N00024-16-R-2321_-_Amendment_0010.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

See Continuation Page

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 3

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 13-Sep-2016

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 N00024-16-R-2321

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

14-Apr-2016

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 5 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

13-Sep-2016

CODE

NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND (HQ)

1333 ISAAC HULL AVE SE

WASHINGTON NAVY YARD DC 20376-2020

N00024 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N00024-16-R-2321

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

This amendment is being released during discussions with offerors in the competitive range in anticipation of requesting a Final Proposal Revision (FPR).

The purpose of this amendment is as follows:

(1) Provide updated document AWI 0026 864-31-4001 Warehouse Support as part of Attachment J-101 – Work Specifications for J-100

a. A Common Access Card (CAC) will be required to access this document.

b. Please contact Stacy Crisman (stacy.crisman@navy.mil) and Richard W. Rossi

(richard.w.rossi@navy.mil) with the point-of-contact with a CAC in order to receive the document.

(2) Provide further clarification in Section L to clearly define that the required unit of effort in the solicitation refers to direct labor hours (see redlined/conformed RFP for full changes).

(3) Remove the word “Max” quantity from Table L-2 in Section L (see redlined/conformed RFP for full changes).

(4) In Section L, the following language directly succeeding Table L-2 is updated, for clarification, as follows:

FROM:

CLIN 0001 contains Program Management labor hours only. The labor mix for CLIN 0001 should be determined based on the provided CLIN 0001 statement of work and requirements of CLIN 0001 Order 0001, as provided in Attachments J-100, J-101, and J-102.

TO:

CLIN 0001 contains 540,000 Program Management direct labor hours. The labor mix for CLIN 0001 should be determined based on the direct labor Program Management tasks provided in the CLIN 0001 statement of work and the direct labor program management requirements of CLIN 0001- Order 0001, as provided in Attachments J-100, J-101, and J-102

(5) In Section M, the definition of “Outstanding” is updated as follows:

An OUTSTANDING proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

TO:

An OUTSTANDING proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

(6) In Section M, Part V – Evaluation Categories and Factors, Paragraph B is updated as follows:

B. Cost Evaluation:

N00024-16-R-2321

Offerors will be evaluated on the basis of Total Evaluated Cost (TEC). Analysis of the cost realism, reasonableness, and completeness of the proposed costs to the Government will be performed on each proposal. This analysis will consider the traceability of the costs to the Offeror’s non-cost proposal, the proposed allocation of man-hours and labor mix, proposed material cost, proposed direct and indirect rates, any other costs which are likely to be incurred by the Offeror in performance of the requirements of the RFP. Based on such analysis, an evaluated cost plus fee/profit will be generated for each Offeror.

The TEC will be based on the offeror’s proposed cost for the sum of the two defined orders and seven notional orders provided in Table L-1 (List of Orders to be Priced). If proposed cost is considered to be unrealistic (i.e. proposed rates are unachievable based on historical data, FPRAs, etc.), the Offeror’s proposed cost for purposes of evaluation will be adjusted by the Cost Analysis Panel (CAP) to reflect a more realistic cost position as reflected in the evaluated cost. TEC will be calculated by adding for each Offeror the Navy’s evaluated cost and the Offeror’s proposed fee/profit. Evaluation of notional orders will not obligate the Government to place said orders.

The Government may reject an offer as nonresponsive if it is materially unbalanced as to amounts for the basic requirement and the option quantities. An offer is unbalanced when it is based on amounts significantly understated for some work and amounts which are significantly overstated for other work.

Further, the Government may eliminate an offer whose cost proposal is inconsistent with their technical proposal.

TO:

B. Cost/Price Evaluation:

Offerors will be evaluated on the basis of Total Evaluated Cost/Price (TEC). Analysis of the cost/price realism, reasonableness, and completeness of the proposed costs to the Government will be performed on each proposal. This analysis will consider the traceability of the costs to the Offeror’s non-cost proposal, the proposed allocation of man-hours and labor mix, proposed material cost, proposed direct and indirect rates, any other costs which are likely to be incurred by the Offeror in performance of the requirements of the RFP. Based on such analysis, an evaluated cost plus fee/profit will be generated for each Offeror.

The TEC will be based on the offeror’s proposed cost/price for the sum of the two defined orders and seven notional orders provided in Table L-1 (List of Orders to be Priced). If proposed cost/price is considered to be unrealistic (i.e. proposed rates are unachievable based on historical data, FPRAs, etc.), the Offeror’s proposed cost for purposes of evaluation will be adjusted by the Cost Analysis Panel (CAP) to reflect a more realistic cost position as reflected in the evaluated cost. TEC will be calculated by adding for each Offeror the Navy’s evaluated cost and evaluated fee or proposed profit. Evaluation of notional orders will not obligate the Government to place said orders.

The Government may reject an offer as nonresponsive if it is materially unbalanced as to amounts for the basic requirement and the option quantities. An offer is unbalanced when it is based on amounts significantly understated for some work and amounts which are significantly overstated for other work.

Further, the Government may eliminate an offer whose cost proposal is inconsistent with their technical proposal.

(7) All other terms and conditions in the solicitation remain unchanged.