Amendment 0004 FA301620R00490004.pdf

R

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

Offers 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 electronic communication 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 letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication 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 NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, 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.)

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

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate the following:The Purpose of This Amendment Is:

The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate the following:

1) Section L, Para 2.6; the page limits for Vol. II and Vol. III have been revised.

2) Section L, Para 3.2; Tabs 1-4 have been revised.

3) Section L, Para 3.3; Second paragraph has been revised.

4) Section M, Technical Factor and Past Performance has been revised to include page limits.

5) All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

Section L - Instructions, Conditions, & Notices to Offerors or Quoters

Miscellaneous text in this section has been modified to:

L-1 PROPOSAL PREPARATION

1.0 General Instructions: This section provides general guidance for preparing proposals, as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. Throughout this section, the term "offeror" means the prime contractor submitting the proposal. The offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. Any offeror who submits an incomplete package may be considered unacceptable. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Request for Proposal (RFP). A proposal that is sufficiently documented to support cost/price and technical requirements in a complete, orderly, and specific detailed manner will enable the Government to perform a thorough and fair evaluation. Non-compliance with the instructions and RFP may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation and may be grounds to eliminate the proposal from consideration for contract award.

1.1 Type of Acquisition: This acquisition is a competitive 100% Small Business Set-Aside. For this acquisition, selection of the best value offeror(s) will be made using Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable (LPTA) procedures with the technical factor and past performance evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis.

1.2 Submission of Offers: Proposals are due No Later Than the date and time shown on Box 13(a). Submit all proposals to both POCs identified at paragraph 1.0. For this acquisition the use of electronic proposals will be utilized. Offerors shall submit proposals electronically. Electronic copies shall be searchable documents compatible with Adobe Reader 9 and/or Microsoft 2007. Electronic Proposals shall be submitted via email to both POCs identified at paragraph 1.0, and should be identified in the subject line as "FA301620R0049 Response to Request for Proposals (RFP)". All proposals will be placed in a secure electronic folder.

1.3 Discrepancies and Ambiguities: If an offeror believes the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, ambiguities, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the CO in writing with supporting rationale no later than 10 calendar days after the RFP release.

1.4 Mistakes: Mistakes in offeror's proposal shall be handled in accordance with FAR 14.407-4 as referenced in

FAR 15.508.

1.5 Period for Acceptance of proposals: The offeror agrees to hold its prices firm for the period specified in Block 13(d) from the date specified for proposals opening. The offeror must follow the instructions contained herein.

1.6 Postponement of Proposal Closing Date: If a determination is made to postpone a proposal closing date, an announcement of the determination shall be posted to the Electronic Posting System (EPS) and, if practicable, before issuance of a formal RFP amendment otherwise communicated to prospective offerors.

FA301620R00490004

1.7 Post-Award/Pre-Performance Conference: A post-award/pre-performance conference will be scheduled by the Contracting Officer (CO) and held prior to the commencement of any work at that installation under the awarded contract. The offeror or their duly authorized representative is required to attend the post-award/pre-performance conference.

1.8 Discussions: When discussions or requests for revised offers are not conducted or requested by the Government, the prices identified in Schedule B shall be valid through the proposal acceptance period (SF 1442 Block 13D).

1.9 Contract Document: Sections K, L and M apply to the solicitation phase only; therefore, they will not be a physical part of the resulting contract.

1.10 Points of Contact (POC): The POC for this acquisition is Andrew Sorensen, Contracting Officer (CO), and Laurenkallen Harper, Contracting Specialist (CS). Written requests for clarification may be sent to the CO/CS:

Mr. LAURENKALLEN HARPER laurenkallen.harper@us.af.mil

(210) 925-1841

502 CONS/JBKAD

1655 Selfridge Ave, Bldg. 5450 JBSA-Lackland, TX 78236

Andrew S. Sorensen andrew.sorensen.1@us.af.mil

(210) 671-6083

502 CONS/JBKAD

1655 Selfridge Ave, Bldg. 5450 JBSA-Lackland, TX 78236

1.11 Pre-proposal Questions. Questions shall be submitted to the POCs listed in paragraph 1.10 no later than May 13, 2020 by 11:00 am local San Antonio, TX time.

L-2 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

2.0 The proposal package must be completed and returned to the address in Block 7 of the SF 1442 attention Laurenkallen Harper, prior to the time set for closing of proposals, see Block 13A of the SF 1442.

2.1 To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Proposals must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this solicitation.

Alternate proposals will not be accepted. The response shall consist of three (3) separate volumes; Volume I - Executed Contract Documentation and Price Proposal, Volume II - Technical Proposal, and Volume III - Past Performance Information.

2.2 The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the Contracting Officer will review this determination and if, in the Contracting Officer's opinion, adequate price competition exists no additional cost information will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition the Contracting Officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists; offerors may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the Contracting Officer to determine the reasonableness of the price.

2.3 Format for proposal Volumes I, II, and III shall be as follows:

2.3.1 USE OF USPS, UPS, FedEx or any other COMMERCIAL SYSTEMS TO TRANSMIT SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION: To facilitate review and evaluation for this source selection the Government proposes to transmit data via commercial systems. Distributed material will be identified as source selection sensitive and distribution will be strictly limited to appropriate personnel, and shall be encrypted per AFFARS MP 5315.3 paragraph 1.4.2.2.3. Should any contractor object to their proprietary information being shared between source selection evaluators and advisors via commercial email as described above, please advise the either of the Contracting Specialists or the Contracting Officer using the contact information above.

2.3.2 HAND-CARRIED PROPOSALS NOTICE: Offerors are cautioned that Joint Base San Antonio - Lackland (JBSA - LAK) has stringent visitor control procedures requiring individuals not affiliated with the installation to obtain a visitor pass and be cleared by the Government point of contact to be visited prior to entrance. A request with at least 3 business days prior to entry must be received for an offeror to gain entrance onto JBSA - LAK. If within 3 business days prior to the proposal due date and time, offerors may try and schedule a time with the points of contact to pick up the proposal at the Visitor Center. It is possible the point of contact may not be available to clear offerors for entrance or pick up proposals, which may prohibit submission of hand-carried proposals; consequently, offerors electing to hand-carry their proposals for submittal just prior to closing time do so at their own risk.

2.3.3 The proposals will be on 8 1/2" x 11" paper, white or ivory stock. Charts, tables or diagrams may not exceed 11" x 17."

2.3.4 A page is defined as one face of a sheet of paper containing information. This includes all appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, etc., unless placed on 11" x 17" sheets, in which case they will be counted as two pages. Covers for factors, tables of contents, indices, title pages, cross reference indices, and section dividers/tables will not be included in the page count if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating factors/sections of the proposal. They will be counted if they contain any other information, (e.

g. diagrams, extraneous data, etc.). Pages marked "This page intentionally left blank" will not be counted.

2.3.5 Type face shall not be less than 12 font, with 1" margins on all sides. Smaller, legible font size, no smaller than 6 point, may be used for charts and tables.

2.3.6 Elaborate formats, bindings or color presentations are not desired or required. Company Name and solicitation number shall be included in the header of each page. Each volume will be labeled with the following format: FA301620R0049, COMPANY NAME, The response shall consist of three (3) separate volumes;

Volume I - Executed Contract Documentation and Price Proposal, Volume II - Technical Proposal, and Volume III - Past Performance Information See Table Below for specific number of copies and pages, etc.

TITLE # OF COPIES MAXIMUM # OF PAGES

Volume I:

Executed Contract Documentation and Price Proposal Original and 1 paper copy, 1 DVD/CD electronic copy.

No page limitation

Volume II:

Technical Proposal Original and 1 paper copy, 1 DVD/CD electronic copy. 50 pages

Volume III:

Past Performance Information Original and 1 paper copy, 1 DVD/CD electronic copy. 15 pages

2.3.7 Pages Counted. Each page shall be counted except for the following:

(a) Cover pages

(b) Table of Contents

(c) List of Figures

(d) Glossaries

(e) Tabs

(f) Dividers

(g) Blank pages

2.3.8 Electronic copies shall be searchable documents compatible with Adobe Reader 9 and/or Microsoft 2007.

The documents shall be delivered in a CD ROM; no other electronic storage medium will be acceptable. One DVD/CD will be acceptable if all Volumes are on the submitted DVD/CD.

2.3.9 Proposal revisions shall conform to the requirements of this section and must be clearly marked to show the changes, on different color stock as directed by the Contracting Officer.

2.3.10 Documents submitted in response to this solicitation must be consistent with the following:

2.3.10.1 Requirements of the solicitation, and government standards and regulations pertaining to the specification.

2.3.10.2 Evaluation Factors for Award in Section M of this solicitation.

2.3.10.3 Any limitation on the number of proposal pages. Pages exceeding the page limitations set forth in this Section L will be removed from the proposal and not read or evaluated.

2.3.11 The estimated magnitude of construction for this project is between $1,000,000.00 and $5,000,000.00.

3.0 Contractors shall provide the following in each of the proposal volumes.

3.1 VOLUME I - Executed Contract Documentation And Price Proposal

Tab 1 - SF 1442. Complete applicable blanks. In doing so, the offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the RFP Sections A through J. These sections constitute the model contract.

Tab 2 - Section B. Insert the proposed price to provide a complete and usable end product in accordance with the terms and conditions stated in this solicitation. Offerors who do not comply with this requirement shall be considered unacceptable and not eligible for award.

Tab 3 - Section C through J. Complete applicable blanks, the offeror shall submit only those pages that require a fill-in.

Tab 4 - Section K. Complete the representations, certifications, and acknowledgments. Section K shall be returned in its entirety.

Tab 5 - Acknowledgement receipt of all amendments issued to this solicitation in box 19, print name and title of authorized person to sign offer in box 20A, and signed box 20B and date box 20C on the SF 1442 to be submitted with this proposal.

Tab 6 - The offeror shall prepare the Construction Cost Estimate Breakdown (Attachment 4) detailing their individual cost elements, including but not limited to: materials, equipment, labor, overhead, profit, and bonds.

The line item estimate shall include unit prices and quantities for each cost line element prepared and submitted in a format similar to RS Means.

Tab 7 - The offeror shall include the original bonds in amounts according with the solicitation requirements.

3.2. VOLUME II - Technical Proposal

Technical Proposal. Each Offeror shall submit a technical volume with its proposal IAW the format below.

Offerors are cautioned that the Government will only use data provided by each Offeror in this volume in the technical evaluation. By your proposal submission, you are representing that you will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. It is not necessary or desirable for you to tell us so in your proposal.

Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation.

Factor- Technical

All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. The contractor shall address the proposed approach to meeting the minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical factor. Marketing presentations are not wanted and will not be evaluated. Hard and compelling evidence of capabilities is required to receive credit for the evaluation factor. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. Offerors are strongly encouraged to provide as specifically as possible, the actual methodology to be used for accomplishing and satisfying the requirements.

Offerors must meet the standards for each sub-factor below in order to be rated "technically acceptable". For the technical proposal to be rated as "Acceptable", the technical factors and sub-factors must be rated acceptable. If any technical sub-factor is rated "Unacceptable," the overall proposal will be rated as "Unacceptable."

Tab 1 - Technical Sub-Factor 1: Tactical Training Simulator Experience

Description: The government will evaluate the offeror's experience building tactical training simulator (TTS) training facilities that meet the Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Commission requisites, or equivalent TTS civilian law enforcement facilities that promulgates uniform law enforcement training standards using CONEX Boxes/ Shipping Containers. The offeror shall provide no more than five (5) projects on a Department of Defense (DoD) military installation using the Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment 7). The offeror may substitute TTS projects meeting POST Commission requisites with civilian law enforcement project that meets equivalency to POST requisites in lieu of DoD military installation projects using CONEX Boxes/ Shipping Containers. No more than 15 pages total.

Tab 2 - Technical Sub Factor 2: Proposed Schedule.

Description: Provide a proposed schedule that captures the major elements of work described in the statement of work, deliverables, and specifications to complete the project at minimum within the allotted period of performance (or sooner) and any other scheduled timelines for deliverables. The offeror must provide a schedule that illustrates and displays project completion of all major elements of work, percent and timelines for each element of work using a graphical or tabular representation (e.g. MS Project, AF IMT 3064, or Gantt chart). The project schedule shall be redacted to remove all company names, logos, and personnel names. No more than 5 pages total.

Tab 3 - Technical Sub Factor 3: Project Narrative

Description: The project narrative shall provide additional details to milestones and clarification to the work or deliverables included in each of the major elements of work in the proposed schedule; definable features of work (DFOW) per division; critical path work elements and milestones in the schedule; and type(s), size, and quantity of equipment proposed. The project narrative shall be redacted to remove all company names, logos, and personnel names. No more than 5 pages total.

Tab 4 - Technical Sub-Factor 4: Quality Control Plan

Description: This subfactor evaluates the offeror's submitted quality control plan. Specifically, the adequacy of the offeror's key quality control staff and approach to the management of the overall quality of the contract, and the adequacy of the offeror's approach to quality control for subcontractors. The plan should be specific to this project and explain the offeror's organization structure and relationship to production. No more than 25 pages total.

3.3. VOLUME III - Past Performance

Offeror's must provide past performance information to establish Recency and Relevancy on all Federal contracts before State, local government or private contracts. Offeror's shall provide adequate past performance information for completed or current contracts (including Federal, State, local government and private) considered most relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the proposed work as identified within the Specifications.

The offeror shall provide no more than three (3) recent and relevant past performance reports. The offeror shall complete Past Performance Information Form (Attachment 8) and provide the past performance information to establish Recency and Relevancy of the reference. Only references for recent and relevant past efforts/contracts will be acceptable for evaluation. No more than 15 pages total.

Recency. Recency is defined as active or completed project completed within the past five (5) years from the issuance date of this solicitation. In lieu of completed projects within the five years, ongoing projects may be used as long as (a) they are at least 80% complete as of the date of issuance of this solicitation and (b) the contractor provides proof of percent completion with a government approved progress report. For commercial contracts, an equivalent customer validation of progress completion report may be used in lieu of a government approved progress report.

Relevancy. Relevant is defined as "tactical training simulator (TTS) training facilities projects of similar scope and complexity" to those described in the specifications with costs ranging between $750K and $10.0M.

Offeror's are required to explain what aspects of each contract are deemed relevant to complexity and magnitude as related to the requirements of this solicitation and in accordance with Section M.

Specific Content. Offeror's are required to explain in the past performance report what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant and related to this solicitation. This may include a discussion of project complexity, technical diversity, contract/subcontract management, schedule, magnitude, description of work elements included.

The offeror is required to clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. For example, submittal of quality performance indicators or other management indicators that clearly support that an offeror has overcome past problems is required. Categorize the relevant information into the specific Technical factor and Cost/Price factor used to evaluate the proposal.

If a joint venture is contemplated, provide complete information as to the joint venture. Include any relevant and recent past performance information on previous joint ventures with the same partner. If this is a first time joint venture, each party to the joint venture should provide a list of past relevant contracts (maximum of three).

Organizational Structure Change History. Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your company. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevancy of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment. Since the government intends to consider present and past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the Offeror(s), your "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

Miscellaneous text in this section has been modified to:

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1.0 SOURCE SELECTION

1.1. Basis for Contract Award

This is a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15, Contracting by Negotiation, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS), and DoD Source Selection Procedures. These regulations are available electronically at the Air Force (AF) FAR Site, https://www.acquisition.gov/ The solicitation requirements include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by this solicitation. Unless specifically identified in your proposal, by submission of its offer, the Offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in a proposal being determined ineligible for award.

1.2. Number of Contracts to be Awarded

The Government intends to award one contract for this competitive acquisition. Award will be made to the technically acceptable Offeror with lowest evaluated price who is deemed responsible in accordance with FAR

9.104 and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements.

1.3. Discussions

The Government intends to award without discussions; therefore, offerors should submit proposals that represent their best efforts. If, during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision. In the event discussions are to be conducted, the competitive range will be established IAW FAR 15.306(c).

1.4. Solicitation Requirements, Terms and Conditions

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as factors. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the offeror being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to determine any such exceptions unacceptable.

1.5. Evaluation Process

Only offers that complied with all the solicitation requirements and instructions will then be evaluated in order starting with lowest offer based on initial assessment of Total Evaluated Price (TEP), followed by a full evaluation of technical acceptability of at minimum the lowest three TEP proposals. If the Government receives three (3) or fewer initial proposals all proposals will be evaluated for Technical Acceptability and Past Performance. A price analysis will be conducted on the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal to determine price reasonableness. Award will be made to the lowest TEP proposal meeting the technical acceptability standards (contingent contractor's responsibility determination). If award is to be made without discussion the evaluation factors and process to be used is listed below.

2.0 M-2 EVALUATION FACTORS

2.1 Evaluation Process.

In evaluating proposals, the Government will select the proposal that is the lowest-priced, technically acceptable offer to the Government with an acceptable past performance rating. The Government will evaluate proposals for technical acceptability starting with the lowest-priced proposal. Only technically acceptable offerors will be then be evaluated for past performance. To arrive at an award decision, each offer will be assessed in accordance with the following evaluation factors for the contract:

Factor 1: Price Factor 2: Technical Factor 3: Past Performance

Offerors are advised that their initial submission should be their best effort. Only technically acceptable proposals having "Acceptable" past performance, either initially or as a result of discussions, are eligible for award. If award is made without discussions; proposal revisions will not be permitted. The Government will evaluate the proposals selected above for technical acceptability and past performance on an Acceptable /Unacceptable basis. For the technical proposal to be rated as "Acceptable", the technical factors and sub-factors must be rated acceptable. If any technical sub-factor is rated "Unacceptable," the overall proposal will be rated as "Unacceptable." For the past performance proposal to be rated as "Acceptable", the proposal must provide past performance information that is recent and relevant for same or similar projects that concluded no more than five (5) years from the original solicitation release date to be rated acceptable.

2.2 Price Evaluation.

The evaluated price shall be the total price proposed by the offeror in Section B as supplemented by the Construction Cost Estimation Breakdown (Attachment 1). Proposals will then be ranked from lowest to highest based on evaluated price. The source selection will be conducted with the expectation of adequate price competition for this acquisition per FAR 15.403-1(c)(1); therefore, certified cost or pricing data are not required per FAR 15.403-1(b)(1). If at any time however, during this competition the CO determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, or if price reasonableness cannot be determined, offerors may be required to submit certified cost or pricing data or additional data other than certified cost or pricing data, as appropriate, for the CO to determine price reasonableness.

2.3 Price Factor.

Prices will be evaluated based on the Total Evaluated Price (TEP), which will be calculated by multiplying the quantities for CLIN 0001 by the CLIN's unit price to determine the total amount for CLIN0001. The same calculation process will be used for any subsequent CLINs. The total amount for each CLIN will then be summed to equal the TEP. The TEP will be established on all proposals which will then be ranked from lowest to highest price.

The Government will conduct a Price Analysis on the lowest priced technically acceptable offer having acceptable past performance rating using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404-1, to determine if it is reasonable and balanced. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable TEP, the price of one or more contract line items or sub line items appears to be significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. An offeror's proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

2.4 Technical Evaluation.

If the Government receives three (3) or more initial proposals the Government will only select the three (3) lowest priced proposals and then evaluate them for Technical Acceptability. The Government reserves the right to evaluate additional proposals for technical acceptability if in the Government's best interest. If additional proposals are evaluated for technical acceptability they will be selected in the order of total evaluated price.

Technical evaluations will continue until the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal is identified. The Government, at its discretion, may continue technical evaluations until the Contracting Officer determines that a sufficient number of technically acceptable proposals have been identified to permit determination of price fair and reasonable based on adequate price competition.

2.5 Technical Factor.

For the purposes of technical evaluation, the term "offeror" will include any proposed teaming arrangements.

The Government's technical evaluation team shall evaluate the technical proposals on an acceptable or unacceptable basis, assigning one of the ratings described below for each factor. For the technical proposal to be rated as "Acceptable", the technical factor and sub factors must be rated acceptable. If any technical sub factor is rated "Unacceptable" the overall proposal will be rated as "Unacceptable". Only those proposals determined to be technically acceptable, either initially or as a result of discussions, will be considered for award. However, the offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

Technical Ratings Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

The technical proposal will be evaluated for the following technical sub-factors:

Sub-Factor 1: Tactical Training Simulator Experience

Description: The government will evaluate the offeror's experience building tactical training simulator (TTS) training facilities that meet the Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Commission requisites, or equivalent TTS civilian law enforcement facilities that promulgates uniform law enforcement training standards using CONEX Boxes/ Shipping Containers. The offeror shall provide no more than five (5) projects on a Department of Defense (DoD) military installation using the Experience Project Data Sheet (Attachment 7). The offeror may substitute TTS projects meeting POST Commission requisites with civilian law enforcement project that meets equivalency to POST requisites in lieu of DoD military installation projects using CONEX Boxes/ Shipping Containers.

The standard has been met when: The offeror demonstrates experience building TTS facilities that meet the POST requisites in DoD military installations, or equivalent civilian law enforcement projects that meet equivalency to POST requisites. The offeror is required to explain what aspects of any civilian law enforcement project presented are deemed equivalent to the POST Commission requisites. Failure to explain how equivalency is met may render the project as irrelevant to meet the experience requirement. No more than 15 pages total.

Sub-Factor 2: Proposed Schedule

Description: Provide a proposed schedule that captures the major elements of work described in the statement of work, deliverables, and specifications to complete the project at minimum within the allotted period of performance (or sooner) and any other scheduled timelines for deliverables. The offeror must provide a schedule that illustrates and displays project completion of all major elements of work and timelines for each element of work using a graphical or tabular representation (e.g. MS Project, AF IMT 3064, or Gantt chart). The project schedule shall be redacted to remove all company names, logos, and personnel names.

The standard has been met when: The offeror demonstrates a sound, comprehensive, realistic, effective, and efficient project schedule that captures all SOW requirements, execution timelines and addresses the above items. The offeror must provide a schedule that illustrates and displays project completion of all major elements of work and timelines for each element of work using a graphical or tabular representation (e.g. MS Project, AF IMT 3064, or Gantt chart). The project schedule shall be redacted to remove all company names, logos, and personnel names. No more than 5 pages total.

The project schedule shall include at minimum the following:

a) Definable features of work (DFOW) per division to a sufficient level to clearly indicate all aspects of the project including project setup, management, design, site work, utilities, construction, equipment installation.

b) Identifies proposed utility outages and road closures.

c) Identifies critical path work elements (including any long-lead time materials) in the schedule.

d) Identifies key deliverables/milestones required to fulfill the SOW.

Sub-Factor 3: Project Narrative.

Description: The project narrative shall provide additional details to milestones and clarification to the work or deliverables included in each of the major elements of work in the proposed schedule; definable features of work (DFOW) per division; critical path work elements and milestones in the schedule; and type(s), size, and quantity of equipment proposed. The project narrative shall be redacted to remove all company names, logos, and personnel names.

The standard has been met when: The offeror demonstrates a sound, comprehensive, realistic, effective, and efficient project narrative that captures all SOW requirements, execution timelines and addresses the above items. The narrative shall be redacted to remove all company names, logos, and personnel names; and the following areas shall be addressed in the technical proposal narrative (No more than 5 pages total):

a) Definable features of work (DFOW) per division to a sufficient level to clearly indicate all aspects of the project including project setup, management, design, site work, utilities, construction, equipment installation.

b) Identifies proposed utility outages and road closures.

c) Identifies critical path work elements (including any long-lead time materials) in the schedule.

d) Identifies key deliverables/milestones required to fulfill the SOW.

Sub-Factor 4: Quality Control Plan

Description: This subfactor evaluates the offeror's submitted quality control plan. Specifically, the adequacy of the offeror's key quality control staff and approach to the management of the overall quality of the contract, and the adequacy of the offeror's approach to quality control for subcontractors. The plan should be specific to this project and explain the offeror's organization structure and relationship to production.

The standard has been met when: The offeror provides a plan that clearly and logically addresses the offeror's key quality control staff and approach to the management of the overall quality; the adequacy of the offeror's approach to quality control for subcontractors; and meets at minimum the requirements specified below (no more than 25 pages total):

a) QC Organization chart showing its structure and its relationship to the production side of the organization.

b) Duties and responsibilities and authority of QC Personnel.

c) Sample letters of appointment for the QC Manager and Alternate QC Manager.

d) Explain the QC personnel's responsibilities for managing and implementing the QC program as described in the plan, and the QC Manager's authority to direct the removal and replacement of non-conforming work.

e) Discipline-specific design quality control checklists (either samples or template).

2.6 Past Performance Evaluation.

The past performance assessment will assess the offeror's/joint venture members' ability (which includes, if applicable, the extent of its subcontractors' listed as a teaming partner) to successfully accomplish the proposed effort based on the offeror's demonstrated present and past work record. The Government will evaluate the offeror's/joint venture members' and if applicable, the critical subcontractors' demonstrated record of contract compliance in supplying products and services that meet users' needs, including cost and schedule. A critical subcontractor is defined as an entity (subcontractor and/or teaming partner), other than the offeror itself, that will perform critical aspects.

The recency and relevancy of the information, the source of the information, context of the data and general trends in the contractor's performance will be considered. The Government will take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies (if used), affiliates, other divisions, or corporate management if such was provided for evaluation and if the offeror's past performance volume demonstrates the company, affiliate, or division will provide the offeror with resources for the instant proposed effort, such as workforce, management, facilities, or other capabilities demonstrating direct and meaningful involvement in the performance of the proposed instant effort.

Pursuant to FAR 15.305(a)(2)(ii), the Past Performance Team evaluation is not limited to review of the information provided in the offeror's Present/Past Performance volume. Present/Past performance information may be obtained from the Government's Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and/or similar systems. The Government reserves the right to use performance information from other sources such as Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), Fee Determining Officials, commercial sources, and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. Data from previous source selections may be used if the data is recent and relevant.

Past Performance Reports.

Offeror's must provide past performance information to establish Recency and Relevancy on all Federal contracts before State, local Government or private contracts. Offeror's shall provide adequate past performance information for completed or current contracts (including Federal, State, local Government and private) considered most relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the proposed work as identified within the Specifications.

The offeror shall provide no more than three (3) recent and relevant past performance reports. The offeror shall complete Past Performance Information Form (Attachment 8) and provide the past performance information to establish Recency and Relevancy of the reference. Only references for recent and relevant past efforts/contracts will be acceptable for evaluation. No more than 15 pages total.

Recency. Recency is defined as active or completed project completed within the past five (5) years from the issuance date of this solicitation. In lieu of completed projects within the five years, ongoing projects may be used as long as (a) they are at least 80% complete as of the date of issuance of this solicitation and (b) the contractor provides proof of percent completion with a government approved progress report. For commercial contracts, an equivalent customer validation of progress completion report may be used in lieu of a government approved progress report.

Relevancy. Relevant is defined as "tactical training simulator (TTS) training facilities projects of similar scope and complexity" to those described in the specifications with costs ranging between $750K and $10.0M.

Offeror's are required to explain what aspects of each contract are deemed relevant to complexity and magnitude as related to the requirements of this solicitation and in accordance with Section M.

Past performance will be rated on an "Acceptable" or "Unacceptable" basis using the following ratings.

Rating Description Acceptable Based on the Offeror's performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the Offeror's performance record is unknown. (See note below).

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.

Note: In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a) (2)(iv)). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, "unknown" shall be considered "Acceptable."

2.9 Discussions: If discussions are to be conducted, the Government will establish a competitive range based on the ratings of each proposal against all evaluation criteria in the solicitation. The competitive range will consist of the most highly rated offerors based on evaluation of all offers against all factors. The Government reserves the right to further 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. Prior to the establishment of the competitive range, and after the decision to conduct discussions has been made, the Government may enter into limited communications with offerors whose inclusion or exclusion from the competitive range is uncertain. These communications are limited in accordance with FAR 15.306(b)(1).

The Government will only enter discussions with those offerors determined to be in the competitive range. At the conclusion of discussions, each offeror still within the competitive range shall be given an opportunity to submit a Final Proposal Revision (FPR) by a common cutoff date and time as established by the contracting officer. If, after discussions have begun the Government determines that an offeror's proposal should no longer be included in the competitive range, the proposal will be eliminated from consideration for award. This may occur at any time even if all material issues have not been discussed or if the offeror has not yet been afforded the opportunity to submit a proposal revision. Written notice of exclusion from the competitive range will be provided to unsuccessful offerors.

1655 SELFRIDGE AVE BLDG 5450

CP 210-671-3617

JBSA LACKLAND, TX 78236-5286

United States Laurenkallen Harper, Email: laurenkallen.harper.1@us.af.mil Telephone: 210-671-6081

SEE CONTINUATION PAGE

Email: andrew.sorensen.1@us.af.mil Telephone: 210-671-6083