J1 P50 - Request for Offer (RFO) Final.pdf.pdf

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

SIR #697DCK-24-R-00198

SCREENING INFORMATION REQUEST (SIR)

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

PHX Base Building and P50 TRACON Upgrade Fire Suppression, Fire Life Safety and Leak Repairs

August 26, 2025

I. Purpose:

This solicitation is for the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX) Base Building and P50 TRACON Upgrade Fire Suppression, Fire Life Safety and Leak Repairs located in Phoenix, AZ. A best value, fixed price, selection process will be utilized for this source selection. The FAA will evaluate each response received and select one qualified offeror based on the evaluation criteria established in this SIR.

Evaluation criteria include but are not limited to financial resources, technical capabilities, past performance, key personnel, schedule and pricing.

II. Submission Deadline and Point of Contact:

All submittals must be received no later than 1500 Eastern Time, on 09/26/2025. Submissions received after this date will not be considered. Hand delivered proposals are not allowed and will not be accepted.

Complete proposals forwarded must address all evaluation criteria and must be submitted electronically, emailed to the address below. However, the onus will be on the submitter that all files submitted are receivable and can be opened/read. Any proposals and/or files received that cannot be opened will be considered as not received at all. The title page must identify at a minimum the company name, Solicitation/RFO #, offeror point of contact name, phone number, email address, DUNS #, and business size in accordance with the applicable NAICS code. Also, each proposal must be well organized and have a table of contents. Each page after the table of contents must have a page number. Any proposal that does not comply with these requirements may be excluded from evaluation. The RFO package must also include a completed Past Performance Survey Questionnaire (minimum of 2 completed questionnaires will be required), per attachments listed in Section L of the Solicitation/RFO.

Electronic copy must be sent to Rodgers L. Cox Jr via email at Rodgers.l.cox@faa.gov (due to FAA email size limitations of 20 MB, multiple emails may be necessary).

Submittals forwarded must address all evaluation criteria and responses must be typewritten, and all questions must be answered to be considered responsive. If a question is not applicable, the Offeror should indicate “N/A.”

The Solicitation P.O.C. (point of contact) is Rodgers L. Cox Jr, Contracting Officer, who can be contacted at Rodgers.l.cox@faa.gov. Any/all questions or requests must be directed only to the CO.

Period of Performance: 536 calendar days Estimated Price Range: $4,000,000 - $7,000,000

III. Submittal Format Proposal must be at least single spaced, on 8-1/2 x 11 inch paper, with a minimum 1-inch margin all around. Text must be of a minimum 12-point front size or a maximum 10 characters per inch (10-pitch, pica) spacing. Bolding, underlining, and italics may be used to identify topic demarcations or points of emphasis. Graphical representations must use Arial font and be, at a minimum an 8-point font size.

Graphics must have adequate space to maintain readability. Submission must be in Word or PDF versions.

Pages must be number consecutively. A page printed on both sides must be counted as two pages. Pages submitted in excess of the page limitations stated throughout this document will not be evaluated. Page covers and/or dividers do not count towards the page limit. The page limitation are as follows:

mailto:thuylinh.t.trannguyen@faa.gov

Factors Proposal and Other Documents Page Limit

Title Page N/A

Table of Contents N/A

Executive Summary 1

Factor 1 Business Proposal N/A

Part A SIR, Offer and Award, and SF30 Amendments – Completed & Signed N/A

Part B SIR Section K—filled in and signed N/A

Part C Financial capability letter N/A

Part D Certificate of liability N/A

Part E Bid Bond N/A

Factor 2 Technical Capability 6

Factor 3 Past Performance N/A

Factor 4 Key Personnel and Team Composition 6

Factor 5 Schedule N/A

Factor 6 Cost Proposal N/A

IV. Project Scope:

the Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX) Base Building and P50 TRACON Upgrade Fire Suppression, Fire Life Safety and Leak Repairs work includes, but is not limited to, furnishing and installing all labor, materials, supplies, and equipment necessary as described in the summary below.

Offeror’s proposal must comply with the FAA’s Specification and all corresponding attachments.

Scope of Work:

1. Replacement of the existing automatic sprinkler system throughout the Base Building including the TRACON as depicted on the design drawings.

a. Note that two existing preaction systems serving the TRACON and TRACON Equipment spaces on the second and third floors will be converted to wet pipe systems, and that their control valve arrangements will be modified as indicated in the project’s design drawings.

b. At the conclusion of the project the entire Base Building from the Basement to the Third Floor will be protected by wet pipe automatic sprinkler systems.

2. Removal of existing piping to be replaced.

3. Installation of new sprinkler system sectional isolation valves (9 valves total):

a. Basement Floor – Two (2)

b. First Floor – Three (3)

c. Second Floor – Two (2)

d. Third Floor – Two (2)

4. Relocation of the First Floor control assembly out of the current location in Janitor’s Closet 102 into Stair 3. Relocation and resizing of the Second Floor control assembly out of the current location in Janitor’s Closet 202 into Stair 3. Resizing of the Third Floor control assembly located in Stair 3.

5. Installation of new corrosion monitoring systems, air release vents, and modifications to the existing drain riser for Nitrogen fill-related piping arrangements in support of the Base Building automatic sprinkler installations.

a. Installation of new automatic air vents (AAVs) with remote inerting stations (RIS) (9 AAVs total):

i. Basement Floor – Two (2)

ii. First Floor – Three (3)

iii. Second Floor – Two (2)

iv. Third Floor – Two (2)

b. Installation of nitrogen purge valve at main drain termination in Basement

6. Upgrade of the system piping with flexible grooved couplings, pipe supports, seismic bracing and restraint, and other features as required by the current edition of NFPA 13 and these technical specifications, including but not limited to sections 21 13 13 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER

SYSTEM.

7. Installation of sprinkler waterflow and valve supervisory switches and addressable signaling circuit interface modules to monitor sprinkler system including new isolation valves, new corrosion monitoring systems, and new air release vent components.

8. Removal and replacement of the two (2) existing fire pumps, jockey pumps, and associated controllers, piping, equipment, and appurtenances.

9. Modification of the existing fire alarm system device installation, removal, and programming to accommodate changes in the automatic sprinkler systems, fire pumps, and Third Floor office space.

10. Installation of temporary workstation spaces to provide building occupants with alternative workspaces when construction activities are being completed; including modular walls, furniture, accessories, new electrical power circuit, and new fire alarm devices including reprogramming of the fire alarm control panel.

11. Reprogramming of existing smoke detectors previously part of the preaction system (Approximately 31 detectors total):

a. Second Floor – Twenty-one (21)

b. Third Floor – Ten (10)

12. Removal of preaction system bypass buttons from the fire alarm program and at the main fire alarm control panel and remote annunciators.

13. Firestopping associated with the automatic sprinkler system and fire alarm system work.

14. Inspection, testing and commissioning of the new fire protection and life safety equipment associated with this upgrade.

15. Provide fire watch services as required during the construction period.

16. Painting and patching.

17. Reinstallation and replacement of removed, damaged and / or broken ceiling tiles and ceiling systems (gypsum and metallic).

18. Clean-up.

V. Screening Information:

Prospective offers are required to submit a proposal as discussed herein. Proposals will be technically evaluated as outstanding, good, satisfactory, marginal, or unsatisfactory on the basis of the criteria listed below.

Any proposal determined to be unsatisfactory in any of the following criteria will render the entire proposal to be unacceptable and therefore removed from further consideration. The government may reject any and all offers and waive informalities or minor irregularities in submitted documents. The government reserves the right to consider any references or items of past performance and not to be limited to those for similar projects or only to those submitted by the offeror. One-on-one communications may be held, at the option of the government, with one or more offerors, as determined by the Contracting Officer, to clarify submitted materials, resolve issues, and/or omissions. However, the offeror is advised that the Government reserves the right to reject offers without communications. Additionally, communications with one Offeror does not necessitate communications with all Offerors. In accordance with AMS Policy Section 3.2.2.3.1.2.2, the FAA reserves the right to conduct Communications with all, some, or none of the Offerors, as circumstances warrant. Offerors should ensure that submissions are complete and accurate. Failure to submit required information may result in rejection of proposal in accordance with AMS guidelines.

The FAA also reserves the right to award a contract immediately following the conclusion of evaluations and is not required to conduct discussions or negotiations with the successful Offeror or any other Offeror.

A prospective offeror must submit a complete proposal, which will encompass the content set forth herein. All proposal areas must be fully addressed. A negative response is required in the event of no experience for a particular area, or for any item that is not applicable. Any omission, partial, or vague responses may lead to the rejection of the offeror's proposal without communications with offeror. The government reserves the right to use and evaluate any and all available information pertinent to any offeror and its subcontractors, in addition to the data incorporated in the submitted proposal.

Each proposal must include a cover page/title sheet that identifies the company name. Also, each proposal must have a table of contents.

VI. Proposal Criteria:

Proposal submission must contain comprehensive, concise and factual information, and complete and substantiated price data. Submittals that contain omissions or incomplete responses to the requirements of this SIR, that restate or rephrase such requirement without further elaboration, or that do not specifically address all such requirements may be considered deficient and may not be evaluated. The proposal submission criteria consist of six (6) factors listed below.

1. Business Proposal

2. Technical Capabilities

3. Past Performance

4. Key Personnel and Team Composition

5. Schedule

6. Pricing

1. Business Proposal Offerors must complete and submit all items listed below.

A. Complete Solicitation, Offer and Award, any applicable SF 30 amendment documents signed and completed.

B. Offer must complete ALL clauses in Section K, Representations, Certifications, and Other

Statements of Offerors, and include Section K in the proposal. Systems for Awards (SAM.GOV) representations and certifications must not be submitted in lieu of Section K.

C. A financial capability letter from the financial institution to include Name, Email, and Telephone number of bank's point of contact, Number of years' business has been conducted with each bank, Types of open accounts (checking, loans, etc.), Balance of current accounts (the bank will provide a "range of figures" for this information, such as medium five-figures range)

D. A certificate of liability from the insurance company that shows requirements can be met.

E. Complete Standard Form 24, 'Bid Bond' with original signature and seal.

2. Technical Capabilities Offerors must demonstrate that they meet the following qualifications by citing a specific project or projects during which they accomplished the following criteria.

For projects wherein the offeror was a subcontractor, provide a point of contact (name, phone number, and address) for the General or Prime Contractor as well. The government reserves the right to verify performance by soliciting feedback from the sponsor/owner/customer and/or General Contractor.

A. Proposal Experience Describe two (2) construction contracts that are similar in contract value, size, scope, complexity, and type of the work described in this screening information request within the last five (5) years to include the contract number, project title and brief description of the work and relevant subcontractor and supplier management; specifically past experience must indicate experience with Fire Life Safety projects and experience in a sensitive work environment where work must be completed in active operational areas and 24/7 continuous facility operation is required (Examples are Hospitals, FAA Facilities, Emergency response centers, Airports, Data centers, etc.). For projects Offeror must provide the following

A. Project title, description, and contract number

B. Dollar Value

C. Customer name, address, phone number/email, and contact person

D. Scope of work performed

E. Performance period

F. Ability to meet schedules and budget constraints

G. Any noteworthy technical problems encountered and solutions

H. Any contractual issues or technical matters disputed and resolution thereof

I. Any claims and resolution thereof (i.e. nature, number, dollar value)

B. Describe firm's ability to perform the work, as stated in the FAA Drawings and Specification (Attachment J2-J2e), and that the firm takes no exceptions to the Specification. If exceptions are taken, demonstrate how it will be mitigated to successfully complete the work.

C. Describe how the project's quality, timeliness and budget will be tracked and controlled, and the method of reporting to the FAA.

Technical Capabilities Criterion:

1. Successful completion of past Fire Life Safety project at an active operational area, critical facility and 24/7 continuous facility operation (i.e. Hospitals, FAA Facilities, Emergency response centers, Airports, Data centers, etc.).

2. Successful completion of projects involving demolition.

3. Successful completion of projects involving the construction of a new or replacement of the existing fire suppression system.

4. Successful completion of projects involving the construction of a new or replacement of the existing fire alarm and detection system.

5. Successful completion of projects involving firestopping penetration.

3. Past Performance Past performance will be evaluated as a measure of the Government’s confidence in the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform this project based on demonstrated relevant and recent performance. It will be evaluated based on the information received as part of the past performance questionnaires, phone interviews with identified customers, project descriptions, and other applicable information.

Evaluation will consider the extent of the Offeror’s recent, relevant experience and ability to meet project quality, performance, technical requirements, schedule, cost control, and customer satisfaction.

The projects identified by the Offeror may not serve as the sole basis of evaluation of past performance. The Government reserves the right to obtain and utilize information obtained by the Government from sources other than those identified by the Offeror, including but not limited to the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPAR). The FAA may evaluate additional past performance information as available under the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and any other means available to obtain relevant past performance ratings. Any CPARS performance information evaluated would be considered in conjunction with your past performance submittals as required in this Solicitation.

A. The Offeror must initiate the Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment L2) for 2 projects within the last five years for a construction project similar in contract value, size, scope, complexity. Specifically, the PPQ must be for Fire Life Safety projects and experience in a sensitive work environment where work must be completed in active operational areas and 24/7 continuous facility operation is required (Examples are Hospitals, FAA Facilities, Emergency response centers, Airports, Data centers, etc.). The Offeror must complete blocks 1 through 7 on the form. The Offeror must request that the owner’s representative most knowledgeable of the project complete block 8 on the form and submit the PPQ directly to the Contracting Officer identified on the form no later than the qualifications proposal due date. Offerors are responsible for ensuring that the telephone numbers provided for the owner’s representative indicated on each Relevant Project Summary are accurate and that the representative is aware that members of the FAA project team may contact them regarding the questionnaire and the Offeror’s past performance.

4. Key Personnel and Team Composition

Provide resumes for Construction Team to demonstrate education, experience and training that meets the qualifications listed below. The combine key personnel proposed for the Construction Team must have a minimum of 17 years of experience in Fire Life Safety projects. The Offeror must be a licensed/certified sprinkler contractor and installer. Offeror must provide resumes for the key personnel below but no more than six (6) resumes will be reviewed. Indicate by name and function the key individuals that are proposed for the project team.

A. Project Superintendent with a minimum of ten (10) years of experience to include a minimum 5 years of experience coordinating mechanical, electrical and control subcontractors in Fire Life Safety projects. Offeror must submit two resumes, one for day shift and one for night shift.

B. NICET Category 1 Engineer must be a National Institute for Certification in Engineering Technologies (NICET) Level III (or IV) Sprinkler System Engineer Technical with a minimum of five (5) of experience.

C. Quality Control (QC) Manager with a minimum of five (5) years of experience as a superintendent, inspector, QC manager, project manager, project engineer or construction manager on similar size and type construction contracts that include the major trades that are part of this requirement. The QC Manager is required to be on site at all times. The QC Manager must be employed by the prime Contractor. The QC Manager will be responsible for implementing the QC plan.

5. Schedule The Offerors must submit an organized and detailed narrative and comprehensive preliminary schedule to achieve the requirements described for this project. The schedule must minimize impacts to the facility, and plan work accordingly (showing night work for all TRACON work, night work for all critical equipment areas, etc.). Follow the phasing document for the different phases of the work.

The schedule must include at a minimum the starts/finishes, /expected durations for the following milestones:

1. Construction NTP

2. Phase 1 Complete

3. Phase 2 Complete

4. Phase 3 Complete

5. Phase 4 Complete

6. Phase 5 Complete

7. Phase 6 Complete

8. Phase 7 Complete

9. JAI/CAI

10. 100% Complete

A. Project Schedule of 536 days is specified, if this is unrealistic provide a narrative and explain a more reasonable schedule that minimizes impacts to the facility and minimizes the duration of the project.

Schedule Criterion:

1. Project duration is limited by Specification 00 14 00 to reduce the period of potential impact to critical air traffic control operations. The Agency anticipates portions of the project will require both day and night shift work in the same 24-hour period for certain efforts, to meet this project duration requirement.

6. Cost Proposal The Offeror must provide a full breakdown of the cost proposal for the project on a Firm-Fixed-Price basis. The proposal must include all cost related to direct and indirect labor, fringe benefits, overhead, G&A expenses, material, equipment, other direct costs, profit, insurance, bonds, freight, handling, transportation, any applicable federal, state, and local taxes, all applicable fees, permits, licenses, and any other applicable miscellaneous charges necessary to perform all the work in accordance with the FAA Specifications and all corresponding attachments (J2 – J3). The proposal must breakout costs to include unit rates and quantity/hours for labor, materials, other direct costs, overhead and profit.

Offeror must utilize Attachment L3 – Standard Proposal Breakdown for the price proposal.

Additional tabs within the spreadsheet may be utilized to provide the necessary information required for this factor. This requirement is subject to the Davis-Bason Act and must comply with the Wage Determination (Attachment J4). If needed, the FAA may request further breakdown to evaluate each proposal. The minimum line items that must be broken out are the following:

1. Sprinkler system installation

2. Sprinkler system demolition

3. Firestopping

4. Acoustical ceilings

5. Fire alarm systems

6. Fire pumps

7. Gypsum ceilings

8. Construction facilities

9. Dayshift superintendent

10. Nightshift superintendent

11. Nightshift differential

12. Overhead

13. Profit

VI. Evaluation Criteria:

Offerors have the responsibility of demonstrating it meets the minimum criteria. The evaluation criteria for Factor 1 (Business Proposal) is Acceptable or Unacceptable. Offerors that receive an UNACCEPTABLE on Business Proposal will not be evaluated or considered for award any further. The evaluation criteria for factors 2-5 will be rated either outstanding, good, satisfactory, marginal, or unsatisfactory. Factors 2 – 5 are of equal importance. Any Offeror receiving an unsatisfactory rating for any of Factors 2 – 5 will not be eligible for award.

Evaluation Criteria Factors

1. Business Proposal (Acceptable/Unacceptable)

2. Technical Capabilities

3. Past Performance

4. Key Personnel

5. Schedule

Note: Factor 1 Business Proposal must contain all documentations indicating completeness and accuracy to be determined responsive. Proposals missing documents, with incomplete sections, or containing errors will be deemed unacceptable.

A. Evaluation Ratings:

ADJECTIVAL RATINGS FOR FACTOR 1 BUSINESS PROPOSAL

Adjectival Ratings

Acceptable Proposal contains all documentations indicating completeness and accuracy.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirement and is missing documents, has incomplete sections or contains errors.

ADJECTIVAL RATINGS FOR FACTOR 2 TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

Adjectival Ratings

Outstanding The proposal exceeds the requirements and contains multiple strengths. The proposal fully addresses all aspects of the criteria and demonstrates technical expertise in FAA facilities' fire life safety systems such as sprinklers, smoke detectors, and fire alarms.

No identified weaknesses and multiple strengths that significantly benefit the FAA.

Good The proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and may contain multiple strengths. The proposal fully addresses all aspects of the criteria and demonstrates technical expertise in Hospitals, Emergency Response Centers, Airports, Federal, State, or Other Government entity facility Fire Life Safety such as sprinklers, smoke detectors, and fire alarms. The proposal contains minimal weaknesses that are outweighed by several strengths. The risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Satisfactory The proposal meets the requirement and the risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate. The proposal fully addresses all aspects of the criteria and demonstrates commercial facility Fire Life Safety experiences.

Marginal The proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple weaknesses. The risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate to high.

Unsatisfactory Proposal does not meet the requirements and the risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

ADJECTIVAL RATINGS FOR FACTOR 3 PAST PERFORMANCE

Adjectival Ratings

Very High Level of Confidence

The offeror’s relevant past performance is of exceptional merit and is very highly pertinent to this acquisition, indicates exemplary performance in a timely, efficient, and economical manner and very minor (if any) problems with no adverse effect on overall performance. Based on the offeror’s performance record, there is a very high level of confidence that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

High Level of Confidence

The offeror’s relevant past performance is highly pertinent to this acquisition; demonstrating very effective performance that would be fully responsive to contract requirements. Offeror’s past performance indicates that contract requirements were accomplished in a timely, efficient, and economical manner for the most part, with only minor problems that had little identifiable effect on overall performance. Based on the offeror’s performance record, there is a high level of confidence that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Moderate Level of Confidence

The offeror’s relevant past performance is pertinent to this acquisition, and it demonstrates effective performance. Performance was fully responsive to contract requirements; there may have been reportable problems, but with little identifiable effect on overall performance. Based on the offeror’s performance record, there is a moderate level of confidence that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Low Level of Confidence

The offeror’s relevant past performance is at least somewhat pertinent to this acquisition, and it meets or slightly exceeds minimum acceptable standards. Offeror achieved adequate results; there may have been reportable problems with identifiable, but not substantial, effects on overall performance. Based on the offeror’s performance record, there is a low level of confidence that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Changes to the offeror’s existing processes may be necessary in order to achieve contract requirements.

Very Low Level of Confidence

The offeror’s relevant past performance does not meet minimum acceptable standards in one or more areas; remedial action was required in one or more areas. Performance problems occurred in one or more areas which, adversely affected overall performance.

Based on the offeror’s performance record, there is a very low level of confidence that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

ADJECTIVAL RATINGS FOR FACTOR 4 KEY PERSONNEL AND TEAM COMPOSITION

Adjectival Ratings

Outstanding The key personnel exceed the requirements and contain multiple strengths. The majority of the key personnel have completed FAA Fire Life Safety work assignments together as a team.

No identified weaknesses and multiple strengths that significantly benefit the FAA.

Good The key personnel exceed the requirements and may contain multiple strengths. The proposal addresses all aspects of the criteria and demonstrates how Hospitals, Emergency Response Centers, Airports, Federal, State, or Other Government Entity Facility Fire Life Safety work experiences can be completed collaboratively. The proposal contains minimal weakness that are outweighed by several strengths.

The risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Satisfactory The key personnel meets the requirement and the risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate. The proposal fully addresses all aspects of the criteria and demonstrates commercial facility Fire Life Safety experiences.

Marginal The key personnel has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple weaknesses. The risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate to high.

Unsatisfactory The key personnel does not meet the requirements and the risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

ADJECTIVAL RATINGS FOR FACTOR 5 SCHEDULE

Adjectival Ratings

Outstanding The proposal exceeds the requirements and contain multiple strengths. The proposal fully addresses all aspects of the criteria and demonstrates FAA Fire Life Safety experiences, including demonstrating critical path and explaining how they will mitigate impacts to the critical path, identifying how lead times may affect the schedule and explaining what steps will be taken to mitigate delays due to lead times, identifying major risks associated with the Scope of Work and how they will mitigate the risk, identifying realistic schedule reductions. No identified weaknesses and multiple strengths that significantly benefit the FAA.

Good The proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and may contain a multiple strength. The proposal fully addresses all aspects of the criteria and demonstrates Hospitals, Emergency Response Centers, Airports, Federal, State, or Other Government entity facility Fire Life Safety experiences, including demonstrating critical path and explaining how they will mitigate impacts on the critical path, identifying how lead times may affect the schedule and explaining what steps will be taken to mitigate delays due to lead times, identifying major risks associated with the Scope of Work and how they will mitigate the risk, identifying realistic schedule reductions, and providing details on how to achieve the reduced schedule. The proposal contains minimal weaknesses that are outweighed by several strengths. The risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Satisfactory The proposal meets the requirement and the risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate. The proposal fully addresses all aspects of the criteria and demonstrates commercial facility Fire Life Safety experiences.

Marginal The proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple weaknesses.

The risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate to high.

Unsatisfactory Proposal does not meet the requirements and the risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

STRENGTHS/WEAKNESS/DEFICIENCIES

Strength

Any part or an item of the proposal that represents an additional benefit to the FAA, is in excess than the FAA’s requirements, or would increase the efficiency or quality of Offeror’s performance under the contract.

Weakness Flaws in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiency A material failure to meet the requirement or a combination of weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level. Deficiencies are fatal errors that can’t be corrected, without major revisions.

Risk An aspect an Offeror's proposal that presents an uncertainty as to the ability of the Offeror successfully to perform the required effort or the proposed approach. An aspect (e.g. cost, price, technical, performance or schedule) that would be possible if the Offeror is selected.

Clarification Communication with an Offeror for the sole purpose of eliminating minor irregularities, informalities, ambiguities, or apparent clerical mistakes in its offer. It is achieved by explanation or substantiation, either in response to Government inquiry or as initiated by the Offeror. Note: An ambiguity is a situation in which something can be understood in more than one way and it is not clear which meaning is intended.

Omission Information requested in the SIR that was not provided in the proposal. An omission is not necessarily a deficiency if is not material in nature and the intent of the Offeror can be readily determined.

B. Cost/ Price Analysis The FAA will conduct a price analysis to determine price fairness and reasonableness based on competition, the IGCE and any other pricing tools necessary in price analysis. The price proposal must include all costs for all labor, materials, equipment, transportation, insurance, notification, licenses, permits, fees and supervision necessary to perform all work in accordance with Specifications (Attachment L3) and all corresponding attachments. The price proposal must break out costs, to include unit rates and quantity/hours for labor, materials, and other direct costs, overhead and profit. Please submit the Price Proposal in Excel format. Any omission of any required pricing information constitutes incomplete pricing and therefore, unreasonable pricing.

The FAA will evaluate proposals for reasonableness in accordance with AMS Policy Section 3.2.3 and AMS Procurement Guidance Section T3.2.3. A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business. When determining price reasonableness, the Government reserves the right to compare the Offeror’s proposed prices to the Independent Government Cost Estimate, to published catalog or market prices, to prior prices paid for the same or similar items and services, or as compared to any other sources. The FAA reserves the right to perform price realism and/or cost realism in accordance with AMS T.3.2.3(A)(1). The FAA reserves the right to conduct cost realism analysis by identifying the specific elements of a cost estimate or a proposed price and comparing those elements against reliable and independent means of cost measurement. This analysis judges whether or not the estimates under analysis are verifiable, complete, and accurate, and whether or not the offeror's estimating methodology is logical, appropriate, and adequately explained. This verifies that the costs or prices proposed fairly represent the costs likely to be incurred for the proposed services under the offeror's technical and management approach. The offeror’s Most Probable Cost (MPC) is determined by adjusting each offeror’s proposed cost, and fee when appropriate, to reflect any cost additions or reductions in cost elements to realistic levels based on the results of the cost realism analysis. The FAA at its sole discretion may require additional information to conduct this cost and price analysis or reject proposals lacking completeness or consistency.

Submissions that reflect unbalanced prices may be eliminated from further consideration on the basis that such pricing may increase performance risk and could result in payment of unreasonably high prices.

C. Basis of Award The Government will make a Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) award to the contractor offering the responsible Best Value offer and Responsibility will be determined in accordance with AMS Policy 3.2.2.2.

Offerors receiving a rating of “Unsatisfactory/Very Low Level of Confidence” for any Factors 2 – 5 above will not be considered for award. This acquisition utilizes Tradeoff Source Selection procedures to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision. Tradeoffs may be made between Technical Factors (2-5) and Price. The Source Selection Official (SSO) will consider the evaluation factors in accordance with that which is listed above and apply his/her business judgement to select the offeror representing the best value.