N0017424R0051-0003.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 to answ er bidder questions. As a result of this amendment, there are changes to Section L, 5.0, Volume II: Past Performance; Section M, Factor 2-Past Perfomance; and Attachment 3-Past Performance Matrix removing the requirement to submit subcontractors' past performance information.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 10

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 11-Jun-2024

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 N0017424R0051

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

23-May-2024

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 1 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

11-Jun-2024

CODE

NSWC IHD C02

4081 N. JACKSON RD

BLDG 841

INDIAN HEAD MD 20640-5116

N00174 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N0017424R0051

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

AMENDMENT 003

The purpose of this amendment is to answer bidder questions. As a result of this amendment, there are changes to Section L, 5.0, Volume II: Past Performance; Section M, Factor 2-Past Perfomance; and Attachment 3-Past Performance Matrix removing the requirement to submit subcontractors' past performance information.

1. QUESTION:

For purposes of Volume II: Past Performance (Factor 2) can the government please define and/or clarify what qualifies as a “subcontractor”?

ANSWER:

FAR 44.101 Definitions. Subcontractor means any supplier, distributor, vendor, or firm that furnishes supplies or services to or for a prime contractor or another subcontractor.

2. QUESTION:

Specifically, the Solicitation states that “Past performance information shall be provided for the Prime and all subcontractors in order to develop an Offeror's past performance rating.” Does this mean only those subcontractors used in responding to the sample Task Order? Alternatively, does this mean all subcontractors that may support the ultimate contract?

ANSWER:

Past performance information shall be provided for only the prime Offeror supporting the contract and not subcontractors in accordance with Amendment 003 of the Solicitation.

3. QUESTION:

With up to seven contracts per subcontractor + PPQs (+ the same for the Prime), using only 3 subcontractors the government could receive almost 30 different PPQs and references to evaluate, which seems very onerous on industry and the government evaluation panel depending on how “subcontractor” is defined. Is there a limit or expected number of subcontractors that offerors should identify for the past performance volume?

ANSWER:

There is no limit on the number of subcontractors that Offerors shall use to fulfill the terms of the contract however in accordance with Amendment 003 of the Solicitation, subcontractors Past Performance is not a requirement of the Solicitation.

4. QUESTION:

How should offerors complete the “Contract Completed On Time” and “Contract Completed at Proposed Cost” columns of the Past Performance Matrix for IDIQ type contracts where there are multiple DOs with their own delivery timelines?

ANSWER:

Offerors having past performance on contracts with multiple delivery orders shall list the contract number and delivery order number(s) on separate rows and complete all information for each column including “Contract Completed On Time YES/NO” and “Contract Completed at Proposed Cost YES/NO”.

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

1.0 OVERVIEW

The purpose of this procurement is to assist the Naval Surface Warfare Center Indian Head Division (NSWC IHD) with providing hardware, materials, supplies, and training services to support Foreign Military Sales (FMS) requirements.

1.1 Contract Award

1.1.1 The Government intends to award up to three (3) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), Firm Fixed Price (FFP) type contracts as a result of this solicitation in accordance with Section M, to the responsible Offeror(s) whose proposal represents the Best Value to the Government utilizing a trade-off process in accordance with the Factors set forth in the solicitation. Once the Government makes contractual awards, individual FFP delivery orders will be competed and awarded based on Lowest Price Technically Acceptable approach, pursuant to FAR 15.101-2 with the exception of the man-rated items, which will be competed and awarded based on the Tradeoff process, pursuant to FAR 15.101-1.

1.1.2 The Government may reject any or all proposals if such action is in the Government’s interest.

1.1.3 The Government reserves the right to award multiple contracts based on initial offers and without holding discussions, but reserves the right to hold discussions at the Government's discretion; therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a cost/price and technical standpoint.

1.1.4 The Government will conduct price analysis on the price proposal.

2.0 NOTICES TO OFFERORS

Each Offeror must (1) submit an offer, (2) submit information that addresses the evaluation factors, and (3) submit supporting price data. The Government will evaluate each Offeror's understanding of the Government's requirements and ability to perform the work on the basis of its proposal. It is the Offeror's responsibility to provide information and evidence that clearly demonstrates its ability to meet the solicitation requirements. Unless otherwise allowed, all questions shall be submitted by 4:30PM ET within 10 business days from date of solicitation release, as time may not permit responses to questions received after that time.

3.0 INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMISSION OF OFFERS

3.1 Submission

3.1.1 Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals

3.1.1.1 The Offeror shall submit the following information electronically to:

Melinda Blaine (melinda.s.blaine.civ@us.navy.mil); AND Kristy Hoffman (Kristy.r.hoffman.civ@us.navy.mil)

Failure to do so will render an offer ineligible for award:

3.1.1.1.1 One (1) copy of the Technical Volume.

3.1.1.1.2 One (1) copy of Past Performance Volume, including Past Performance Matrix (Attachment 3), and Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 4)

3.1.1.1.3 One (1) copy of the Price Volume, containing the completed and signed RFP package, with all representation certifications executed, and with prices in Section B.

3.1.1.2 Any proposal modification or revision not received/submitted by the exact time specified for receipt of offers is “late” and may not be considered. The solicitation will close at the exact date and time specified in the solicitation and Offerors will be unable to submit their proposal after that time.

3.1.1.2.1Proposals may be withdrawn by written notice to the Contracting Officer provided such notice is received prior to contract award. Withdrawals are effective upon receipt of notice by the Contracting Officer.

3.1.1.2.2 Failure to submit a complete proposal prior to the solicitation closing date and time may render the proposal unacceptable.

3.2 Offer Expiration Date

Proposals in response to this solicitation shall be valid for 365 calendar days.

4.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT

4.1 General

In order to maximize efficiency and minimize the time for proposal evaluation, all Offerors shall submit its proposals in accordance with the format and content specified. Proposals that do not meet the below requirements may be deemed unresponsive and may not be eligible for award. The electronic proposal shall be prepared so that if printed, the proposal meets the following format requirements:

8.5 x 11 inch paper Single-spaced typed lines 1 inch margins Font text shall be 12-point Times New Roman, except for:

o Graphs, graphics, tables, or charts used to supplement the proposal text shall use Times New Roman that is no smaller than 9-point font size.

o Microsoft Office Excel spreadsheets shall use Times New Roman that is no smaller than 9-point font size. Excel spreadsheets shall be formatted for printing in landscape orientation such that all row and column headings appear on each printed page. All spreadsheets shall include calculations in the cells showing all formulas. Do not enter hard data where formulas were used to calculate the entered value.

No hyperlinks Proposals shall be in English and in U.S. dollars.

Proposals shall be Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, PowerPoint) 2010 and newer versions or Adobe Acrobat

(.PDF) compatible

Offerors are instructed to clearly label all files with Volume number, company name and a unique identifying name, which is reflective of the contents of the file (i.e., VOL. III, ABC COMPANY, PRIME COST PROPOSAL). Please keep the file names consistent for all volumes.

4.1.1 Page Numbering

The Offeror shall use a standard page numbering system to facilitate proposal references. Number consecutive pages within sections. Charts, graphs and other insert materials shall be page-numbered as part of the page numbering system.

4.1.2 Page Limitations

Page limitations are identified for each volume/section of the proposal, as described in paragraph 5.0 below and will be treated as maximums. If exceeded, excess pages will not be read or considered in proposal evaluation. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Graphs, charts, and tables are included in the page count. The following are not included in the page limitations:

(i) Title/Cover pages

(ii) Tables of contents

(iii) Glossaries of abbreviations and acronyms

(iv) Proposal Cross-Reference Tables

4.2 Cover letter, provided as a separate file, of the proposal must provide the following:

i. The solicitation number;

ii. The name, address, e-mail address, cage codes, and telephone and facsimile numbers of points of contact for the Offeror;

iii. Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation;

iv. Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal.

v. The following elements of the technical proposal shall be addressed in the cover letter:

Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)

Certification/Mitigation Plan: The Offeror shall certify compliance with the OCI clause L-209-H009, Notification of Potential Organizational or Personal Conflict(s) of Interest (NAVSEA) (APR 2022). If a potential conflict of interest exists at any tier, each potential prime Offeror is requested to notify the Contracting Officer within 14 days of the date of this solicitation and present an acceptable plan to neutralize any potential organizational conflict of interest. Those Offerors deemed to have a conflict of interest may be ineligible for award.

vi. A statement that the Offeror consents, meets and agrees with all terms, conditions, requirements, provisions, and amendments included in the solicitation. Offerors must meet all requirements at the time of proposal submission; or provide with their cover letter an acceptable plan to meet the requirements by the start date of the contract performance. Failure to meet all requirements at the time of proposal submission or provide an acceptable plan to meet the requirements by the start date of the contract performance may remove the Offeror from consideration of award.

4.3 Cover Page, Table of Contents, Proposal Cross-Reference Table

Each proposal volume must include a Cover Page and a Table of Contents. The Cover Page shall identify the solicitation number, amendment number, proposal volume and title, and the Offeror’s name. Volume I shall include a Master Table of Contents and a Proposal Cross-Reference Table. The Proposal Cross-Reference Table shall indicate the required proposal content by solicitation section/page number and the section/page number where this content appears in the proposal.

4.4 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

Each volume shall contain a glossary, which includes all abbreviations, acronyms and their corresponding definitions.

4.5 Cost Information

Pricing information of any kind shall only be included in Volume III, Price Proposal. Offerors must submit all price related documentation required for Volume III.

5.0 PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION

Factors are of equal importance.

VOLUME I – TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES AND APPROACH (Not to Exceed 25 Pages) (FACTOR 1)

The Offeror shall address the technical factor as detailed below. Offerors are to ensure that only Technical information is contained within Volume I. The resultant Offeror's proposal will be incorporated into the contract by reference and the Offeror shall perform in accordance with the technical proposal presented with its proposal.

The technical proposal shall be limited to the Government specified number of pages:

The Offeror shall describe its specific knowledge, capability, and technical approach to perform the requirements listed in sections 3.1 through 3.4 of the Government provided Statement of Work (SOW). The Offeror shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements in the proposal. The Offeror shall provide sufficient details and convincing rationale that address how the Offeror intends to meet the requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of its facilities, capabilities or experience.

Task Order 0001 (Attachment 5) is being provided to detail the requirements for a Kick-Off meeting for contractor awardees. Offerors shall address their ability to meet the requirements in the SOW.

In addition, the Government is providing a sample Delivery Order, identified in Attachment 2: Example SOW for Pricing. Offerors shall describe their technical approach to performing the requirements in the sample Delivery Order and how you will meet the requirements using prime resources.

VOLUME II: PAST PEFORMANCE (FACTOR 2)

Past performance information shall be provided for the Prime in order to develop an Offeror's past performance rating.

Past performance information is one indicator of an Offeror’s ability to perform the contract successfully. In the evaluation of an Offeror’s past performance, the Government reserves the right to use relevant performance within the past five years. Relevant and timely past performance information in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) (http://www.CPARS.gov/) including the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) (http://www.SAM.gov/) will be considered during the evaluation of an Offeror’s past performance.

Using the Past Performance Matrix (as listed in Section J), the Offeror shall provide a separate list of relevant contracts that were performed within the last five years. Contracts that are listed in CPARS are preferred. The list for the Prime shall contain no more than seven relevant contracts. The identified relevant contracts shall focus on performance that is relevant to the current solicitation requirement of this solicitation. Relevancy includes similarity of item, complexity and dollar value. With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. If the Offeror has no relevant past performance within the last five years or cannot provide a list of relevant contracts, then the Offeror must provide an explanation.

Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 4) only apply to relevant contracts for which performance information is not available through PPIRS. The Offeror shall submit the Past Performance Questionnaire to all of their references listed on the Past Performance Matrix that have NO PPIRS contracts, and shall request the references to complete the Past Performance Questionnaire. Surveys shall be emailed to Melinda Blaine (melinda.s.blaine.civ@us.navy.mil) and Kristy Hoffman (kristy.r.hoffman.civ@us.navy.mil).

VOLUME III – PRICE (FACTOR 3)

REMINDER: It is imperative that Offerors label all price files with Volume III, company name and a unique identifying name which is reflective of the contents of the file.

This volume is the only volume that shall contain price information. There is no limitation on the number of pages for the submission of the price proposal. All Attachments submitted under Volume III, price proposal shall be clearly identified.

The Price Volume shall include the completed RFP document. The Government will be establishing a Not To Exceed ceiling in Section B for each CLIN that is assigned for each FSG specified in the SOW.

Offerors shall provide pricing information for Task Order 0001 (Attachment 5) in accordance with FAR 52.216- 19(a) to meet the minimum order.

The sample delivery order identified in Attachment 2: Example SOW for Pricing is a sample representation of the types of equipment that will be procured under this contract. They will not be the exact items procured under this contract. Offerors will provide a cost estimate in Attachment 2 for the sample delivery order.

The Price Volume shall include any available pricing information to facilitate the price analysis that will be performed in evaluating the proposal (i.e., price breakdown, catalog pricing, past pricing history, etc.).

The price information shall include data regarding the general financial condition of the Offeror and specific plans for financing the proposed contract. The Government has no plans to provide any financial assistance.

The Price Volume shall also include all executed representation certifications. The Offeror shall not take any exceptions or make any deviations to the terms of the RFP, as any exception or deviation in a proposal will be considered to be a deficiency.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES (NOV 2021)

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

General:

1. It is the intention of the Navy to award up to three (3) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), Firm Fixed Price (FFP) type contracts for a five-year ordering period.

2. Award will be made to the Offeror(s) whose proposal is the most advantageous to the Government under the selection criteria set forth in this Section M. Offerors are required to follow specific instructions in submitting their proposal. Each Offeror’s submission will be screened upon receipt by the Contracting Officer or a designee of the Contracting Officer to ensure compliance with the RFP instructions and requirements. Elimination of an Offeror due to failure to comply with the submission requirements of the RFP is at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer.

3. As a result of this solicitation, the Government intends to award up to three contracts based on initial offers and without holding discussions, but reserves the right to hold discussions at the Government’s discretion. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, in accordance with FAR 15.306 -- Exchanges With Offerors After Receipt of Proposals, clarifications may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. IAW FAR: “(a)(1) Clarifications are limited exchanges, between the Government and Offerors. (2) If award will be made without conducting discussions, Offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of proposals (e.g., the relevance of an Offeror’s past performance information and adverse past performance information to which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond) or to resolve minor or clerical errors.”

4. The following factors will be used to evaluate offers: Both non-cost factors are of equal importance. Both non-cost factors, when combined, are more important than cost. However, the degree of importance of cost will increase with the degree of equality of the proposals in relation to the non-cost factors on which the selection is to be based, or when the price delta between Offerors is so high as to diminish the value of the superiority of the non-cost factors.

Volume I: Factor 1: Technical Capabilities and Approach

Volume II: Factor 2: Past Performance

Volume III: Factor 3: Price

Technical Ratings:

The Government will use the following Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method.

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

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES AND APPROACH (Volume I)

The Government has established the page limit for the technical factor in Section L of the RFP. Offerors are advised that excess pages will not be evaluated. The Government will assess whether or not the Offeror has simply restated the Statement of Work (SOW), which is unacceptable.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s detailed description of their specific knowledge, capability, and technical approach to perform the requirements listed in sections 3.1 through 3.4 of the Government provided SOW.

The Government will assess the Offeror’s ability to meet the requirements of Task Order 0001 for a Kick-Off meeting for contractor awardees.

The Government will evaluate the degree to which the Offeror’s technical approach to performing the requirements in the sample delivery order is realistic, thorough and detailed.

FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE (Volume II)

The Government will evaluate the Prime’s past performance to develop the Offeror’s past performance rating. Past Performance will be evaluated by the Contract Specialist.

Past performance information is one indicator of an Offeror’s ability to perform the contract successfully. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each Offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products that meet the contract’s requirements. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort is to the current solicitation requirement cited in the Scope of this solicitation and to determine how well the contractor performed on those previous contracts.

Relevancy includes similarity of service/support, complexity and dollar value. With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success. One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each Offeror after evaluating the Offeror’s recent past performance and its relevancy.

The reference information must be current to facilitate the evaluation process. If the Offeror has no relevant past performance within the last five years or cannot provide a list of relevant contracts, then the Offeror must provide an explanation.

In the evaluation of an Offeror, the Government reserves the right to use relevant performance only within the past five years. The Government will not evaluate past performance information outside of the five year timeframe which begins at the date of solicitation issuance. Relevant and timely past performance information including, but not limited to, information in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) (http://www.CAPRS.gov/) including the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)(www.SAM.gov) will be considered during the evaluation of an Offeror’s past performance. Other sources of information available to the Government may also be used in the evaluation of Past Performance.

The following adjectival ratings/definitions shall be used to assign a rating for each effort for the Relevancy of the Past Performance obtained by the Government:

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.

The following adjectival ratings/definitions shall be used to assign one rating for the Performance Confidence Assessment to each Prime Offeror. This rating shall be based on the Prime’s Past Performance Information.

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.

FACTOR 3 - PRICE (Volume III)

Price will be evaluated by the Contracts personnel to determine fairness, completeness and reasonableness through the most appropriate method available in accordance with FAR Part 15.4.

METHODOLOGY

Proposals will be evaluated for the degree of understanding demonstrated, the technical excellence or lack thereof within the factors, and the level of competence proposed within each factor, as appropriate. Each factor will be reviewed based on the merits of the information contained in the Offeror’s submission. Evaluators will not allow any prior knowledge of the Offeror to affect the evaluation of Factor 1, but relevant and timely past performance information will be considered during the evaluation of Factor 2.

At the conclusion of the Technical and Past Performance evaluations, the Government will reach a consensus rating for the Technical factor and for the Past Performance factor for each Offeror. If an Offeror receives a Technical rating of “Unacceptable” the Government may not rate the Offeror’s Past Performance as that Offeror may not be considered for award. Only Offerors receiving a Technical rating of “Acceptable” and a Past Performance rating of other than “Limited Confidence” or “No Confidence” will be eligible for award. The Government will not assign a rating to the Price factor, but will determine the total evaluated price of Task Order 0001 (Attachment 5) and Example SOW for Pricing (Attachment 2) from each Offeror based on information provided, for the Offerors that represent the most likely candidates for award. These Offerors will then be compared using the best value tradeoff analysis between the Technical factor, the Past Performance factor and Price.

Best value means the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement. A tradeoff analysis may be used when it is in the best interest of the Government to consider award to other than the lowest total evaluated cost Offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror. The comparison will trade off differences in technical capability based on the non-cost factors and total evaluated cost. If one Offeror has both the better technical capability and the lower total evaluated cost, then that Offeror will be the better value. If one Offeror has the better technical capability and a higher technical evaluated cost, the Government will decide whether the difference in technical capability is worth the difference in price. If it is determined that the difference in technical capability is worth the difference in price, then the more capable, higher-priced Offeror will be the better value. If not, then the less capable, lower-priced Offeror will be the better value.

Offerors are advised that the Government seeks proposals that demonstrate an acceptable technical ability at a reasonable and realistic price. Award will be made to the Offeror(s) whose proposal represents the best value to the Government.

(End of Summary of Changes)

For questions regarding this amendment, please contact Megan Pierce (megan.a.pierce9.civ@us.navy.mil)