Attachment 9-Amended Sections L and M.pdf

R5532125RCEG021

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 pupose of this modification is to amend Sectons L and M.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 10

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 21-May-2025

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 N0024425R0043

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

06-May-2025

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, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

21-May-2025

CODE

NAVSUP FLC SAN DIEGO

REGIONAL CONTRACTS (CODE 200)

3985 CUMMINGS ROAD

BUILDING 116 - 3RD FLOOR

SAN DIEGO CA 92136-4200

N00244 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N0024425R0043

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1

Addendum to 52.212-1

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES (SEP

2023) - (Section L)

1. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.1 This section provides general instructions for preparing offers as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the offer. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements in addition to those identified as evaluation factors.

Taking exception to any provision in the solicitation without addressing the exception with the Contracting office before the offer due date specified within the solicitation will render the offer ineligible for award.

1.2 The anticipated Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) contract award under this solicitation will be a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) set-aside made in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 12, Acquisition of Commercial Products and Commercial Services, and FAR 13.5 Simplified Acquisition Procedures for Certain Commercial Products and Commercial Services following the policies and procedures for solicitation, evaluation, and award.

1.3 The award resulting from this solicitation will only be made to SDVOSB concerns under NAICS code 561990 who are eligible under the SDVOSB Program in accordance with FAR 52.219-27.

1.4 The evaluation of offers will be best on a best value basis in accordance with FAR 13.106-1 using a Tradeoff process in accordance with FAR 13.106-2.

1.5 The Government intends to award this contract without further exchanges with offerors. Notwithstanding this intent, the Government reserves the right, at the Governments discretion, to conduct exchanges with any or all Offerors and request revised offers.

1.6 Vendors are hereby instructed that, regardless of any language that may be used in this solicitation, this procurement is being conducted under FAR 13.5 Simplified Acquisition Procedures. Offerors are advised that in accordance with FAR 13.106-2, the Government, at its discretion, may avail itself to one or more of the evaluations procedures in FAR Part 14 or 15.

1.7 An Offeror’s offer is presumed to represent the Offeror’s best efforts to comply with the solicitation requirements. Clarity and completeness of the offer are of the utmost importance. The offer must be written in a practical, clear, and concise manner. It must use quantitative terms whenever possible and must avoid qualitative adjectives to the maximum extent possible. Offerors are cautioned against restating PWS requirements in their offer, particularly with regard to technical requirements and must state how all RFP and PWS requirements will be met.

Statements such as "the Offeror understands" and "the Offeror shall/can comply", along with responses that paraphrase the RFP, are inadequate. The use of phrases such as "standard practices" (with a specific government reference or industry reference) does not indicate that an Offeror understands the requirements and will likely result in a diminished evaluation rating.

1.8 The offer shall be complete as submitted and not include references to data or information previously submitted. Data previously submitted to the Navy, if any, will not be incorporated “by reference” into the offer and will not be considered in the evaluation of the offer.

1.9 At the Government’s discretion, the Contractor’s offer may be incorporated into the final contract, either in whole or in part.

1.10 The Offeror’s offer shall remain valid for at least 120 calendar days after the offer due date.

1.11 Questions regarding any aspect of this procurement must be submitted in writing via email only and addressed to yesica.l.burrill.civ@us.navy.mil. The subject line of all email correspondence should state: “RFQ N00244-25-R-0043 QUESTIONS” in the subject line.

1.12 Other methods of submitting questions are not authorized and may not be acknowledged or addressed. Both questions and answers will be posted to the Government Point of Entry for all parties to view. The Government will make every attempt to answer all questions in a timely manner. However, questions submitted within ten (10) business days of the posted closing date may not allow for ample time to respond, and Offerors cannot be guaranteed a response will be issued. All questions must be submitted by date referenced on solicitation.

2. OFFER FORMAT AND CONTENT

2.1 The Offerors offer shall be submitted in severable volumes based on the Factors as set forth below and all information specific to each Factor shall be confined to that volume. Failure to provide any volume may result in the offer not being eligible for award. Information provided shall be specific to each Factor.

2.2 The offeror’s offer shall consist of four (4) separate volumes:

Volume I – Offer, FAR 52.212-3, and Offeror Representations and Certifications specified herein.

Volume II – Technical Volume III – Past Performance Volume IV – Price

Volume Name Page Limit Volume I – Offer and FAR 52.212-3 Unlimited Volume II –Technical (15) pages, excluding title pages, table of contents, resumes and letters of intent Volume III – Past Performance (3) pages, excluding Offeror’s Past Performance

Data (OPPD) Volume IV – Price Excel – Unlimited, submission may include a 5-page explanatory in word document.

* Volume II shall not contain any price or cost information ** Page limits do not include cover pages or table of contents. However, these pages shall not include any material information that needs to be evaluated under the evaluation factors.

Note: To ensure fairness to all offerors, the above page limitations must be strictly enforced by the Government’s evaluation process. Material over and above the page limitation will not be reviewed and/or evaluated by the Government.

2.3 Each volume must include the Cover Sheet. The cover sheet shall include:

• Title – Logistics Support Services

• Volume Name (Technical/Past Performance/Price)

• Volume Number

• Name and address of the offeror, point-of-contact (POC), title, telephone number, email address, Taxpayer

Identification Number (TIN), and Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code.

• Table of Contents – The table of contents shall provide enough detail to easily locate all important elements of the offer.

2.4 The Government prefers one-inch margins on all sides and single-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font with normal spacing, and pages of each volume numbered consecutively. 10-point may be used for graphics and tables. Digital copies shall be provided in Microsoft Word, PDF, and/or Excel.

2.5 Electronic copies shall be provided via e-mail no later than the stated due date and time and shall contain all of the specified volumes to be considered for award. Documents shall be submitted in Adobe PDF, Microsoft Word, or Microsoft Excel format. Other file formats, such as OpenDocument Text (.odt), will not be evaluated.

3. SPECIFIC VOLUME INSTRUCTIONS

3.1 VOLUME I: OFFER

3.1.1 Complete and submit the following documents, constituting Volume I:

(a) Standard Form 1449, “Solicitation, Offer and Award” with blocks 17a, 30a, 30b, and 30c completed with original signatures and completed CLIN pricing

(b) FAR Clause 52.212-3 Alt I – Offerors’ Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items (OCT 2014) Products and Commercial Services (SEP 2023) including additional RFP Certification requirements set forth herein.

(c) Acknowledgement of any/all RFP amendments, by signature and title on each applicable Standard Form 30

(d) All Representations and Certifications or certification of completion within the offerors System of Award Management (SAM) profile

(e) The offeror shall demonstrate that it currently possesses a required Security Clearance in accordance with the draft DD-254. If the offeror does not currently possess the required Security Clearance, it must demonstrate through documentation, that it is willing and eligible to obtain one upon award.

3.2 VOLUME II: TECHNICAL

NOTE: There shall be no cost or pricing information included in Volume II.

3.2.1 The technical offer shall be written so that the government can make a thorough evaluation and arrive at a sound determination as to whether the offer has the capability to successfully perform the requirements contained in the PWS. To this end, the technical offer shall be specific, detailed, and complete, to clearly and fully demonstrate that the prospective contractor has a thorough understanding of and ability to perform the technical requirements contained in the PWS.

Failure to adequately address any of the required information may be considered a “material omission”, precluding further consideration for award.

3.2.2 The technical volume shall be organized in the order specified and shall address in detail the information required below. Each factor shall be clearly identified.

Technical has three sub-factors:

Sub-factor (1) Technical Approach, Sub-factor (2) Staffing Sub-factor (3) Management Plan

3.2.3 TECHNICAL APPROACH: The Offeror must address their understanding of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Offeror must address how they can support the needs and objectives defined in the PWS.

The narrative shall provide a complete analysis of the performance work statement requirements and explain processes, best practices, and other methods the offeror will use to meet the requirements of the PWS. The technical approach is not to be a restatement of the information contained in the PWS.

3.2.4 STAFFING PLAN: The Offeror shall describe its plan to provide proper staffing for the tasks described in the PWS including a staffing list and qualifications for proposed personnel. The Offeror shall address their ability to respond to workload fluctuations and to ensure all contract requirements are supported in their entirety and to full completion. The Offeror shall address its risk mitigation plan for vacancies and demonstrate ability to respond to replacement of on-site personnel on short notice, considering both planned and unplanned absences. The Offeror shall also provide their current retention rate and address retention strategies, such as benefits and compensations plans, to retain employees and reduce staff turnover.

Offerors are encouraged to engage incumbent service employees if the contractor, after careful assessment, finds the incumbent service employees qualify to meet the requirements of the solicitation.

A resume, not exceeding two pages in length, and letter of intent or evidence of current employment with the proposing contractor or subcontractor must be submitted for each of the key personnel as described in the PWS.

Letters of intent are not included in the resume page count. Subcontractor employees must be clearly identified.

Resumes shall specifically address the labor experience described in the PWS, as it applies to each key personnel.

Each resume shall provide the following information:

--Name;

--Present place of employment (if contingent hire, so note);

--Security clearance (if applicable);

--Proposed labor category;

--Experience and educational background;

--Unique skills, specific experience, and accomplishments that are directly applicable to the PWS; and --Proposed application of the individual to the contract effort (i.e., full time or part time).

Desired qualifications and experience of each individual should be appropriate to the proposed labor category in accordance with the PWS. Each employee must be eligible for a favorable trustworthiness determination and verification of licensing is required to be submitted with the proposal.

If the Offeror proposed personnel from a different labor category or by a different title, a cross-reference list is required to be provided in the offeror’s proposal justifying the submission. The justification shall clearly state the basis for the deviation and rationale supporting the deviation.

3.2.5 MANAGEMENT PLAN: The Offeror shall demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed organizational structure and functional relationships. Offerors must address methodology for performing the technical requirements identified in the PWS; management approach and contract administration including status reporting;

the reporting chain of command, lines of authority, responsibilities designed to accomplish the proposed work effort, and methods for overall supervision.

Offeror shall demonstrate ability to provide continuity of support of the Contractor services and explain their ability to manage unplanned events and circumstances. Each Offeror must address what role, if any, any subcontractor will play and their relationship with the prime contractor.

3.3 VOLUME III – PAST PERFORMANCE

3.3.1 The past performance evaluation factor assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an Offeror’s ability to supply products and services that meet users’ needs, based on a demonstrated record of performance.

3.3.2 Offerors should provide relevant past performance information for similar or related work under contracts completed during the last three years from the date of proposal submission for up to three (3) past performance references of which, at least two (2) should be for the prime contractor. Offerors may submit performance data regarding current contract performance as long as a minimum of one year of performance has been completed as of the closing date of this solicitation. Each Offeror has the opportunity to provide in its offer any information regarding its past performance of contracts similar to the Government's requirement that it would like the Government to consider. The Offeror may include Federal, State and Local Government and private sector contracts.

3.3.3 Offerors should provide the following information below. There is a limit of three past performance entries.

a. Contract Number and, in the case of Indefinite Delivery type contracts, GSA contracts, and Blanket Purchase Agreements, also include Delivery Order Numbers

b. Contact Information: Contracting Officer/Technical Point of Contact/Customer/Agency (name, e-mail address, and telephone number)

c. Brief description of the scope of work: Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirements of this solicitation.

d. Contract type (specific type such as Fixed Price (FP), Cost Reimbursement (CR), Time & Materials (T&M), etc.)

e. Award Price

f. Total Labor-Hours of Effort

g. Period of Performance

h. Contract Deliverables

3.3.4 For any contracts that did not/do not meet original schedule or technical performance requirements, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence.

3.3.5 OPPD's Offerors may request that each reference complete the “Offeror’s Past Performance Data” (OPPD) (Attachment 2). A prime contractor shall not submit an OPPD for one of its subcontractors nor shall a subcontractor submit an OPPD for their prime contractor. OPPDs received of this nature will not be accepted or evaluated. OPPDs shall be emailed directly from the reference no later than the closing date and time of this solicitation to Ms. Yesica Lorena Burrill at yesica.l.burrill.civ@us.navy.mil and should include “N00244-25-R-0043 (Contractor Name) OPPD” in the Subject Line of the email. OPPDs are not mandatory but assist the Government in evaluating an offeror’s past performance. CPARS may be submitted in lieu or addition to OPPDs for any or all references.

3.3.6 OPPD's are not mandatory but assist the Government in evaluating an offeror’s past performance. CPARS may be submitted in lieu or addition to OPPD's for any or all references.

3.3.7 To obtain information, the Government may contact the points of contact listed by Offerors, however, the Government is not required to contact the points of contact provided by Offerors and may limit the number of references it decides to contact. The Government is also free to contact references other than those provided by the Offeror to evaluate past performance of Offerors and to avail itself to any data available such as SAM, PPIRS etc. to evaluate past performance.

3.3.8 If the offeror possesses no relevant past performance, it must affirmatively state this fact in the Volume III submittal.

3.4 VOLUME IV – PRICE

3.4.1 The price offer shall cover all aspects of the proposed effort including pricing in excel format with a breakdown of the different elements (i.e. hours, labor rates, fringe, overhead, G&A, profit etc.) unlocked with unhidden formulas. Data contained in the price offer shall be consistent with data contained in Volume II.

3.4.2 The Offeror is required to submit a price offer breakdown for each CLIN included in the Schedule of Supplies/Services of the Solicitation. All CLINs must be rounded to the nearest whole dollar.

3.4.4 The Government reserves the right to ask offerors for additional pricing information if needed to determine reasonableness.

3.4.5 Offerors are instructed to price a six-month option at the end of the last period of performance. This six-month option should be priced separately from the rest of the offer. Therefore, please do not include this option pricing in the total proposed cost, it should be independent of the offer. The six-month option pricing should not exceed 50% of the last option year. Should clause 52.217-8 OPTION TO EXTEND SERVICES be executed, the six-month option will be incorporated into the contract.

3.4.6 Offerors should use the hours provided in the Price Template attachment; however, if an offeror proposes less hours than those listed, then it must provide a narrative detailing why and how they can accomplish the requirements of the PWS with less personnel. The explanation must clearly demonstrate the offeror’s ability to meet all goals and objectives set forth in the PWS. Failure to provide an adequate explanation may render the offer ineligible for award.

3.4.7 Offeror’s must submit utilizing the not to exceed (NTE) travel ceiling provided in the Price Template.

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

Addendum to 52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES (NOV 2021) – (Section M)

1.0 EVALUATION CRITERIA

1.1 This procurement will be conducted in accordance with FAR 13.5 with a best value evaluation using a tradeoff source selection process that permits tradeoffs among price and non-price factors allowing the Government to accept other than the lowest priced proposal..

1.2 The award resulting from this solicitation will be a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) commercial contract solicited through the open market via www.sam.gov. Award will be a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) set-aside. The resulting contract shall be awarded as a competitive SDVOSB set-aside.

1.3 An initial competitive pool of contractors will be established by evaluating the four (4) highest technically rated offers. The government may, at its sole discretion, expand the competitive pool by any number of additional offerors at any stage of the procurement process as many times as it sees fit. If the competitive pool is to be expanded by less than the total number of responsible offerors, inclusion will be based on technical rating.

Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint.

1.4 Award will be made to the responsible offeror, in accordance with FAR Part 9.1, whose offer conforms to the solicitation requirements and is determined to be the Best Value Offeror after performing a tradeoff evaluation among price and non-price factors.

1.5 To make a determination of Best Value, the Government shall first perform a technical evaluation of each Offeror to establish the competitive pool of the four (4) highest technically rated offers. Then, the Government will conduct a past performance evaluation, followed by a price analysis for each Offeror in the competitive pool and perform a tradeoff process, to determine the overall best value offeror. The non-price factors are approximately equal in importance to each other and when combined, are equal in importance to Price. The Government reserves the right to consider an offer other than the lowest price that provides additional benefit(s).

1.6 The Government intends to award this contract based on initial offers. Therefore, the Offeror's initial offer should contain the Offeror's best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to have exchanges and request revised offers. The Government may limit the number of offerors it engages with exchanges for purposes of efficiency at its discretion.

1.7 Failure to adequately address any of the required information may be considered a “material omission”, precluding further consideration for award.

2.0 EVALUATION FACTORS

2.1 The Government will evaluate offers based on the following factors:

Factor I – Technical:

Sub-factor (1) Technical Approach Sub-factor (2) Staffing Sub-factor (3) Management Plan

Factor II – Past Performance Factor III - Price

2.2 Factor I (Technical) and Factor II (Past Performance Confidence) are of equal importance. The non-cost factors [Factor I (Technical), Factor II (Past Performance Confidence), when combined, are equal to Factor III (Price).

2.3 The sub-factors are each of equal level of importance and each subfactor will be individually rated. A rating of “Unacceptable” in any subfactor will render the entire factor unacceptable.

2.4 The Government will provide an overall score for Factor I - Technical based on the ratings of the three (3) subfactors. A proposal with an unacceptable Factor I rating will be deemed ineligible for award and will not be eligible for the competitive pool to be further evaluated under Past Performance or Price.

3.0 FACTOR I – TECHNICAL

3.1 The Government will assess the Offeror’s Technical proposal with respect to its compliance with the solicitation requirements and the risk associated with the Offeror's approach through the assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies. Specifically, the Government will evaluate the:

3.1.1 Sub-factor (1) Technical Approach. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s offer to determine the Offeror’s understanding of, approach to, and ability to successfully accomplish the requirements identified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). The Government will evaluate the extent in which the Offeror’s technical approach demonstrates the Offeror’s ability to accomplish the specified work in a technically competent, and timely manner with minimal risk to the Government. The narrative will be evaluated for analysis of the performance requirements and explanation of the processes, best practices, and other methods the Offeror proposes to use to meet each requirement stated in the PWS.

3.1.2 Sub-factor (2) Staffing Plan. The Government will evaluate the adequacy of the Offeror’s staffing plan to determine whether it properly addresses the staffing requirements described in the PWS for on-going day-to-day operations. Offerors will be evaluated on their ability to respond to workload fluctuations and overlapping tasks in a timely manner, as well as their ability to engage in full performance of the Contract once the firm receives notice of award with minimal transition disruption.

Offerors will also be evaluated on their ability to ensure proposed personnel meet the experience and/or qualification requirements as outlined in the PWS and the strategies used to retain qualified personnel. The ability to demonstrate minimal turnover of personnel and retention of incumbent personnel may be considered strengths.

3.1.3 Sub-factor (3) Management Plan. The Government will evaluate the management plan sub-factor based on the degree the proposed approach addresses management and administration of on-going day-to-day coordination, direction, execution of PWS tasks, and the ability to manage unplanned events and circumstances.

3.2 The Government will use a combined technical/risk rating that includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the significant strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. To receive an “Acceptable” rating the proposal must clearly demonstrate that the offeror meets the requirements as defined by the PWS and all RFP attachments with, at worst, moderate risk.

3.3 The following table of Ratings/Definition/Description shall be used for the Technical/Risk Rating for each Sub-factor and for Factor (I). The overall Factor I (Technical) rating will be determined by evaluating the ratings for each of the sub-factors. No Technical Proposal may be given more than a marginal rating unless the proposal clearly shows that the offer meets the requirements as defined by the PWS and all RFP attachments.

Table 1. Combined Technical/Risk Rating

Adjectival

Rating

Description Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate risk

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

3.4 The Government will then establish a competitive pool of the four (4) highest technically rated offers.

4.0 FACTOR II – PAST PERFORMANCE

* Only Offerors found technically acceptable that are included in the competitive pool with be evaluated under Factor II - Past Performance. *

4.1 The assessment of the Offeror’s past performance will be used by the Government as a means to evaluate the relative capability of the Offeror and other competitors to successfully meet the requirements of the PWS and as a measure of performance risk for contract award. The government’s assessment of performance risk is not intended to be the product of a mechanical or mathematical analysis of an offeror’s performance on list of contracts, but rather the product of subjective judgment of the government after it considers all available relevant and recent information.

4.2 Each past performance reference will be evaluated to determine whether the work performed by the Offeror is recent and relevant to the instant requirement. Recent and Relevant past performance is performance under contracts accomplished within the past three (3) years from the date of proposal submission that is of the same or similar scope, complexity, and magnitude to that which is described in the solicitation. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to, the following: similarity of product/service/ support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of personnel (for services), and extent of subcontracting.

4.3 Past performance references not found to be recent will not be further evaluated for relevancy, and references not found to be relevant will not be further evaluated for quality.

4.4 The Government will assign one relevancy rating for each past performance effort submitted using the four levels of relevancy as shown in “Past Performance Relevancy Rating” Table below. Past performance of greater relevancy 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. Past performance reference that that has no relevance to the instant requirement will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably and will not be considered in the overall assessment of Past Performance Confidence.

4.4 Table M-1 “PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATING”

Rating Definition

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.

4.5 Each past performance reference under each offeror’s Past Performance submission that is found to have at least some relevance to the instant requirement will be evaluated to determine the quality of the offeror’s performance under that reference. The Government will focus its inquiry of the Offerors record of performance as it relates to timeliness, quality, cost control, and customer satisfaction.

4.6 Quality of the relevant past performance will form the basis for the Offeror’s overall rating for Past Performance.

4.7 In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance, or for whom information on past performance is not available, the government will evaluate the offeror neither favorably nor unfavorably on past performance. Such offerors will receive a rating of “Neutral Confidence.” A "Substantial Confidence" or "Satisfactory Confidence" past performance rating is worth more than a "Neutral Confidence" past performance rating.

4.8 Offerors are reminded that if they possess no relevant past performance, they must affirmatively state this fact.

Past performance will be rated using the ratings defined below:

TABLE M-2 “PAST PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE”

Overall Rating Definition

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.

5.0 FACTOR III – PRICE

*Offerors that receive a rating of “no confidence” under Factor II – Past Performance will not be evaluated under Factor III - Price.*

5.1 Offerors are reminded that a finding of “No Confidence” in Factor II will result in the entire offer being determined unacceptable and therefore will not be further evaluated under Factor III – Price.

5.2 All offers will be ranked by the total evaluated price. Total Evaluated Price will be calculated by summing the evaluated price for the base year and all option years. Evaluation of options WILL NOT obligate the Government to exercise the options.

5.3 Price will be evaluated to determine that the proposed price is fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR 13.106-3. Price reasonableness will be determined using one or more techniques identified in FAR 13.106-3(a) such as comparison of competitive offers. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if prices are materially unbalanced. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items or subline item(s) appear to be significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques.

5.4 Price will be evaluated by totaling the prices for all line items, including option periods, for which the Government has requested the offeror provide a price. Option prices will be evaluated at time of award. Evaluation of the options WILL NOT obligate the Government to exercise the options.

5.5 Offerors are also reminded that the 6-month option under clause 52.217-8 OPTION TO EXTEND SERVICES WILL NOT be incorporated at the time of award and should be priced separately from the rest of the offer and not included in the total proposed cost. The six-month option pricing should not exceed 50% of the last option year.

5.6 Offerors must propose at least the minimum rates of the respective Wage Determinations (WD) (attached).

If the proposed hourly rates are less than the current WD, the price will be determined unrealistic, and the offer will be rejected.

5.7 Offerors are reminded that pursuant to FAR 52.222-43 they are only entitled to WD adjustments for the Contractor’s actual increase or decrease in applicable wages and fringe benefits to the extent that the increase is made to comply with the newly applicable WD at the beginning of the renewal option period. Ie. If proposing rates above the WD floor, then a price adjustment would only be granted up to the new WD amount. Therefore, option periods should be priced accordingly.

RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION

A Responsibility Determination will be conducted in accordance with FAR 9.104 utilizing any information available to the Government (FAPIIS, CPARS, SPRS, PPIRS, SAM, etc.). If an offeror is determined non-responsible, award will not be made to that contractor.

SECURITY CLEARANCE DETERMINATION

Facility Clearance Documentation/Evidence – Documentation/evidence of current Security Clearance in accordance with the attached DD 254 or evidence demonstrating willingness and eligibility to obtain required security clearance through the Defense Security Service (DSS) upon award. This documentation/evidence will be evaluated on an acceptable or unacceptable standard and is not a weighted factor. Information related to the security/facility clearance process can be obtained by visiting www.dss.mil. Failure to provide evidence a current Security Clearance or eligibility to obtain one shall render the offeror ineligible for award and the offer will not be further evaluated

(End of Summary of Changes)