N32205-16-R-4603-0002.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 revise Section M-2, Factor III - Price and Business Proposal.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 4

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 31-Oct-2016

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N32205-16-R-4603

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

26-Jul-2016

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 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

31-Oct-2016

CODE

MILITARY SEALIFT COMMAND NORFOLK

471 EAST C STREET BLDG T-26

NORFOLK VA 23511

N32205 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N32205-16-R-4603

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION FACTORS

M-1 BASIS FOR AWARD

The evaluation of proposals submitted in response to the RFP will be conducted utilizing Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Source Selection Procedures. The Government shall award a contract to the Offeror(s) that:

1) Obtain a technical proposal rating of Acceptable.

2) Obtain a past performance rating of Acceptable.

3) Offers a total evaluated price determined fair and reasonable by the Contracting Officer; and

4) Is determined responsible under FAR Part 9.104.

Note: Any offeror which receives a rating of “Unaccetptable” on any Factor of Subfactor cannot receive award.

M-2 EVALUATION FACTORS

The purpose of the proposal evaluation is to ensure impartial and comprehensive examination of competitive proposals and to select a contractor whose proposal and evaluated capabilities offer optimum satisfaction of program requirements. Statements and representations made in the Offeror’s proposal may be subject to verification by proposal evaluators. The Government reserves the right to award without discussion. The proposal will be evaluated in accordance with criteria set forth below.

FACTOR I - TECHNICAL

(The following technical factors are equal in importance.)

Subfactor A: Understanding of ABS and USCG Regulations

Subfactor B: Emergency Response Capability

Subfactor C: Ship Repair Technical Capabilities

Subfactor D: Hazardous Waste Management Plan

Subfactor E: Contractor Control Plan

FACTOR II – PAST PERFORMANCE

The past performance evaluation will assess the Offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. To develop an overall rating, the Government’s evaluation will take into account relevant information submitted by each Offeror as part of its proposal and the Government’s assessment and evaluation of other sources of information. Other sources of information for past performance may include, but are not limited to, Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) reports, the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Report System (ESRS), other databases, questionnaires and interviews.

(1) The Government will consider the recency and relevancy of past performance information compared to the requirements detailed in the PWS, the source of the information, the context of the data and general trends in the Offeror’s performance and any associated risk.

(2) The Government will consider the extent of the Offeror’s ability to perform a previous contract successfully in the areas of: (a) quality of product or services; (b) timeliness or scheduling of supplies/deliveries; (c) business relations/customer satisfaction; (d) key personnel and staffing (including subcontractors); and (e) cost controls

(COST CONTRACTS ONLY).

(3) The Government will consider the company itself, predecessor companies, and key personnel who have relevant experience and subcontractors who will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement.

(4) For all Offerors, the Government will consider historical compliance with the requirements of FAR Part 52.219- 8 (Utilization of Small Business Concerns).

The Government reserves the right to consider Past Performance Questionnaires received after the due date for receipt of proposals. The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information and the right to consider other relevant past performance information. The Government may call customers, whether or not provided by the Offeror, to inquire about the Offeror’s past performance. The Government does not assume the duty to search for data to cure the problems it finds with the information provided by the Offeror. The burden of providing thorough and complete past performance information remains with the Offeror.

In accordance with FAR 15.305(a) (2) (iv), an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

FACTOR III - PRICE AND BUSINESS PROPOSAL

In evaluating offers, the contracting officer will perform price reasonableness evaluation in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, the purpose of which is to:

(1) Verify the Offeror understands the requirements;

(2) Assess the degree to which the price proposal reflects the approaches and/or risk that the Offeror will provide the supplies or services for the offered costs; and

(3) Assess the degree to which the cost or prices included in the cost or price proposal accurately represent the effort included in the technical proposal.

Except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the Government’s best interests, the Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic period. Evaluation of options will not obligate the government to exercise the option(s).

Evaluation of Option to Extend Services under 52.217-8. For the purposes of the award of this Contract, the Government will evaluate the option to extend services, provided under FAR 52.217-8, as follows: The evaluation will consider the possibility that the option can be exercised at any time, and can be exercised in increments of one to six months, but for no more than a total of six months during the life of the contract. The evaluation will assume that the prices for any option exercised under FAR 52.217-8 will be at the same rates as those in effect under the contract and any exercised option. The evaluation will therefore assume that the addition of the price or prices of any possible extension or extensions under FAR 52.217-8 to the total price for the basic requirement and the total price for the priced options has the same effect on the total price of all proposals relative to each other. This evaluation methodology does not obligate the Government to exercise any option under FAR 52.217-8.

The government may reject an offer as non-responsive if it is materially unbalanced as to prices of the basic requirement and the option quantities. An offer is unbalanced when it is based on prices significantly less than cost for some work and prices which are significantly overstated for other work.

Adjectival Ratings for Technical Proposals

Technical proposals will be evaluated using the following adjectival ratings, which incorporate consideration of risk assessment. The following adjectival ratings/definitions shall be used for the evaluation of the respective factors as a whole. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

Acceptable: Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

Adjectival Ratings for the Past Performance Proposal

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

Unacceptable: Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a) (2) (iv)).

Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

(End of Summary of Changes)