Instructions to the Offeror Pest Control 2026 Solicitation.pdf

SECTION L

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS

Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders FOR OFFERS TO BE CONSIDERED

1. The Offeror is to provide its submission in accordance with the instructions found herein and within the solicitation provision FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items. Offerors are to make their submission by way of company letterhead.

2. Offers are to be received by MICC-Fort Benning no later than 12:00 PM Eastern Time, Wednesday, February 19, 2026. All proposals should be submitted to Ms. Thaunica Johnson at Thaunica.N.Johnson.civ@army.mil.

3. Offers are to consist of the following documents:

a. Company letterhead, containing information prescribed by FAR 52.212-1. Documents for technical evaluation, representations and certifications, and past performance as addressed in subparagraphs 52.212-1(b)(4), (8) and (10) are to be provided separately as discussed below.

b. Technical Capability, Technical Expertise: Separate documentation in response to the technical capability evaluation factor, in accordance with the Performance Work Statement. The Contractor, at the time of Contract proposal, shall provide the Contracting Officer (KO) with a copy of the following documents:

i. (1) Contractor's pesticide license for Georgia and Alabama;

ii. (2) State certification for each Contractor employee performing pest management services under this Contract; and shall submit updates, as necessary (State certification provided shall contain the following information at a minimum: licensee’s full name, license/certification number, pest control categories, and license/certification expiration date);

iii. (3) The Contractor shall also provide proof of liability insurance for operation of a commercial pest control business, effective in the State where operations are to be performed. The Installation Integrated Pest Management Coordinator (IPM Coordinator) will submit all these licenses/certifications to an Army Environmental Command (AEC) Pest Management Consultant (PMC) for validation and approval.

c. Technical Capability, Staffing Approach: The offeror shall, at all times, maintain a sufficient staff of pesticide applicators certified in the category of pest control service to be performed, such that all pest control service orders are executed within 72 hours of issuance by the Directorate of Public Works (DPW). The offeror shall provide a staffing plan describing methods used to maintain such continuous operation.

i. Pages beyond the initial twenty-five (25) will not be evaluated. Submission is to include a narrative description of the Offeror’s proposed (1) technical capability, (2) past performance, and (3) price, which price should be a separate attachment.

d. Past Performance: Separate document in response to the past performance evaluation factor.

Limit is two pages of narrative. Pages beyond the initial two will not be evaluated. Submission is to include up to ten (10) references from private and public entities for which the Offeror performed work as either a prime or sub-contractor that is similar in nature and scope during the past five years (as of date set for receipt of offers). The Government will use this and other information at its disposal to determine acceptability of the Offeror’s past performance.

e. A completed copy of the Offeror’s representations and certifications required by the provisions 52.209-7 and 52.212-3. As an alternative, the Offeror may affirm in its cover letter that the required representations and certifications are found on-line in the Government’s System for Award Management (SAM).

mailto:Thaunica.N.Johnson.civ@army.mil

4. Submission may be made via e-mail to Thaunica.N.Johnson.civ@army.mil or delivered to MICC Fort

Benning, 6650 Meloy Drive, Suite 250, Fort Benning, GA 31905. Facsimiles will not be accepted. If submitted via email, attached files must be Microsoft compatible and virus/malware free. Electronic media suspected by Government computers as possibly containing virus/malware will not be opened or considered.

5. All quotations from responsible sources will be fully considered. Vendors, who are not registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) with all required information provided prior to award, will not be considered. Vendors may register with SAM by going to www.sam.gov.

a. Contracting Office Address: MICC-Fort Benning, 6650 Meloy Drive, Suite 250, Fort Benning, GA 31905 Point of Contact: Ms. Thaunica Johnson; Email: Thaunica.N.Johnson.civ@army.mil;

Ph: 520-671-5268

SECTION M

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award INSTRUCTIONS AND NOTICES

1. Basis for Contract Award

a. This is a best value contract selection. The Government will utilize a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) evaluation method for this requirement. The Government will award a single contract to the Contractor whose proposal is technically acceptable and the lowest price. Subject to the provisions contained herein, the Government intends to award a single contract resulting from this solicitation to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), as supplemented, whose Proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, and all other information required by the solicitation), provides the Lowest Priced, Technically Acceptable proposal to satisfy the requirements of this requirement and the PWS. Proposals that fail to address all the requirements set forth in the Solicitation and PWS will be rejected.

b. The Government will evaluate the price proposed for each CLIN and the total estimated price proposed. The Government will evaluate the price for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the base period, and comparing the total prices proposed for all of the proposals found to be technically acceptable.

Price will not be evaluated on those proposals found to be Technically Unacceptable.

c. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s technical proposal to determine whether it satisfies the requirements of the PWS and is executable as proposed. In order to be considered for award, there must be an “acceptable” rating in every non-price sub factor. A determination will be rendered as to whether the technical proposal is evaluated as Acceptable or Unacceptable as follows:

TABLE I

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation

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

NOTE: SUB-FACTORS WILL BE RATED ACCEPTABLE OR UNACCEPTABLE ACCORDING TO

THIS TABLE.

d. The Government intends to issue one contract as a result of this solicitation. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors. Therefore, the Offeror’s in their best terms from a cost and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to reject a proposal upon initial submission and not consider it for contract award if any required data is absent or the data received conveys a misunderstanding of the requirement. If revised proposals are requested, they will be evaluated against the same criteria as the initial proposals.

2. EVALUATION FACTORS:

Evaluation criteria consist of the following factors and sub-factors. The proposals will be evaluated under three (3) evaluation factors:

Factor I - Technical Capability;

Factor II - Past Performance;

Factor III - Price

3. Factor I: Technical Capability

The Government’s technical evaluation team will evaluate proposals to determine each offeror’s technical acceptability. The proposal must demonstrate a practical/functional approach that meets the requirements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Failure to meet the criteria will render the proposal technically unacceptable and the proposal will not receive further consideration for award.

a. Subfactor 1: Technical Expertise – The offeror’s technical expertise will be evaluated to assess the offeror’s technical capability, the proposed approach to meet the Government’s requirements, and the methods for ensuring successful contract performance. The responses to the technical expertise area will be evaluated to determine whether it is feasible. The proposal will also be evaluated to determine whether the offeror's methods, resources, certifications and approach in meeting the requirements stated in the PWS can be performed in a timely manner and whether it provides the Government with a high level of confidence of successful completion. The Government will also evaluate the offeror’s response to meeting the requirements of the PWS, QASP and the PRS.

i. The offeror shall be licensed by the state department of agriculture in both Georgia and Alabama as a pest control contractor/business in the category of pest control service to be performed and provide a copy of such license.

ii. Any of the offeror’s pest management personnel operating on Fort Benning shall be licensed by the state department of agriculture as a certified pesticide applicator in the category of pest control service to be performed and the offeror shall provide a copy of such license.

iii. The offeror shall maintain current liability insurance as a pest control business, effective in the state(s) where the pest control service is to be performed and provide a copy of such.

iv. The offeror shall provide a Pesticide Use Proposal consisting of a list of EPA/state-registered pesticides to be used in the performance of services, including brand name and EPA registration number.

b. Subfactor 2: Staffing Approach – The Government will evaluate the offeror’s staffing approach to determine whether it is feasible in terms of providing the required support set forth in the PWS. The offeror’s staffing approach will be evaluated to determine the offeror's ability to recruit, hire, retain and manage qualified, experienced and certified personnel required to perform the services and whether it is feasible in terms of providing the required support as stated in the offeror’s PWS. The staffing approach will be also evaluated to determine the offeror’s ability to retain a certified workforce sufficient to satisfy the requirements stated in the offeror’s PWS.

i. The offeror shall, at all times, maintain a sufficient staff of pesticide applicators certified in the category of pest control service to be performed, such that all pest control service orders are executed within 72 hours of issuance by the Directorate of Public Works (DPW). The offeror shall provide a staffing plan describing methods used to maintain such continuous operation.

a. The feasibility of the offeror’s approach,

b. The level of understanding of the requirements and

c. The level of detail provided to explain the offeror’s approach. Each Technical Capability element will receive one of the adjectival ratings defined below, and then there will be an overall roll-up adjectival rating at the factor level. Proposal risk is used to portray the evaluation of weaknesses in the Contractors’ proposals. The element ratings will be used to determine an overall rating for the factor. A proposal shall achieve a minimum rating of “Acceptable” in the Technical Capability factor to be viable for award and shall demonstrate a sound approach that meets all requirements and objectives of the proposed PWS.

4. Factor II: Past Performance Past Performance

Provide information on past performance to include recent and relevant contracts (within the past five years) for the same or similar items and other references (including contract numbers, points of contact with telephone numbers, and other relevant information).

a. Using information provided in the proposal, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), and information from other sources such as other Federal Government offices and commercial sources, the Government will assess the offeror’s ability to perform the efforts as described in the solicitation. The purpose of the assessment is to identify and review recent performance within the past five (5) years and relevant similar scope, magnitude and complexity to the services required to be performed. Offerors with no relevant present or past performance history shall receive the rating of ‘neutral”, meaning the rating is treated neither favorably nor unfavorably. If adverse past performance information is obtained; the offeror will have an opportunity to respond in writing to explain the adverse past performance information. This information will be considered in the evaluation.

b. The evaluation process of Past Performance will result in an overall past performance based on the information submitted. Past performance evaluation will be rated IAW table below:

TABLE III

Past Performance Evaluation Ratings

Ratings Description Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral The offeror has insufficient or no relevant past performance upon which to base a meaningful performance.

5. Factor III: Price

a. The offeror’s price shall represent the offeror’s best efforts to respond to the solicitation. Any inconsistency between performance and price shall be explained in the submission. Any significant inconsistency, left unexplained, may raise a fundamental question of the offeror’s ability to perform the task within the fiscal constraints thereof, may be cause for rejection of the submission. The burden of proof for price credibility rests with the offeror.

b. The offeror’s price submission will be evaluated considering the offer to the solicitation in the Pricing Schedule by adding the basic requirement plus all options for the total price. An offeror’s proposed prices will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified in the Pricing Schedule by the proposed unit price for each Contract Line Item Number to confirm the extended amount for each. The techniques and procedures described under FAR Part 15.404 will be the primary means of assessing price submission reasonableness. To be viable for award, offeror’s price must be determined fair and reasonable by the Government.