13-Q-7614_RFQ_Amendment_0003.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is as follow s:

1.) Perform an administrative change to the RFQ, Section M - "EVALUATION FACTORS", FAR 52.212-2, and FAR 52.212-2 Addendum as highlighted w ithin;

2.) Perform an administrative change to the PWS in Sections 3 and 10 as highlighted w ithin;

3.) Perform an administrative change to the PWS Addendum 2 as highlighted w ithin.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 6

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 28-Feb-2013

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 M68909-13-Q-7614

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

14-Feb-2013

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

28-Feb-2013

CODE

COMMANDING OFFICER

CONTRACTS, MCTSSA

BOX 555171

CAMP PENDLETON CA 92055-5171

M68909 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

M68909-13-Q-7614

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been added by full text:

52.212-2 ADDENDUM EVALUATION

52.212-2 Addendum Evaluation -- Commercial Items (Jan 1999)

The Government intends to evaluate quotations and award a task order without discussions. Each Offeror’s quotation should contain the Offeror’s best price and technical approach. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if it is later deemed necessary. Any Offeror that is rated below “Acceptable” in any evaluation criteria may not be considered for contract award.

In order to be considered responsive to this RFQ, the Offeror’s quotation MUST meet all RFQ and PWS requirements. Unsupported promises to comply with the contractual requirements will not be sufficient.

The Government may award to other than the lowest-priced Offeror or to other than the Offeror with the highest technical rating if the Contracting Officer determines that to do so would result in the best value to the Government.

In making its “Trade Off” determination, the Government will consider all non-price factors, combined, to be of significantly greater importance than evaluated price. However, the importance of price as a factor in the final determination will increase with the degree of equality in the overall technical merit of the quotations.

Evaluation Areas and Factors

General. The Government will apply the following evaluation factors to identify the best value proposal. The evaluation factors represent key areas of importance to be considered in the source selection decision. The factors have been chosen to support meaningful discrimination between and among competing quotations. The quotations will be evaluated against the Government‘s requirements using four factors, listed in descending order of importance.

Factor 1 – Technical Understanding and Approach Factor 2 – Personnel Qualifications Factor 3 – Past Performance Factor 4 – Price/Cost Proposal (evaluated but not rated)

PROCEDURES. The Price Quotations will be evaluated separately from the Technical Quotations, but not rated.

An adjectival rating and risk assessment will be used to establish technical merit and performance risk.

Note: This RFQ requires the Offeror to demonstrate its experience with Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) provisions and clauses for all Contracting Personnel within designated countries or with forward-deployed units of the USMC. Accordingly, the Offeror’s SOFA experience will be evaluated as part of the Offeror’s response to Factor 2, Personnel Qualifications.

Technical Ratings: The technical ratings to be used for Factors 1 and 2 are:

Rating Description Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach to and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses.

Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach to and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which generally outweigh weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach to and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are generally offsetting or will have little or no negative impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach to and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies.

Proposal is unawardable.

Risk: When assessing risk, the Government will consider the potential for disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION FACTORS

EVALUATION FACTORS:

Offeror shall submit a separate Technical, Personnel, and Price Quotations. The Technical Quotation shall not contain pricing information.

Factor 1. Technical Understanding and Approach

The Offeror shall describe in a narrative format their technical understanding of the Tactical Systems Support (TSS) Professional Engineering Services (PES), and the technical approach to meeting the requirements of the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS), Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP), along with any innovative solutions. The Offeror shall describe their ability to provide continuous quality support for the TSS PES efforts described in the PWS.

This factor may not exceed 65 pages (to include Cover/Title Page, Table of Contents, Acronym List, PWS Compliance Matrix/Cross-Reference) (Transition Plan is limited to 5 pages; see below).

The Government will evaluate if the Offeror demonstrates a thorough understanding of the proposed work through their submitted Technical Quotation concerning the technical TSS requirements and identifies a sound technical approach to meeting the objectives and performance requirements of the PWS and QASP.

Other Technical Criteria. Material omission(s) may cause the technical proposal to be rejected as unacceptable.

Proposals which are generic, vague, or lacking in detail may be considered unacceptable. The Offeror’s failure to include information that the Government has indicated should be included may result in the proposal being found deficient if inadequate detail is provided. The Government cannot make award based on a deficient offer.

Transition Plan. The Offeror shall include a discussion of their transition plan for migrating support from the incumbent (if applicable), and mitigating the associated risks. The Transition Plan shall not exceed 5 pages.

Factor 2. Personnel Qualifications

Offeror shall identify the names of key personnel (providing resumes) and the methods to be used to fill other personnel positions with qualified and experienced TSS technical personnel throughout the contract period. Offeror shall describe relevant TSS technical qualifications, currency of skills, and required experience of key personnel (identified as the TSS Program Manager and the TSS Technical Manager) and the correlation of key personnel to the work requirements; required security clearances for all personnel; estimated labor hours for each task and/or subtask in the PWS; and total estimated hours proposed for each labor category. Offeror shall also provide a matrix that lists the personnel responsible for supporting each identified C4 system in the PWS, Table 3-1.

This factor may not exceed 30 pages. Offerors may submit supporting documentation (i.e., resumes, staff matrix, contingency hire letters, etc.), however, the total combined submission shall not exceed 30 pages. The Offeror shall provide resume(s) for key personnel (PWS Paragraph 10.1).

The Government will evaluate the proposed personnel to ensure that they have at least five (5) years of experience or equal and expertise in tactical C4I systems, and shall be otherwise qualified to perform the work described herein. Of specific note, the PWS, Table 3.1, provides the list of currently fielded tactical C4 systems. Further, Addendum 2 provides a list of TSS billet requirements by location. The Offeror is hereby placed on notice that the personnel requirements noted in the PWS, Section 10, is inclusive of the requirements contained in both Table 3.1 and Addendum 2. Thus, for all systems listed in Table 3.1, the Offeror must demonstrate that it can provide personnel with the requisite experience (in terms of years and expertise), whether or not the system is also listed in Addendum 2. For example, Table 3.1 lists the Expeditionary Command and Control Suite (ECCS), but this system does not specifically appear in Addendum 2. To be considered acceptable, the Offeror must demonstrate that its personnel have the ability to support the ECCS.

Factor 3. Past Performance

Offeror shall submit a listing of relevant past contracts pertaining to its experience over the past three (3) years in performing TSS and engineering support or like services as described in the PWS. The list shall contain the contract number, dollar value, description of project, Government points of contact (name, address, telephone number, and email address), and cite any challenges encountered and overcome. Performance assessments will focus on Department of Defense contracts. The Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) shall be sent by the Offeror to their customers to allow for sufficient time for completion and forwarding directly back to the PCO and Contract Specialist by the due date.

This factor may not exceed 10 pages (does not include PPQs).

The Government will evaluate whether the Offeror and/or proposed personnel (if applicable) demonstrate a successful performance history in meeting and managing the same or similar technical requirements. The Government may use information other than that provided by the Offeror in its evaluation of past performance. The PPQ is a method of collecting this information to include personal knowledge as well as other references. 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 will receive a "neutral" rating and will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably for past performance.

Sources of Past Performance Information for Evaluation. Sources are as follows:

• Past performance information may be provided by the Offeror, as solicited.

• Past performance information may be obtained from questionnaires tailored to the circumstances of the acquisition.

• Past performance information shall also be obtained from any other sources available to the Government to include, but not limited to, CPARS, PPIRS, EPLS, or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, PCOs, and Fee-Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency.

• The Contract Specialist will review this past performance information and determine the quality and usefulness as it applies to performance competence assessment.

Past performance will be rated for relevancy and confidence, using the definitions below.

Rating Description Very Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as required by the current solicitation.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as required by the current solicitation

Somewhat Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved some of the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as required by the current solicitation

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities as required by the current solicitation

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.

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 successfully perform the required effort.

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

Factor 4. Price/Cost

Offeror shall submit a proposed price for each task and/or subtask in their submitted technical quotation, list the labor category, the number of hours for the labor category, the fully burdened hourly rate, and the total labor cost for each task and/or subtask, which shall correlate to the estimated labor hours proposed in Factor 2. Proposed prices shall not be more than the prices offered to the general public for the same labor category. Offeror shall clearly identify firm labor prices by labor category for each option period.

Other Direct Costs, if required, shall be identified and supported by a breakout to include identification of the cost element and the rationale. Travel costs shall be within the Department of Defense Joint Travel Regulations.

General and Administrative (G&A) and Overhead (OH) rates shall not be separately priced.

This factor may not exceed 50 pages.

The Government will evaluate if the Offeror demonstrates price reasonableness by comparing the fixed-price hourly rates offered to commercial prices for similar services, and historical data obtained from other Government agencies.

As part of price evaluation, the Government will evaluate its option to extend services (see FAR Clause 52.217-8) by adding six (6) months of the Offeror's final option period price to the Offeror's total price. Offerors are required only to price the base and option periods. Offerors shall not submit a price for the potential six month extension of services period.

Price Proposal/Payment Schedule. Provide a breakout of your participating team members (i.e., labor), associated schedules, travel, and Other Direct Costs (ODC) necessary to support your technical approach, mapped to both the appropriate WBS element and the associated CLIN. Provide any discount that you intend to apply to your total pricing. ODCs that are considered “unique, or exceptional” must be clearly delineated at the time of proposal submission to be considered for payment during the period of performance. Unauthorized purchases will not be authorized as ODCs. The price proposal shall contain pricing for the base period and option periods.

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 1999)

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

See Addendum to 52.212-2

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

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)

(End of Summary of Changes)