required by Section L.

2.1.2 Factor 1 – IDIQ and TO1 Technical Capabilities

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposal for Factor 1 by evaluating each Subfactors for significant strengths, strengths, significant weaknesses, weaknesses, deficiencies, risks, and uncertainties with the following order of importance:

A2 (Personnel) and A4 (Work Experience) being of equal importance and more important than;

A3 (Supplier Strategy) which is more important than;

A5 (Security and Data Right) which is more important than;

A1 (IDIQ/Task Order Program Management Experience) with TO1 Program Manager Experience being more important than IDIQ Program Manager Experience.

A combined technical/risk rating (see table 2) will be assigned to the overall Technical factor based on sub-factor assessments. Specifically, the Government will evaluate the offeror’s approach and understanding of both the IDIQ and TO1requirements and the likelihood (risk) that the offeror will be able to perform the described technical effort.

2.1.3 Reserved

2.1.4 Factor 2 – Past Performance

2.1.4.1 This factor assesses the offeror’s ability to perform the contract successfully by considering the offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the IDIQ and TO1 requirements. TO1 past performance is more important than IDIQ past performance.

2.1.4.2 Past Performance Evaluation. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation:

recency, relevancy, (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information). All three aspects will be considered for each reference provided.

2.1.4.2.1. Recency. Recent contracts are defined as contracts with a performance record of at least six (6) months of completed performance prior to the closing date of the solicitation and work completed prior to the last five (5) years will be considered as less relevant than similar but more recent experiences.

2.1.4.2.2. Relevance. Relevant contracts are defined as those in which the work performed are considered to be similar in scope, magnitude, and complexity when compared to the requirement described in this solicitation, including but not limited to the SOW and contract type.

2.1.4.2.3. Quality of Performance. The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. The past performance evaluation conducted in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

2.1.4.3 Performance Confidence Assessment. Past performance will be evaluated to determine how well the contractor has performed on the recent and relevant contracts. This evaluation will result in a performance confidence assessment rating for the offeror. It will assess the quality, schedule adherence, and safety record of past performance will include the quality of work performance, schedule performance against contract requirement, reported safety mishaps and similar areas of interest associated with the requirements of this solicitation and usefulness of the offeror’s past performance as it applies to the performance confidence assessment.

2.1.4.4 In evaluating past performance, the Government may consider past performance information in the offeror’s proposal, information obtained from questionnaires tailored to the circumstances of the acquisition, or the Government may also review any and all CPARS records to either validate or discover further past performance experiences, trends, and/or any other performance data, considering the same relevance measures as used with the references provided with the proposal. The Government may elect to consider any CPARS record in the system in regard to recency. The Government may elect to consider any information obtained from the Focal Point, Alternative Focal Point, Assessing Official Representative, and/or Assessing Official for each CAPRS references. Additionally, the Government may also incorporate data from the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) to supplement other CPARS information and past performance information provided with the proposal.

2.1.4.5 If no past performance or only non-relevant performance information is available the offeror will not be rated favorably or unfavorably. A rating of “Neutral Confidence” will be assigned for the Performance Confidence Assessment in the event no record of past performance or information exists.

2.2 Factor 3 - Cost

The Cost Proposal for TO1 will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(c). The proposed cost will be analyzed for completeness, reasonableness, balance, and realism.

3.0 EVALUATION PROCESS

An adjectival rating will be assigned to each non-cost factor. Any proposal with a rating of “unacceptable” for any factor will not be eligible for contract award.

3.1 Technical Rating Evaluation Process – Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating The Government will first evaluate Other Submittal Requirements using the Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating method below. The purpose of the technical factor is to assess whether the offeror’s proposal will satisfy the Government’s minimum requirements. Offerors receiving an “Unacceptable” rating for this factor will no longer be considered for award and no further evaluation will be conducted.

Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation (Table 1) Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Table

3.2 Technical Rating Evaluation Process – Combined Technical/Risk Rating The Government will evaluate non-cost Factor 1 – IDIQ and TO1 Technical Capabilities using the Combined Technical/Risk Rating method below. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the significant strengths, strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

Color Rating Description Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

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

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

(Table 2) Combined Technical/Technical Risk Table

3.3 Definitions. The following definitions will be used during the evaluation of the offeror’s proposal for Factor 1 – IDIQ and TO1 Technical Capabilities.

3.3.1 Significant Strength: is an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal with appreciable merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the considerable advantage of the Government during contract performance.

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

3.3.3. Weakness: means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

3.3.4. Significant Weakness: means a flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

3.3.5. Deficiency: is 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 unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

3.4 Past Performance Evaluation Process

The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements.

In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered. These shall be combined to establish a performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror, as described in the following paragraphs.

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information). All three aspects shall be considered for each of the past performance references submitted.

In assessing the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements, evaluation of past performance will result in Past Performance Relevancy Ratings and a Performance Confidence Assessment rating as follows:

3.4.1 Past Performance Relevancy Rating One of the following Past Performance Relevancy Ratings will be assigned:

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

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

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

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

(Table 3) Past Performance Relevancy Table

3.4.2 Performance Confidence Assessments One of the following Performance Confidence Assessment Ratings will be assigned:

Adjectival Rating Description Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the

Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

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

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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

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

(Table 4) Performance Confidence Assessment Table

Cost Analysis An adjectival rating will not be assigned to the Cost factor, but the Cost Proposal will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(c). The proposed costs will be analyzed as discussed below:

A. Completeness. All information/data required by the solicitation has been submitted and supports the offer.

B. Reasonableness. The costs are considered fair and reasonable to the Government in accordance with FAR 15.404-1.

C. CLIN Balance. Costs across CLINS will be evaluated to ensure they are not unbalanced in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g).

D. Cost Realism. Costs will be evaluated to ensure they are realistic in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(d).

For award purposes, the Government will evaluate the Cost Proposal by adding the total cost for the base period and cost for all option periods as calculated based on the total evaluated cost. In the event that future year’s pricing to technologies does not exist and/or is not provided within the proposal, the Government reserves the right to estimate the total pricing for future years as the Government sees most appropriate, and may not be the same methodology for all offerors, where asymmetric performance data exists. The Government may determine that an offered cost is unreasonable if the cost are significantly unbalanced in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g).

Note that the evaluation of options does not obligate the Government to exercise the options.

(End of Summary of Changes)