3.04_Amendment(0001)_23040-0032.PDF

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

(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 ACKNOWLEDG- MENT 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.

30-105

(If required)

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:

tended.

is not ex-is extended,

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

(Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION appropriation date, etc.)

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

(Specify authority)

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

(SEE ITEM 11)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.(No., street, county, State and Zip Code)8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

6. ISSUED BY

PAGE OF PAGES1. CONTRACT ID CODE

3. EFFECTIVE DATE2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

IN ITEM 10A.

THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO:

SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

(such as changes in paying office, C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

(Specify type of modification and authority)D. OTHER

BY(Signature of person authorized to sign)

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.

CODE FACILITY CODE

CODECODE

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

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

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

(SEE ITEM 13)

(If applicable)5. PROJECT NO.4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)

16C. DATE SIGNED15C. DATE SIGNED

Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return ____ copies to the issuing office.

10B. DATED

9B. DATED

E. IMPORTANT:

1 2

0001 2024 NOV 25 23040-0032 (CASREP )

N00104

NAVSUP WEAPON SYSTEMS SUPPORT MECH

5450 CARLISLE PIKE

MECHANICSBURG, PA 17050-2411

CREATOR OFC CD: N7M1.11

N00104-24-R-JB32

X

2024 NOV 23

X X

THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED FOR RECEIPT OF OFFERS IS EXTENDED TO 2:00 PM LOCAL TIME ON 2025 JAN 24.

SEE NEXT PAGE

N00104-24-R-JB32 AMEND: 0001 PAGE 2 OF 2

NOTE:

This amendment is to hereby make the following changes:

1. The offer due date is extended from 23 DEC 2024 to 24 JAN 2025.

2. This amendment incorporates Enclosures into section L and section M with the full force and effect as if contained therein.

This amendment makes no other changes.

Enclosure 1 – Proposal Submission: Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Offerors (Section L)

SECTION L.1 Proposal Submission: Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Introduction: This section contains general proposal submission instructions as well as specific proposal requirements for procurement of the item(s) listed in Section B of the schedule.

a) The Government intends to award one Firm Fixed-Price contract to the Offeror representing the best value to the Government, considering both non-price and price factors.

b) Offerors are responsible for confirming the Contracting Officer and/or Contract Specialist received their proposal.

The complete proposal, as described in Section L.2, and all subsequent amendments shall be submitted electronically no later than the due date and time specified in the solicitation. The Government will not consider proposals submitted by mail or delivered by hand. Offerors shall submit an electronic proposal to the email address listed in Section A of the solicitation in one of the following manners:

a) Electronic mail: Each proposal submitted via E-mail should not exceed 10MB. Offerors may send attachments in separate emails to remain within the size limit. Offerors may request acknowledgement to verify receipt of their proposals.

The Government may award without discussion. As a result, the Offeror should submit a proposal that presents its best offer, subject to all terms and conditions.

Offerors should submit all questions no later than one (1) week prior to the initial solicitation closing date. The

Government is not required to answer questions received after this date. Unless otherwise stated in an amendment, extensions to the solicitation due date will not extend the date for questions from potential Offerors.

SECTION L.2 Proposal Instructions

Offerors shall submit their proposals in accordance with instructions outlined here. Offerors should thoroughly review sections L & M of the solicitation prior to submitting a proposal. Proposals shall be specific, complete, unambiguous, and address each designated factor using only the English language.

The proposal shall communicate the Offeror’s ability to perform the requirement in a clear and convincing manner.

The contractor should not simply restate or repeat the solicitation requirements in the proposal as doing so would add no value for evaluation of the stated criteria. Proposals that do not contain information that Sections L and M require risk rejection. The Government intends to award a single contract under this Request for Proposal (RFP).

The Government also intends to award without discussion, but reserves the right to contact Offerors for clarification, or conduct discussions if the Primary Contracting Officer determines discussions necessary in accordance with FAR

15.306(a).

The proposal shall consist of an introductory volume and the following proposal volumes:

L.2.1 Proposal Volumes: One (1) electronic copy of each Volume submitted separately as set forth below:

Volume 1: Introductory Volume

Volume 2: Past Performance Factor Volume

Volume 3: Small Business Participation Volume

Volume 4: Price Factor Volume

Address each evaluation factor in a separate volume as specified above. Offerors shall provide electronic copies in

Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel or Portable Document Format (PDF) format. The Government considers quality of information more important than quantity with attention to clarity, brevity, and logical organization. Passwords must be provided for each password-protected document as the evaluation will not be delayed to obtain passwords.

Separate from the proposal volumes, Offerors who are a large business must also submit a small business subcontracting plan, unless an exception applies or a waiver is granted. Subcontracting plans are assessed for acceptability and may be negotiated if necessary to achieve acceptability.

Alternate proposals are not authorized. Any exception to this solicitation may render an offer non-compliant.

SECTION L.3 Proposal Organization Instructions

Offeror(s) shall organize all information intended for the Government to consider, specific to each volume, within its designated volume. Failure to include requested information in the applicable volume could result in non-consideration. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal volume. Proposals that do not contain the information requested risk the

Government’s rating of non-compliant.

Volume 1: Introductory Volume: Offerors’ proposals shall remain valid for a minimum of 90 days after the close of the RFP and contain the following:

a) One signed copy of the solicitation (Standard Form 33) to include a completed Section K, Representation and Certifications and acknowledgement of all amendments.

Volume 2: Past Performance Factor: The Government considers past performance a predictor of future contract performance. The Government bases its degree of confidence the Offeror will complete the requirements in accordance with the contract terms on the Offeror's demonstrated record of recent, relevant performance. Each

Offeror shall submit its past performance information in accordance with the following format:

Contract Past Performance Examples: Offerors may submit up to four (4) contract examples with its initial proposal representing recent, relevant performance under Government and/or commercial contracts. Offerors should limit examples to those involving its performance as a prime or first tier subcontractor only. The Government is not required to interview any points of contact identified by Offerors. The Government reserves the right to use data provided in the Offeror’s proposal and data obtained from any other sources of information to evaluate Past

Performance including, but not limited to, the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) or the System for Award Management (SAM). The Government does not assume the duty to search for data to cure any problems it finds in the information provided by the Offeror. The burden of providing thorough and complete past performance information remains with the Offeror.

Recent contracts are those that produced deliverables under prime contracts, task orders, delivery orders, subcontracts, within three (3) years prior to issuance of this solicitation, as well as contracts that continue today. The

Government reserves the right to consider any significant past performance after the solicitation closing date and prior to award.

Relevant means performance that demonstrates the Offeror’s successful performance on current and/or prior efforts involving the same or similar manufacturing and quality assurance processes. Other factors of potential consideration to determine relevance include the degree to which the contracts are comparable with regard to the complexity of the manufacturing processes, size of the production quantities or total dollar value to the solicited effort. In-house performance holds greater relevance and therefore, a greater predictor of success than outsourcing.

The Government determines which information is relevant for evaluation purposes. Offerors are encouraged to highlight those efforts it feels are most similar in scope and magnitude of effort and complexities to the requirements of this solicitation. The Past Performance information submitted in this Volume should include contract descriptions with at least the following information:

1. Contract number, Award date, Total contract dollar value.

2. Item description, nomenclature, NSN, Part Number, quantity, and period of performance.

3. Name and reference point of contact at the Government or commercial entity for where the contract performed.

The Past Performance Factor consists of three Sub-factors:

Sub-factor 1 – Quality: Offeror shall provide evidence of a Quality Management System (QMS) that has minimized defects and implemented procedures for identification, control, corrections, and/or resolution of deficiencies identified in components, assemblies, and the end items.

Sub-factor 2 – Timeliness of Delivery: Offeror shall provide evidence of how it met interim milestones, controlled supplier performance, provided reliable delivery, was responsive to technical direction, and completed work on time.

Sub-factor 3 – Small Business Utilization: Offeror shall provide evidence of its previous efforts to comply with FAR 52.219-8 Utilization of Small Business Concerns and FAR 52.219-9 Small Business

Subcontracting Plan.

Volume 3: Small Business Participation Commitment Factor: All Offerors shall submit a Small Business

Participation Commitment Document and substantiating documentation to demonstrate how the Offeror will meet these requirements. These Small Business Participation Commitment Document requirements will be incorporated into any resulting contract(s). As required by DFARS 215.304, Small Business Participation is an evaluation factor in this acquisition. Small Business Participation is evaluated in order to support the Government policy that Small

Businesses be provided maximum practicable opportunities in Government acquisitions.

This section applies to all Offerors (small businesses and other than small businesses) (including Comprehensive

Subcontracting Plan Program Participants and Commercial Subcontracting Plan Holders). This is NOT an assessment of a small business subcontracting plan (IAW FAR 19.7). At a minimum, the following information shall be included in the Small Business Participation Commitment Document:

• Goals for each socioeconomic category shown in the chart below, expressed as dollars and percentages of total contract value for Small Business Concerns and each subcategory of Small Business.

• The small business concerns as defined in FAR Part 19 that are to be used in the proposed approach to satisfying the requirements of this solicitation and the nature of the commitment with the small business concern (i.e., letter of commitment, joint ventures, mentor protégé agreements, others).

Offerors may use the table/format below in proposing this volume, or use their own format so long as the proposed volume meets the minimum requirements stated above.

Business Category Dollar Value % of Total Contract

Value

Total Proposed Contract Value – Prime Offer $_______________ %_______________

Total Small Business $_______________ %_______________

Small Disadvantaged Business $_______________ %_______________

Woman-Owned Small Business $_______________ %_______________

HUBZone Small Business $_______________ %_______________

Veteran-Owned Small Business $_______________ %_______________

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small

Business

Company Name Small Business Category(ies)

(SB, WOSB, SDV,

HUBZone, VOSB, SDVOSB)

Product(s)/Services(s) to be

Provided, including type & variety of work

NAICS Nature of

Commitment

While this strategy is separate from the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, it shall be consistent with, the Small

Business Subcontracting Plan, if such a Plan is required.

Small Business Subcontracting Plan – Companies that are other than Small Business concerns shall provide a Small

Business Subcontracting Plan conforming to the requirements of FAR Clause 52.219-9, Small Business

Subcontracting Plan, which is separate from the Small Business Participation Commitment Factor. Subcontracting

Plans shall reflect and be consistent with the commitments offered in the Small Business Participation Strategy.

Volume 4: Price Factor: Proposed unit prices are limited to two decimal places. Offeror(s) shall provide a completed copy of Section B with unit prices and total subline item pricing. Failure to do so may cause the

Government to reject the offer.

If the Government receives only one offer, the Offeror will comply with DFARS 252.215-7008.

Enclosure 2 - Evaluation Factors for Award (Section M)

SECTION M.1 - Basis for Award: Evaluation Factors for Award (Section M)

The Government will perform an initial assessment of the Offerors’ proposals against the submittal requirements of

Section L. Failure to submit the required documentation in the format specified in Section L of this solicitation may render the Offeror’s proposal unevaluable and the proposal will be eliminated from the competition without further consideration. The Government will evaluate proposals submitted in accordance with this section and will make a determination considering the following factors: Past Performance, Small Business, and Price. Based upon competition among Offerors, the Government will award the contract to the Offeror that demonstrate the best value to the Government.

The Government intends to award a single contract to the Offeror that communicates the best value in its proposal.

The tradeoff determination seeks to identify each proposal’s relative strengths, weaknesses, and risks. This means the Government may award the contract to an Offeror that does not offer the lowest price. The selection decision will consider an evaluation of the factors indicated above using an adjectival rating system that grades an Offeror’s non-price factors. Price will be evaluated for reasonableness, but not adjectivally rated.

The Government will evaluate each proposal strictly in accordance with Section M. Selection of the successful

Offeror follows an assessment of each proposal against the solicitation requirements and the cited evaluation criteria.

Section L of the solicitation contains criteria to review and assess information provided by the Offerors in response to information sought. The Government intends to award without discussions but reserves the right to hold exchanges with industry, which may include clarifications, communications, and discussions as defined in FAR

15.306.

Responsibility: Pursuant to FAR 9.103, the Contracting Officer will award only to a contractor he or she deems a responsible contractor. Separate from the best value source selection criteria, each Offeror must be able to demonstrate it meets the standards of responsibility set forth in FAR 9.104.

a) The Government reserves the right to conduct a pre-award survey on any Offerors considered for award, to assist in the Contracting Officers determination of Contractor responsibility. The Contracting Officer may also either make a responsibility determination without requesting any information from an Offeror or require the Offeror provide information to substantiate that it satisfies the general responsibility standards of FAR 9.104-1. The Contracting Officer considers an Offeror’s ability to respond to his or her request(s) for information promptly as an indication of the Offeror’s level of responsibility.

b) Nothing in this provision limits the Contracting Officer’s discretion to rely on information available from other sources (e.g., past performance databases, discussions with other entities familiar with the Offeror) or to use any other technique described in FAR 9.1 when determining whether the Offeror satisfies the FAR

9.104-1 general responsibility standards.

Other Evaluation Considerations: The Government will evaluate proposals in terms of Offerors’ past-performance or unrealistic prices. These can indicate a lack of understanding of the requirement’s complexity and risk(s) to the

Offerors.

Tradeoff Evaluation Standard Definitions

Term Definition

Risk The potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an Offeror’s proposed approach may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Strength An aspect of a proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantages to the Government during contract performance.

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

Deficiency A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

SECTION M.2 - Order of Importance

All evaluation factors other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than price. Within Past

Performance factor, all subfactors are approximately equal. Past performance is significantly more important than

Small Business Participation.

The Government reserves the right to make the award to an Offeror other than the Offeror that submits the lowest overall evaluated price, using a Best Value trade-off analysis method of procurement. Offerors must receive a rating of at least limited confidence in Past Performance to be eligible for award.

Evaluation Factors and Sub-factors:

The Government intends to award the responsible Offeror that proposes the best value to the Government, based on the evaluation of these factors and sub-factors:

• Past Performance Factor o Sub-Factor 1: Quality o Sub-Factor 2: Timeliness of Delivery o Sub-Factor 3: Small Business Utilization

• Small Business Participation Factor

• Price Factor

The Government will find Offerors that do not propose on all the above factors non-compliant and may remove them from the competitive range and/or not rate the proposal. Offerors will submit in accordance with Section L.

SECTION M.3 – Evaluation Factors

The purpose of the proposal evaluation is to ensure competitive proposals are examined impartially and comprehensively. The evaluators may verify any statements and representations made in the Offeror’s proposal.

Each proposal will be evaluated in accordance with the criteria set forth below.

Volume 1: Introductory Volume: Offerors’ proposals shall remain valid for a minimum of 90 days after the close of the RFP and be in compliance with the submission instructions provided in Section L.

Volume 2: Past Performance Factor Evaluation: The Government considers past performance information a predictor of future contract performance. The Government bases its degree of confidence it has that the Offeror will successfully complete the requirements in accordance with the contract terms on the Offeror's demonstrated record of recent and relevant performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. Assessment of the Offeror’s past performance translates a means of evaluating the relative capability of the Offeror(s) to achieve the RFP’s requirements.

The Government may consider the currency, degree of relevance, source and context of the past performance information it evaluates as well as general trends in performance, and demonstrated corrective actions. A significant achievement, problem, problem resolution, or lack of relevant data in any element can become an important consideration in the assessment process. A negative finding in any element may result in a lower past performance confidence assessment rating.

Absent any recent and relevant past performance history, the Government assigns an Unknown Confidence

(Neutral) Past Performance rating to the Offeror. Without past performance information, the Government does not consider the Offeror’s past performance favorably or unfavorably.

The Government may use information obtained from other sources to conduct past performance evaluation, or it may use information with regard to other contracts performed by the Offeror of which it has knowledge, whether or not those contracts are disclosed to the Government by the Offeror.

The Government will rate each Offeror on its recent and relevant contractual information. The definitions for recent and relevant are provided in Section L of the solicitation. The Government will assign recent and relevant ratings in accordance with the below tables.

Recent Ratings:

Determination of recent contract examples in regards to the Past Performance Factor information will be determined as follows:

Recent Rating Description

Recent

Recent contracts are those that produced deliverables under prime contracts, task orders, delivery orders, subcontracts, within three (3) years prior to issuance of this solicitation, as well as contracts that continue today. The Government reserves the right to consider any significant past performance after the solicitation closing date and prior to award.

Not Recent

Not Recent contracts are those that have not produced deliverables under prime contracts, task orders, delivery orders, subcontracts, within three (3) years prior to issuance of this solicitation.

Only information determined to be recent by meeting the standard for recent as defined in Section L and in the chart above, will be further considered in the past performance evaluation.

Relevancy Ratings:

Relevancy of the past performance information will be determined as follows:

Adjectival Rating Description

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Only information determined to be relevant (any level of relevancy) and meeting the standard for recent as defined in Section L will be further considered in the past performance evaluation.

Performance Confidence Assessment:

The Government will assess how well the Offeror performed on recent, relevant contracting efforts. The

Government may use information presented in the Offeror’s Past Performance proposal volume in addition to information independently obtained from outside sources, to include assessment reports, databases, interviews, and other sources. Sub-factor evaluation uses an overall Past Performance factor rating assigned from the table below based on the individual sub-factor ratings and findings. If any Past Performance sub-factor receives a No Confidence rating, the overall factor rating will be No Confidence.

Adjectival 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.

Neutral Confidence

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

The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

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 be able to successfully perform the required effort.

The Government may use additional, external sources to evaluate past performance. These sources include, but are not limited to, CPARS, SAM.gov, or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and the Defense Contract Management Agency. The Government also has the right to consider information regarding an

Offeror’s past performance up to date of award. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to provide complete past performance information and thorough explanations as required by Section L. The Government is not obligated to make another request for the required information.

Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a No Confidence rating, since problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an Offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems. The Offeror is required to demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming any problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified, clearly.

The Past Performance Factor Evaluation consists of three Sub-factors:

Sub-factor 1 – Quality: The Offeror demonstrates evidence of a Quality Management System (QMS) that has effectively minimized defects and implemented procedures for identification, control, corrections, and/or resolution of deficiencies identified in components, assemblies, and the end items for recent and relevant efforts.

Sub-factor 2 – Timeliness of Delivery: The Offeror provides clear evidence of how it met interim milestones, controlled supplier performance, provided reliable delivery, was responsive to technical direction, and completed work on time for recent and relevant efforts.

Sub-Factor 3 – Small Business Utilization: The Offeror provides evidence of how its efforts to comply with

FAR 52.219-8 Utilization of Small Business Concerns and FAR 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontracting

Plan have enhanced opportunities for small business and enabled the offeror to meet or exceed their small business subcontracting goals. Evaluation may include the following: reporting of small business performance in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), achievement of subcontracting goals and timely eSRS reporting.

Volume 3: Small Business Participation Commitment Factor Evaluation: As required by DFARS 215.304, Small

Business Participation is an evaluation factor in this acquisition. The Small Business Participation Factor contains no subfactors.

The Government will evaluate the degree to which the Offeror's Small Business Participation Plan demonstrates the

Offeror's commitment to maximizing opportunities for small businesses. Small businesses can claim their own self-performance as part of the small business percentage. Each Offeror’s proposal shall include the information requested in Section L. The Government will assess the Offeror’s planned approach for subcontracting with Small

Business concerns. The Government is seeking to determine whether the offeror has demonstrated a good faith effort to use the various small business concerns in the various socioeconomic sectors for the work that it does not intend to perform as the prime contractor. The Government will evaluate the following to determine if the offeror met or exceeded the requirements:

i. Extent of participation of small business firms in terms of total contract value.

ii. Extent to which Small Business firms as defined in FAR Part 19, are specifically identified in proposals.

iii. Extent to which offerors demonstrate commitment to use such firms

iv. Identification of the complexity and variety of work to be performed by Small Business firms

The Government will develop one overall Small Business Participation rating for the Offeror based on the evaluation criteria described above and using the Small Business Participation table provided below:

Small Business Participation Rating Table

Color Rating Adjectival Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Green Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

Volume 4: Price Factor Evaluation

The Government will evaluate the price of all proposals but will not use an adjectival rating to rate Offerors. The

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requires the Government award contracts at fair and reasonable prices. The

Government uses price analysis to determine price reasonableness and whether proposals reflect an understanding of the required effort. The Contracting Officer may use additional analysis techniques as needed. In accordance with

DFARS clause 252.215-7008, the Government reserves the right to require Certified Cost, Certified Pricing Data, or data other than certified cost and pricing data in the event this solicitation garners only one offer.

SECTION M.4 - Evaluation Process

This source selection will be conducted in accordance with the FAR, DFARS, NMCARS, internal NAVSUP guidance and procedures as well as any other applicable regulation or policy. These regulations and procedures provide for checks, balances and independent evaluation of proposals to ensure integrity is maintained throughout the process. Offerors are encouraged to consult the regulations and guidance online. The following is a broad overview of the Evaluation Process:

Initial Proposals: The Government will open and distribute the proposal volumes. The Government will determine whether offerors have proposed in accordance with the requirements in Section L. The Government will evaluate each proposal independently against the evaluation factors. The Government may elect to make award based on initial proposals; however, the Government reserves the right to enter into discussions.

Discussions: If discussions are applicable, the Government will advise all offerors selected to participate in discussions of their deficiencies, significant weaknesses, and other areas of risk in their offer. Offerors selected to participate in discussions shall be offered a reasonable opportunity to correct or resolve these areas. The

Government may also authorize all offerors selected to participate in discussions to submit price, or other revisions to their offer that may result from the discussions.

Final Proposal Revision (FPR): At the conclusion of discussions, the Government may request that offerors submit their final proposals. The Government will then consider any revisions and/or additional data provided as a result of discussions to determine the best value proposal to the Government. The evaluation criteria in Section M shall continue to be the basis for evaluation of the FPRs.

Notifications: The Government will provide any notification required during the evaluation process in accordance with FAR 15.5.