N3943018R2031_AMD_0002.pdf

ACQR5029495

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 incoroprate changes to the solicitation as decribed on the follow ing pages.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 14

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 01-Jun-2018

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 N3943018R2031

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10-May-2018

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 X 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

01-Jun-2018

CODE

NAVFAC EXWC

CODE ACQ / NAVAL BASE VENTURA COUNTY

1100 23RD AVE BLDG 1100

PORT HUENEME CA 93043-4301

N39430 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N3943018R2031

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES (REVISED)

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0002

Amendment 0002 for

Solicitation N3943018R2031 Explosion Effects, Risk Assessment, and Protective Construction Support for Explosives Safety

1. The proposal due date is hereby extended from 10:00 am PST, June 14, 2018 to 10:00 am PST, June 18, 2018.

2. Section J Attachment C – Schedule of Firm Fixed Price Rates is hereby revised to incude a separate input column entitled “Subcontractor Fully Burdened Labor Rates,” which shall includes all taxes, fringe, overhead, and profit. The offeror shall input subcontractor fully burdened labor rates for each of the key and non-key personnel listed in the spreadhseet for all ordering years and for the extension of services period. Section M is also hereby corrected for the applicable paragraphs for Factor 5: Price Solicitation Submittal Requirements (changes shown in red font in revised Section M below.) Offeror shall input data into the yellow highlighted cells only, and shall not manipulate any formulas in the spreadsheet or change any placeholder amounts.

3. The following Requests for Information (RFI’s) are hereby incorporated into the solicitation

Question #1: In Section C, 5.0 Key Personnel Minimum Education/Experience Qualification, Page 6-9 of the RFP, the minimum education/experience requirements are provided for the proposed key personnel.

Request that the Government specify labor category education and experience requirements or require that offerors provide the qualifications for the positions they propose for each of the non-key personnel positions in Attachment C (Engineer/Scientist, Technician, Technical Writer, Administrative Assistant).

This will enable an equal (apples to apples) comparison between offerors and allow the govt. to determine the cost reasonableness and realism for these non-key personnel labor categories with common, corresponding qualifications.

Answer #1: Minimum education and experience are not required to be submitted for non-key personnel.

Question #2: Will a table of contents and list of figures in the Technical Volume be excluded from the page count?

Answer #2: No, they will not be excluded. If included in the Volume I proposal, they would be counted in the total page count for the respective section.

Question #3: L5 Joint Venture Offerors states “Joint Venture Agreements shall be provided in both the technical and price proposal. Letters of Commitment shall be provided in the technical proposal.” Please clarify where Teaming Agreements should be submitted.

Answer #3: Teaming Agreements, if applicable, shall be provided in both the technical and price proposal.

Question #4: Factor 5: Price, (1) (c) ii. states “If the offerors use a different description for the labor categories, it should enter the description in the space provided.” We interpret “description” to mean the Labor Category Name only, and that all Key Personnel Categories must maintain the minimum education/experience qualifications as stipulated in Section C, Paragraph 5.0, pages 6-9. Please confirm that our interpretation is correct.

Answer #4: Yes, “description” means labor category name only.

Question #5: Our interpretation of the solicitation submittal requirements is that Attachment C is the only submittal that is required when the proposal is delivered and submittal of financial statements and financial institution information is only required, after an offeror is selected for award, and within three days of a request by the Contracting Officer. Please confirm that our interpretation is correct.

Answer #5: No, the language in the solicitation regarding Factor 5: Price - Solicitation Submittal Requirements (Volume II) is incorrect, and is hereby revised as follows (also corrected in red font in the revised Section M below):

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

(a) Financial Statements: The offeror shall submit the company financial statement for the most recent completed financial accounting year. The financial statement should include the balance sheet, income statement, statement of cash flows, and notes to the financial statement, if any. This information will be utilized to verify Financial Responsibility as required by FAR Part 9, and provide an understanding of the offeror’s rate structure.

(b) Financial Institution Information: Offeror shall submit with their cost proposal the completed form in Section J, Attachment B of the solicitation. This information will be utilized to verify Financial Responsibility as required by FAR Part 9.

Question #6: Do we need to submit a narrative for the price proposal? If so, please clarify the page limit (if any) and required content of the narrative.

Answer #6: No, a narrative is not required for the price proposal (Volume II.)

Question #7: The RFP states “The Government will evaluate price, input by the offeror, in Section B.”

However, Page 64, Factor 5: Price states “Offerors are not required to submit a completed Section B.”

Should the reference on Page 66, (2) Basis for Evaluation (a) be changed to Attachment C? Please clarify.

Answer #7: Yes, the reference on Page 66, Factor 5: Price, paragraph (2)(a) Basis for Evaluation is incorrect, and is hereby corrected as follows (also corrected in red font in the revised Section M below):

“The Government will evaluate price input by the offeror, in Section J, Attachment C.”

Question #8: Instructions state that “…each resume shall not exceed five pages in length.” Later in that same paragraph, it states that “The “Letter of Intent” must be signed by the company and employee and is not included in the two-page limit.” Please clarify that the page length for the resumes is not to exceed five pages.

Answer #8: Yes, the reference on Page 60, Factor 1: Key Personnel , paragraph (1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements is incorrect, and is hereby corrected as follows (also corrected in red font in the revised Section M below): “The ‘Letter of Intent’ must be signed by the company and the employee and is not included in the five-page limit.”

Questions #9: On some of the tabs [in Section J, Attachment C spreadsheet], the labor subtotal (cell E12) is not including all of the labor costs. Please clarify and/or revise, as needed.

Answer #9: Yes, the formulas in the spreadsheet are incorrect, and have been corrected in the revised Section J Attachment C spreadsheet, which is attached separately. (See item #2 above regarding this and other changes to Attachment C.)

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The Table of Contents has changed from:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment A Past Performance

Questionnaire

4 18-APR-2018

Attachment B Finanical Questionnaire 1 18-APR-2018 Attachment C Schedule of Firm Fixed

Price Rates

0 18-APR-2018

Attachment D Request for Information 1 18-APR-2018 Attachment E Quality Assessmen

Surveillance Plan (QASP)

2 18-APR-2018

to:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES DATE

Attachment A Past Performance

Questionnaire

4 18-APR-2018

Attachment B Finanical Questionnaire 1 18-APR-2018 Attachment C Schedule of Firm Fixed

Price Rates-REVISED

0 01-JUN-2018

Attachment D Request for Information 1 18-APR-2018 Attachment E Quality Assessmen

Surveillance Plan (QASP)

2 18-APR-2018

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

SECTION M

M1. BASIS FOR AWARD

(1) The Government reserves the right to eliminate from consideration for award any or all offers at any time prior to award of the contract; to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range; and to award the contract to the offeror submitting the proposal determined to represent the best value—the proposal most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

(2) The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. In addition, if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

(3) The tradeoff process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition. The Government considers it to be in its best interest to allow consideration of award to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror.

(4) All non-price technical factors (Factors 1, 2, and 3), when combined, are of equal importance to the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating (Factor 4); and all technical factors and the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating (Factors 1, 2, 3, and 4), when combined, are approximately equal to price (Factor 5).

(5) Any proposal found to have a deficiency in meeting the stated solicitation requirements or performance objectives will be considered ineligible for award, unless the deficiency is corrected through discussions. Proposals may be found to have either a significant weakness or multiple weaknesses that impact either the individual factor rating or the overall rating for the proposal.

M2. DEFINITIONS

OFFEROR: Refers to the contractor submitting the proposal as offeror, including joint ventures, whose name appears in Block 15A of Standard Form 33 (Solicitation, Offer and Award).

PAGE: Refers to one printed side of a piece of paper. (For example, five pieces of paper printed on both sides would result in 10 pages of narrative.)

PROJECT: An activity or task order, with a single starting point and a single ending point.

SELF-PERFORM: Refers to performing work in-house without subcontractors.

M3. ADJECTIVAL RATINGS/DESCRIPTIONS

(1) Non-Price Factors: except for Past performance, non-price factors will be rated using the following adjectival rating scheme:

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

Outstanding (O) Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

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

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

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

Unacceptable (U) Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is un-awardable.

(2) Past performance:

(a) For Relevancy, past performance will be rated using the following adjectival rating scheme:

Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method

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.

(b) For Performance Confidence, past performance will be rated using the following adjectival rating scheme:

Performance Confidence Assessments

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

M4. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Factor 1: Key Personnel

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Submit resumes for the individuals proposed to fill each of the Key Personnel positions listed in the solicitation. If subcontractors are to be used to fill any of the Key Personnel positions, resumes shall be included with the present company affiliation clearly identified. Each resume shall not exceed five pages in length. Each resume shall include, at a minimum: the individual’s job title; relevant work experience, education and qualifications; contract numbers of any work experience performed under Government contract; references with current email addresses and phone numbers; and state whether the individual is presently employed with the Offeror, a proposed subcontractor, or whether they are proposed under a “Letter of Intent”. The Offeror shall certify that the proposed personnel shall be available within one week of notice to proceed. The Offeror is required to submit a current, signed "Letter of Intent" for all personnel that are contingent hires and whose resumes are submitted as part of the proposal. The “Letter of Intent” must be signed by the company and the employee and is not included in the five-page limit. The meaning of “current” as used in this factor is defined as within 30 days prior to submission of proposal. A "Letter of Intent" that states that personnel working on other contracts in various global locations are willing and ready to support the contract is acceptable. The work history of each Key Personnel must contain experience on work performed for like, or similar, requirements to that described in the PWS and the depth of relevant experience in years. All key personnel must be available full-time.

(2) Basis of Evaluation: The offeror will be evaluated on the extent to which the technical knowledge and capability of proposed personnel will contribute to the offerors ability to meet the contract requirement based on resume information provided and its relevancy to the functional areas specified in the RFP. Education/experience requirements, as citied in Section 5.0 of the Performance Work Statement, are a pre requisite for Key Personnel.

Factor 2: Management Approach

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: This requirement considers the effectiveness of the offeror’s management approach and organization to adequately perform the requirements of the solicitation. The Government seeks a management approach that will maximize quality, takes into account logistical realities, and will result in the optimal use of resources. In fifteen pages or less, describe your management approach, including the following:

(a) Provide an organizational chart with related narrative. The organization chart shall reflect the organization of the prime contractor to all sub-contractors (if applicable) and identify Key Personnel that will be employed to perform under this contract.

(b) Describe the proposed program management organizational structure, including organizational relationships.

(c) Information provided shall adequately explain the flow and levels of authority and communication, both internally and with the Government.

(d) The narrative shall address prime and subcontractor interfaces and responsibilities.

(e) Offerors shall submit unconditional letters of commitment for proposed key subcontractors. These letters of commitment shall not count against the limit of number of pages in the submittal.

(f) If a joint venture is proposed, describe the roles of each joint venture member in the management of the contract. Provide information on the structure and decision making responsibilities of the partners in terms of who will control the manner and method of performance of work.

(g) Provide a staffing plan that fully supports multiple concurrent task orders, particularly where the level of work in a particular area exceeds the available time of that specific Key Personnel. Describe how periods of work surges will be handled within the organizational structure and how technical challenges shall be met.

(h) Describe your approach for managing quality of work (quality assurance/quality control program).

Provide a description of how this QA/QC program has been used successfully on prior projects. These shall be the same projects submitted for Past Performance on Factor 4.

(2) Basis of evaluation: The Government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror’s management plan:

(a) Demonstrates an effective organization structure and logical approach to providing a quality end result;

(b) Provides an efficient plan for staffing/resourcing to support all technical areas covered by this contract, conducting concurrent task orders, and efficient integration of sub-contractors to address workload;

(c) Provides for a Quality Assurance/Quality Control program, which demonstrates that quality control measures are in place and have been successfully used on previous projects;

(d) The offeror’s proposal should demonstrate that they possess a management team that has proven experience relevant to the work required under this contract.

Factor 3: Safety

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: The Offeror shall submit the following information: (For a partnership or joint venture, the following submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. Experience Modification Rates (EMR) and OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) and Total Recordable Case (TRC) Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

(a) EMR: Include three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data. This rate compares company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums. The offeror may submit an insurance company-provided equivalent rate if no EMR exists. If the offeror has no EMR or premium, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affect the EMR and negative trends should be addressed as part of the factor submission.

(b) OSHA DART Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data. If an offeror cannot submit an OSHA DART and TRC rates, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA, DART, and TRC rate data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

(c) Technical Approach for Safety: Describe the plan for safety that will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. The offeror shall submit a narrative that fully describes the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and subcontractor performed work. The offeror will describe any innovative methods that will be employed to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and/or all subcontractor levels. Additionally, the contactor will describe their methodology to execute an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques and processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps. The technical approach to safety narrative shall be limited to two pages.

(2) Basis of Evaluation: The Government is seeking to determine that the offeror has consistently demonstrated a commitment to safety and that the offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures for itself and its subcontractors. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s overall safety record, the offeror’s plan to select and monitor subcontractors, and any innovative safety methods that the offeror plans to implement for this procurement.

The Government’s sources of information for evaluating safety may include, but are not limited to, OSHA, NAVFAC’s Facility Accident and Incident Reporting (FAIR) database, and other related databases. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete safety information regarding these submittal requirements rests with the Offeror. The evaluation will collectively consider the following: EMR; OSHA DART Rate and TRC Rates; Offeror Technical Approach to Safety; other sources of information available to the Government.

(a) EMR: For the three previous complete calendar years the offeror will submit EMR. If no EMR exists, the offeror may submit an insurance company-provided equivalent rate explaining why not. If an insurance company-provided equivalent rate is provided, it will be treated the same as an EMR. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the EMR and negative trends should be addressed as part of this selection factor. The board will evaluate the EMR to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any negative trends and extenuating circumstances that impact the rating.

(b) OSHA DART and TRC Rate: For the three previous complete calendar years, the offeror will submit their OSHA DART and TRC, as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. If unable to submit OSHA DART and TRC rates, affirmatively state so, and an explanation must be provided. Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA DART and TRC rate data and negative trends should be addressed as part of this element. The board will evaluate the OSHA DART and TRC rates to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated a history of safe work practices taking into account any upward trends and extenuating circumstances that impact rates.

(c) Technical Approach to Safety: The offeror will describe their plan to evaluate their safety performance and that of potential subcontractors. Also, describe any innovative methods that the Offeror will employ to ensure and monitor safe work practices at all subcontractor levels. The Safety Narrative shall be limited to two pages. The board will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which subcontractor safety performance will be considered in the selection of all levels of subcontractors on the upcoming project. The board will evaluate the narrative to determine the degree to which innovations are being proposed that may enhance safety on this procurement and validate the contractor has addressed methodology to be used in the execution of an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques/processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps. Those Offerors whose plan demonstrates a commitment to hire subcontractors with a culture of safety and who propose innovative methods to enhance a safe working environment may be given greater weight in the evaluation.

(d) Other Sources of Information Available to the Government: Other sources for safety may include but are not limited to OSHA data, NAVFAC’s Contractor Incident Reporting System (CIRS) in Enterprise Safety Applications Management System (ESAMS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and other related databases.

Factor 4: Past Performance on Recent, Relevant Projects

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Offerors are required to submit past performance information for up to five projects. For each project/contract, there are two submittal requirements: (1) past performance evaluation forms; and (2) a narrative statement.

(a) Past Performance Evaluation Forms. For each project/contract, the offeror must submit a FINAL Past

Performance Information Reporting System (PPIRS) evaluation or a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ). If a final PPIRS evaluation is available on the PPIRS website for the contract/project, the offeror must submit the PPIRS evaluation for the project/contract. If there is not a final PPIRS evaluation for the project/contract, a PPQ must be submitted. A PPQ form is included in Section J as Attachment B to the solicitation. Offerors must submit the PPQ form to the client for completion. Offerors should take care to ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact on the PPQs. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of the questionnaires. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project/contract before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ which will provide contract/project and client information. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Richard Epstein, via email at richard.s.epstein@navy.mil prior to proposal closing date. An offeror should not submit a PPQ when a final PPIRS evaluation is available.

Only one PPQ shall be submitted per project.

The Government will only consider recent past performance. Recent is defined as projects/contracts completed no more than five years from the posting date of this RFP. Projects/contracts which were completed more than five years before the posting of this RFP will not be evaluated. The requirement to submit these forms cannot be satisfied by directing the Government to consider forms or information submitted on other procurements. The Government may utilize any other information available in the past performance evaluation.

(b) Narrative Statement. Offerors must submit a statement for each project/contract submitted that provides an overview of each project/contract and how the project/contract is relevant to the work described in the performance work statement of this solicitation. The statement for each project/contract may not exceed one page.

(2) Basis of Evaluation: The Government will evaluate each offeror’s past performance using a three-step process.

First, the Government will determine whether the project is recent. Second, the Government will evaluate the relevancy of all projects/contracts submitted by the offeror and other information available (Relevancy Assessment).

Third, the Government will, considering relevancy and the offeror’s performance on those contracts, assign a Performance Confidence Assessment Rating.

(a) Recency Assessment: The Government will evaluate whether the project was completed within the past five years, considering the issue date of the RFP. Projects that are not recent will not be considered further.

(b) Relevancy Assessment: The Government will conduct a relevancy assessment of each project/contract submitted by the offeror to determine the work performed under those projects/contracts relates to the work described in this solicitation. The Government is not obliged to seek out and consider information other than the information the offeror submits but may at its discretion consider information involving other projects/contracts.

The Government will evaluate the relevancy of projects based on the evaluation scale in the table below. The terms “scope”, “magnitude” and “complexity” in the following table have broad meaning such that evaluators will consider any feature of a past project/contract which has a predictive effect on performance on the current contract.

The purpose of assessing relevancy is to take into account the predictive value of past effort toward success on this contract. Therefore, work performed under a Government contract may be considered more relevant than work performed under a commercial contract. In addition, past performance as a prime contractor may be more relevant than the past effort performed as a subcontractor.

Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method

Adjectival 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.

(c) Overall Performance Confidence Assessment Rating. Taking into account the Relevancy Assessment

(Step 2), and the quality of performance on the past projects/contracts, the Government will assign an overall performance confidence assessment rating for this factor (past performance rating) based on the scale in the table below. Offerors for whom past performance information is not available or is so sparse that no rating can be reasonably assigned will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably and, as a result, will receive an “Unknown Confidence” rating for this factor. A favorable record of relevant past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than an “Unknown Confidence” rating. PPIRS and PPQs that have narratives that amplify the ratings provided may be considered more favorably than PPIRS and PPQs with no comments or limited comments, even if the ratings are higher.

Performance Confidence Assessments

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

Factor 5: Price

The Contracting Officer has determined that certified cost or pricing data is not required to be submitted for this solicitation for the IDIQ contract. However, offerors are required to submit non-certified cost or pricing data per the submittal requirements below.

The cost proposal shall be submitted in a separate volume from the technical proposal. No technical information shall be submitted as part of the cost proposal.

Offerors are not required to submit a completed Section B. Section B represents the total ordering capacity of the contract, not the offeror’s pricing.

(1) Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

(a) Financial Statements: The offerors shall submit the company financial statement for the most recent completed financial accounting year. The financial statement should include the balance sheet, income statement, statement of cash flows, and notes to the financial statement, if any. This information will be utilized to verify Financial Responsibility as required by FAR Part 9, and provide an understanding of the offeror’s rate structure.

(b) Financial Institution Information: Offeror shall submit with their cost proposal the completed form in Section J, Attachment B of the solicitation. This information will be utilized to verify Financial Responsibility as required by FAR Part 9.

(c) Schedule of Firm Fixed Price Rates: Offerors shall complete the Schedule of Firm Fixed Price Rates in Section J, Attachment C of the solicitation, for each ordering year and for the extension of services period.

The Attachment also includes an input column for subcontractor fully burdened rates.

(d) General: Offerors shall submit with their price proposal a completed Schedule of Firm Fixed Price

Rates, Solicitation Attachment C. This schedule provides the maximum hourly rates, maximum indirect rates (i.e.

Overhead/General & Administrative Expense), and maximum profit factor for the prime contractor, and also maximum hourly rates (fully burdened with all taxes, fringe, overhead, and profit) for the subcontractor. These rates will be incorporated into the contemplated IDIQ Contract. The maximum rates/factors will be binding on the contractor as maximum rates for purposes of costing/pricing. These rates will be the maximum that will be allowed on subsequent task orders and modifications to task orders. The Government reserves the right to negotiate the prices and rates submitted for task orders and modifications. Modifications that add or augment scope/work should be priced using the current year rates, regardless of what year the task order was written. A description of how to complete Attachment C is included below. Offerors may use their own format for the Schedule of Firm Fixed Price Rates, Solicitation Attachment C, if (i) use of the Government’s preferred format will cause an unreasonable burden on resources: (ii) offerors’ rate structure is significantly different than the Government presentation; and (iii) the Offerors’ format provides in substance the same level of detail and information reflected on the Government’s pricing format.

i. Labor Category Annual (Unburdened) Hourly Rates: Offerors shall input their best competitive unburdened labor rates and also maximum fully burdened rates for the subcontractor. Offerors must also complete the summary tab to show the Total Evaluated Price (please do not change the formulas in the spreadsheet).

Offeror’s are permitted to escalate the labor rates for each full year after the award or effective date of the contract (whichever is later), and for the extension of services period. The rates will be the maximum allowable rates during the ordering period. Offerors may propose individual wages or category average rates for key and non-key labor categories. If individual wages are utilized, then the offeror must equally allocate the number of hours to each labor category. If the offerors use a different description for the labor categories, it should enter the description in the space provided. If the labor categories do not exist within the offerors’ structure, an explanation of who performs those tasks shall be provided. Key labor categories are denoted with an asterisk (*)

ii. Labor Category Annual Hours: Offerors shall use the Government estimated annual labor hours delineated, below, to develop its proposal and prepare the Attachment C. The table and Attachment C provide the Government estimate of the IDIQ annual hours. The estimate is for planning purposes (placeholder only) and is not an IDIQ maximum or ceiling. Price proposals for future task orders shall consider the requirements set forth in the statement of work for developing estimated hours for key and non-key labor categories.

iii. Fringe benefits & Payroll Taxes: If offerors have a multi-rate structure with a fringe benefit & payroll taxes rate, input the maximum fringe rate for each year of the ordering period and the extension of services period. If offerors do not have a separate fringe benefit & payroll taxes rate, offerors shall so state. Fringe benefits include allowances and services provided by the company to its employees as compensation in addition to regular wages and salaries. Fringe benefits include, but are not limited to: the cost of vacations, sick leave, holidays, military leave, employee insurance, supplemental unemployment benefit plans, and pensions on retirement or death.

Payroll taxes include those required by Federal, State or local law.

iv. Overhead and General and Administrative (G&A) rates: If offerors have a multi-structure rate with separate Overhead rate(s) and/or G&A rate, input the rates for each year of the ordering period and the extension of services period. Overhead or General and Administrative Expense is defined as the corporate home office overhead rate or General and Administrative Expense and includes the indirect elements of expense related to company operating overhead, general and administrative, general sales and marketing, facilities capital cost of money, etc. If offeror’s established accounting practices allow for use of other indirect expense rates (i.e. overhead on subcontractor, field office overhead); those rates shall be inserted in the areas where such rates are applied.

Provide an overview of the company’s indirect cost rate structure. We suggest that offerors’ proposals include a summary schedule similar to that below, which identifies the name of each cost burden center and related allocation base (This table appears on the summary tab in Attachment C).

Summary of Cost Burden Centers

Name of the Burden Center Allocation Base (i.e., the cost base to which the rate is applied)

i. Material/Equipment Costs: The Government anticipates that materials and equipment will be required to perform the tasking specified in the PWS. The offerors shall use the estimated amounts (placeholder only) specified in Attachment C for direct materials/equipment. Applicable burdens, if any, should be added by the offeror when preparing Attachment C.

ii. Travel: The Government anticipates that travel will be required in the performance of this contract. Offerors shall use the estimated amounts (placeholder only) specified in Attachment C for travel.

Applicable burdens, if any, should be added by the offeror when preparing Attachment C.

iii. Subcontracts: The Government anticipates that subcontracts will be required in the performance of this contract. Offerors shall use the estimated amounts (placeholder only) specified in Attachment C for subcontracts. Applicable burdens, if any, should be added by the offeror when preparing Attachment C.

iv. Maximum Profit: Offerors shall input on Solicitation Attachment C, its best competitive profit factor for each year of the ordering period and the extension of services period. This profit factor shall be the maximum allowable profit factor for proposals (new awards and modifications) during each year of the ordering period or extension of services period.

(2) Basis of Evaluation:

(a) For award of the IDIQ, the Government will evaluate proposals by conducting price analysis. The

Government will evaluate price input by the offeror, in Section J, Attachment C. The Government intends to evaluate the extension of services (option) period and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in the soliciation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). Analysis will be performed by one or more of the following techniques to ensure a fair and reasonable price:

i. Comparison of proposed prices received in response to the solicitation.

ii. Comparison of proposed prices to historical prices paid, whether by the Government or other than the Government, for the same or similar services.

iii. Comparison of proposed prices with Government cost estimates.

iv. Analysis of pricing information provided by the offeror.

(b) The Government will also evaluate the price proposal for unbalanced pricing. Unbalanced pricing may be determined to exist when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price. The price of one or more of the line items in Attachment C is significantly over or understated as may be indicated by the application of the price techniques specified above. An offer may be rejected if the Government determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

(End of Summary of Changes)