20R8703_Pre-ProposalConferenceAgenda_Minutes.pdf

PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE

AGENDA

SOLICITATION NUMBER: N40084-20-R-8703

PROJECT TITLE: HOUSING CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY MAINTENANCE (COM)

AT THE U.S. NAVAL AIR FACILITY ATSUGI JAPAN AND U.S.

FORCES JAPAN CONTROLLED AREAS IN KANTO PLAIN, JAPAN

LOCATION: NAF Atsugi and USFJ Controlled Areas in Kanto Plain, Japan

DATE: 2 September 2020, 09:00 AM

Welcome/Introductions Contracting Officer

Project Overview Contracting Officer

Contractual Background Contracting Officer

Contract Procedures Contracting Officer

Wrap-Up Contracting Officer

Site Tour Project Manager

NOTICE TO PROSPECTIVE OFFERORS:

YOUR QUESTIONS ARE ENCOURAGED REGARDING THE RFP AND WILL BE

ANSWERED, IF POSSIBLE, DURING THE PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE. PLEASE

SUBMIT YOUR QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SPECIFICATIONS OR SITE VISIT

TO MIKI MASUDA VIA E-MAIL AT MIKI.MASUDA.JA@FE.NAVY.MIL, WHICH, IF

NEEDED, WE’LL FOLLOW WITH AN AMENDMENT TO THE SOLICITATION.

MINUTES OF THE CONFERENCE, INCLUDING QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, WILL

BE POSTED ON THE ASIANECO WEBSITE.

THE SOLICITATION REMAINS UNCHANGED UNLESS AN AMENDMENT IS

ISSUED.

N4008420R8703

AGENDA

1. Welcome/Introductions – Contract Specialist

a. Attendance Roster.

Please take a moment to sign the attendance roster. Minutes of the Pre-Proposal

Conference minutes will be posted on the beta.SAM website.

b. SAM Registration Please ensure that your company is actively registered in SAM.

System for Award Management (SAM): hhttps://sam.gov/portal/SAM

Beta.SAM: Register at – https://beta.sam.gov/

c. Amendments.

Be advised that unless the solicitation is amended in writing, it remains unchanged. If an amendment is issued, it will be posted on beta.SAM and normal procedures relating to the acknowledgement and receipt of solicitation amendments shall apply.

2. Project Overview – Contracting Officer

a. Project Description.

The work includes, but not limited to, providing all labor, equipment, materials, transportation, supervision, and any other necessary work for Housing Change of Occupancy Maintenance at the U.S. Naval Air Facility, Atsugi and the U.S. Forces Controlled Areas in Kanto Plain, Japan.

b. Funding Availability. The Government reserved the recurring work for base period for this project.

c. Options. Seven (7) one-year option periods are included in this procurement

d. Period of Performance. Base period (7 months) and seven (7) one-year options.

Considering the long term of the contract period and market price, some increases in price for option items will be one of the contractor’s choices.

CLINS Option Periods Description Period of Performance 0001 Base Year Period Recurring Portion 12/1/2020 – 6/30/2021 0002 Base Year Period Non-Recurring Portion 12/1/2020 – 6/30/2021 0003 1st Option Period Recurring Portion 7/1/2021 – 6/30/2022 0004 1st Option Period Non-Recurring Portion 7/1/2021 – 6/30/2022 0005 2nd Option Period Recurring Portion 7/1/2022 – 6/30/2023 0006 2nd Option Period Non-Recurring Portion 7/1/2022 – 6/30/2023 0007 3rd Option Period Recurring Portion 7/1/2023 – 6/30/2024 0008 3rd Option Period Non-Recurring Portion 7/1/2023 – 6/30/2024

0009 4th Option Period Recurring Portion 7/1/2024 – 6/30/2025 0010 4th Option Period Non-Recurring Portion 7/1/2024 – 6/30/2025 0011 5th Option Period Recurring Portion 7/1/2025 – 6/30/2026 0012 5th Option Period Non-Recurring Portion 7/1/2025 – 6/30/2026 0013 6th Option Period Recurring Portion 7/1/2026 – 6/30/2027 0014 6th Option Period Non-Recurring Portion 7/1/2026 – 6/30/2027 0015 7th Option Period Recurring Portion 7/1/2027 – 6/30/2028 0016 7th Option Period Non-Recurring Portion 7/1/2027 – 6/30/2028

e. Special Issues.

i) Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) Invoicing Procedure shall be used in accordance with

DFARS Clauses 252.232-7003 and 252.232-7006 in the solicitation.

3. Contractual Background – Contract Specialist

a. Regulations

i) The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR),

ii) The Department of Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement

(DFARS),

iii) Navy Marine Corps Acquisition Regulation Supplement (NMCARS),

iv) NAVFAC Acquisition Supplement (NFAS)

b. The Contract.

i) Advertised solicitation – beta.SAM website https://beta.sam.gov/.

Attachments – Attachments 1, 2 and 3 will be made available to Offerors upon request.

ii) Amendments – Will be posted to beta.SAM.

iii) Estimated award date is November 2020.

iv) CAUTION – Today’s Q&As are not contractually binding. Please submit any questions in English electronically by 8 September 2020. (If longer date is necessary, please request by submitting the inquiry form.)

c. 41 U.S.C. 423 - Procurement Integrity.

(A) PROHIBITED CONDUCT BY COMPETING CONTRACTORS

During the conduct of any Federal agency procurement of property or services, no competing contractor or any officer, employee, representative, agent, or consultant of any competing contractor shall knowingly—

(1) make, directly or indirectly, any offer or promise of future employment or business opportunity to, or engage, directly or indirectly, in any discussion of future employment or business opportunity with, any procurement official of such agency, except as provided in subsection (c) of this section;

(2) offer, give, or promise to offer or give, directly or indirectly, any money, gratuity, or other thing of value to any procurement official of such agency; or

(3) solicit or obtain, directly or indirectly, from any officer or employee of such agency, prior to the award of a contract any proprietary or source selection information regarding such procurement.

NOTICE

UNITED STATES LAWS AND REGULATIONS PROHIBIT YOU FROM PARTICIPATING

IN ANY OF THE FOLLOWING CONCERNING THIS SOLICITATION:

BID RIGGING

PRICE FIXING

COLLUSIVE BIDDING

BID ROTATION

OFFERING GRATUITIES

OFFERING OR RECEIVING KICK-BACKS

THE PRICES IN YOUR OFFER MUST BE ARRIVED AT INDEPENDENTLY WITHOUT

ANY CONSULTATION, COMMUNICATION, OR AGREEMENT WITH ANY OTHER

OFFEROR OR COMPETITOR.

YOUR OFFER CAN NOT BE DISCLOSED BY YOU DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY TO

ANY OTHER OFFEROR OR COMPETITOR BEFORE BID OPENING.

IT IS ALSO UNLAWFUL FOR YOU TO INDUCE ANY OTHER BUSINESS TO, OR

ALLOW ANOTHER BUSINESS TO INDUCE YOU TO SUBMIT OR NOT SUBMIT AN

OFFER FOR THE PURPOSE OF RESTRICTING COMPETITION.

ALL OF THE ABOVE ACTS ARE ACTS OF DISHONESTY UNDER UNITED STATES

LAWS AND REGULATIONS AND ARE FORBIDDEN.

PENALTIES COULD INCLUDE DEBARMENT OR SUSPENSION FROM DOING

BUSINESS WITH ANY UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, CANCELLATION

OF CONTRACTS AND RECOUPMENT OF PRIOR MONIES PAID.

IF YOU ARE SOLICITED BY ANY OTHER BUSINESS TO COMMIT WITH ANY OF THE

ABOVE ILLEGAL ACTS, PLEASE NOTIFY NAVFAC FAR EAST AT TELEPHONE

NUMBER 046-816-4092.

注意

この入札に関連して次のいずかに関与したら合衆国の法律、規則等により違法になりま

す。

不正手段による入札 値段の不正取り決め 共謀入札 入札の回し取り 謝礼をすること リベートの授受

入札の値段の入札者や競争相手との協議、意志伝達又は同意によらず独自に見積もった

値段でなければならない。

貴方の入札は開札前に他の入札者や競争相手に直接、間接見せてはいけない。

尚、貴方が他の会社に、あるいは他の会社が貴方に競争相手を制限する目的入札をする

様に 又は入札しない様にと説き勧めることは、これまた違法である。

全て上記の行為は、合衆国の法律、規則等のもとでは不正な行為であり、禁じられてい

る。

処罰は、合衆国政府機関の関連事業からの除外又は停止、契約の取り消し、そして支払

い金の償還も含まれる。

もし貴方が他の会社から上記のいずれかの違法行為に関わりあうことになる様な申し込

みをされたら、NAVFAC FAR EAST 電話 046-816-4092 まで御通報ください。

4. Contract Procedures – Contract Specialist

a) Authorization to Perform

In accordance with DFARS 252.225-7042, the Offeror must be duly authorized to operate and to do business in Japan.

b) The Best Value Source Selection Process.

The lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA) source selection process is used for this procurement.

c) Proposal Format.

The price proposal and the non-price (Technical) proposal shall be submitted in separated binders. Each binder, as described below, shall be appropriately tabbed and present a clear, concise offer.

BINDER 1 - PRICE PROPOSAL

Tab 1 Signed Standard Form 1449, complete Representations and Certifications, and copies of all amendments (if applicable) Tab 2 Completed Exhibit Line Item Number (ELIN) worksheet J-0200000-6 Tab 3 Other documents described in 52.212-1

BINDER 2 - NON-PRICE (TECHNICAL) PROPOSAL

Tab 1 Factor 1, Corporate Experience Tab 2 Factor 2, Safety Tab 3 Factor 3, Past Performance

d) Proposal Submission Requirements.

Binder 1: Price Proposal

1. Solicitation Submittal Requirements for Price Proposal

Offeror shall complete and submit the price proposal in a binder clearly marked as the price proposal. Each copy of the price proposal shall include a separate tab for each item specified below:

(a) TAB 1: Standard Form (SF) 1449: 1) Complete blocks 17a and, if applicable, 17b; 2)

Complete blocks 30a, 30b, 30c; 3) Complete Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) 0001 through 0016 and the Total Price on the SF1449 – Continuation Sheet; and 4) Complete Representations and Certifications. Prices shall be submitted in Japanese Yen only.

(b) TAB 1: Copies of all amendments (if applicable) acknowledged

(c) TAB 2: All pages of Attachment 2, J-02000000-06, Exhibit Line Item Numbers (ELIN) worksheet in both Microsoft Excel format support the amounts specified for each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) in the solicitation. In the event that there is a difference between the hard copy and the Microsoft Excel format version of the price proposal, the hard copy price will be held to be the intended offer and the total of the CLINs, SLINs, or ELINs will be recomputed accordingly.

Although not part of the price evaluation, Offerors should also include the following items if available with their price proposal to assist the Government in validating eligibility to receive an award.

TAB 3:

a. An informational page that contains following information:

i. Solicitation Number and Title

ii. Prime Contractor Name, address, phone number, point of contact, and email address

iii. DUNS Number

DUNS Numbers are provided by Dun and Bradstreet’s Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS). Offerors can register for a DUNS number online at https://www.dnb.com/duns/number/get-a-duns.html. Offerors are not required to obtain a federal Tax Identification Number (TIN), also known as an Employer Identification Number (EIN). When registering, simply leave the TIN/EIN information blank. There is no cost to obtain a DUNS number. Offerors do not have to have a DUNS number to submit a proposal; however, one will be required before receiving an award.

iv. CAGE Code Once registered in the System for Award Management or SAM, an Offeror can request a CAGE Code through the Defense Logistics at https://cage.dla.mil/. There is no cost to obtain a CAGE Code. Offerors do not have to have a CAGE Code to submit a proposal; however one will be required before receiving an award.

b. A copy of current SAM registration

Offerors can register with SAM at http://www.sam.gov. Offerors do not have to be registered with SAM to submit a proposal; however registration will be required before receiving an award.

c. Completed Representation and Certification

d. A copy of a Joint Venture Agreement, Partnership Agreement and /or Teaming

Agreement (if applicable). The JV of Partnership must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database as the JV or Partnership. The SAM website is located at https://www.sam.gov. Failure to submit the Joint Venture Agreement, Partnership Agreement or Teaming Agreement may result in the Offeror’s proposal being rejected as non-responsible.

e. Financial Capability

Offerors shall provide evidence of financial capability. In accordance with FAR9.104-1 responsibility determination, a contractor must have adequate financial resources to perform the contract. Offerors shall submit the company’s Dun & Bradstreet number (DUNS) and provide the latest three years complete fiscal year financial statements for the prime contractor, certified by an independent accounting firm, if practicable or at least by an authorized officer of the organization. In addition to the above, submit evidence of availability of working/operating capital, which will be used for the performance of the resultant contract. For Joint Venture arrangements discuss the financial responsibilities among the companies and if the Joint Venture has been in existence for less than three years, also provide the latest three years complete fiscal year financial statements for each member of the Joint Venture

f. CD-ROM (including all submittals both of technical and price proposal)

g. Executed FAR Provision 52.229-11.

h. Completed IRS Form W-14, Certificate of Foreign Contracting Party Receiving

Federal Procurement Payments, if applicable. If not submitted with the offer, exemptions will not be applied to any resulting contract and the Government will withhold a full 2 percent on each payment.

2. Basis of Evaluation for Price Proposal

The Government will evaluate price based on the total price. Total price consists of the basic requirements and all option items. The Government intends to evaluate all options and has included the provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options (JUL 1990) in the solicitation. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

As authorized under FAR 15.404-1, 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 RFP.

(ii) Comparison of proposed prices with the IGCE.

(iii) Comparison of proposed prices with available historical information.

(iv) Comparison of market survey results.

Binder 2: Non-Price (Technical) Factors

TAB 1: Factor 1, Corporate Experience:

1. Solicitation Submittal Requirements for Corporate Experience

Submit a minimum of one (1) to a maximum of three (3) recent and relevant projects that best demonstrate experience on relevant projects using the Project Data Sheet (Attachment C). A relevant project is defined as a change of occupancy maintenance work valued approximately 80,000,000 (JPY) or more per year including all options for maintenance of at least 80 single and/or multi-family units per year. In order to demonstrate a recent project, such contracts must have been completed (including all options) within the past ten (10) years of the issuance of this solicitation or ongoing projects with at least two (2) years of performance completed as of the issuance of this solicitation.

If more than the maximum number of projects is submitted, the Government will only evaluate projects up to the maximum number authorized in the solicitation, excess will not be evaluated.

If the offeror has teaming partners, recent and relevant project experience should be submitted for projects performed by either the offeror or the teaming partner. The offeror needs to provide a copy of the teaming agreement. Offerors failing to provide a copy of the teaming agreement will be considered to have not met the requirements of the factor and shall be rated Unacceptable.

To enable verification, the offeror should include the firm’s name and CAGE code for each project included in the proposal for this factor.

2. Basis of Evaluation for Corporate Experience

The Government is seeking to determine if the Offeror has demonstrated recent and relevant corporate experience involving a change of occupancy maintenance for single and/or multi-family property.

An Offeror will be rated “ACCEPTABLE” if at least one (1) of its submittals for Corporate Experience demonstrates the experience involving a change of occupancy maintenance work valued approximately 80,000,000 (JPY) or more per year including all options for maintenance of at least 80 single and/or multi-family units per year that have been completed (including all options) within the past ten (10) years of the issuance of this solicitation or ongoing projects with at least two (2) years of performance completed as of the issuance of this solicitation.

An Offeror will be rated “UNACCEPTABLE” if it fails to meet the requirements to be rated acceptable described above.

A proposal receiving an “Unacceptable” evaluation rating for Factor 1 will be ineligible for award.

TAB 2: Factor 2, Safety:

1. Solicitation Submittal Requirements for Safety:

Offeror shall submit a written explanation that demonstrates the Offeror’s commitment to safely accomplishing the requirements identified in the Performance Work Statement and will properly manage and implement safety procedures and accident prevention methods. The Offeror shall submit a narrative no more than 2 single-sided (1 double-sided) pages that demonstrates its commitment to safely accomplishing the requirements identified in the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and will properly manage and implement safety procedures and accident prevention methods. The narrative should address each of the following topics:

(a) METHOD for selecting a subcontractor with a safe performance record;

(b) SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM that will be used to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and subcontractor performed work;

(c) EFFECTIVE PROGRAM (methodology) to execute an effective program that facilitates accident prevention techniques and processes, and employee reporting of unsafe conditions and unsafe activities.

2. Basis of Evaluation for Safety

The Government is seeking to determine whether the information contained in the Offeror’s proposal demonstrates a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures and accident prevention methods for itself and its subcontractors.

An Offeror will be rated “ACCEPTABLE” if it demonstrates a commitment to safety and that the Offeror plans to properly manage and implement safety procedures and accident prevention methods for itself and its subcontractors.

An Offeror will be rated “UNACCEPTABLE” if it fails to meet the requirements to be rated acceptable described above.

A proposal receiving an “UNACCEPTABLE” evaluation rating for Factor 2 will be ineligible for award.

TAB 3: Factor 3, Past Performance:

1. Solicitation Submittal Requirements for Past Performance

Offerors shall clearly demonstrate a history of past performance on contracts/projects that demonstrates experience in performing work similar to that described in the definition of a relevant project under Factor 1, Corporate Experience. The offeror shall submit past performance information for each project included in its proposal for Factor 1, Corporate Experience. IF A

COMPLETED CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORTING SYSTEM

(CPARS) EVALUATION IS AVAILABLE, IT SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE

PROPOSAL. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION, THE PAST

PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (PPQ) INCLUDED IN THE SOLICITATION AS

ATTACHMENT D IS PROVIDED FOR THE OFFEROR OR ITS TEAM MEMBERS TO

SUBMIT TO THE CLIENT FOR EACH PROJECT THE OFFEROR INCLUDES IN ITS

PROPOSAL FOR FACTOR 1, CORPORATE EXPERIENCE. An offeror should not submit a PPQ when a completed CPARS evaluation is available.

IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ (Attachment D), which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Ms. Miki Masuda, via email at Miki.Masuda.JA@fe.navy.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

Offerors may provide any information on problems encountered and the corrective actions taken on projects submitted under Factor 1, Corporate Experience. Offerors may also address any adverse past performance issues. Explanations shall not exceed 4 single-sided pages in total.

Performance recognition/award(s) or additional similar information submitted will not be considered.

The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. The Government’s inability to contact any of the Offeror’s reference or the references’ unwillingness to provide information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this factor.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate, and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

A copy of the blank Past Performance Questionnaire to be used for requesting client references is included as Attachment D.

2. Basis of Evaluation for Past Performance

The Government is seeking to determine if the Offeror has relevant and recent past performance information that pertains to the requirement outlined in the solicitation. The past performance evaluation results is an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The evaluation will consider how well the Offeror performed relevant projects submitted under Factor 1, Corporate Experience and may also consider past performance on other projects currently documented in known sources.

The Government will consider the recency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the Offeror’s performance. This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Offeror’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the Offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the Offeor’s probability o successfully meet the requirements of the solicitation.

The Government will evaluate the degree to which past performance evaluations and all other past performance information reviewed by the Government (e.g., PPIRS, Federal Reporting System (eSRS), performance recognition documents, and information obtained from any other sources) reflect a trend of satisfactory performance considering:

(i) A pattern of successful completion of tasks;

(ii) A pattern of deliverables that are timely and of good quality;

(iii) A patter of cooperativeness and teamwork with the Government at all levels (task managers, contracting officers, auditors, etc.,); and

(iv) Recency of tasks performed that are identical to, similar to, or related to the task at hand

An offeror will be rated “ACCEPTABLE” if an offeror’s “Past Performance” information demonstrates:

(1) An overall rating of at least Satisfactory or better on the Past Performance Questionnaires, Attachment D,

(2) An overall rating of at least Satisfactory or better in CPARS or other DOD or Government appraisal systems, or

(3) Past Performance Evaluations from telephone interview of Satisfactory or better.

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 is 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”.

An Offeror will be rated “UNACCEPTABLE” if it fails to meet the requirements to be rated acceptable described above.

A proposal receiving an “UNACCEPTABLE” evaluation rating for Factor 3 will be ineligible for award.

CURRENT PROPOSAL DUE DATE: 21 SEPTEMBER 2020, 10:00 JST

e) 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 lowest priced, technically acceptable offer.

2. As stated in the solicitation, 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 LPTA process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition because the best value is expected to result from selection of the technically acceptable proposal with the lowest evaluated price.

4. An overall non-price factors rating must be at least “ACCEPTABLE” in order to be eligible for award. An “UNACCEPTABLE” rating in any factor results in the overall non-price factors proposal being rated “UNACCEPTABLE” unless corrected through discussions. An overall non-price factors rating of “UNACCEPTABLE” makes a proposal ineligible for award.

ADJECTIVAL RATINGS/DESCRIPTIONS

Each offeror’s technical factors and past performance will be evaluated separately. Upon the conclusion of the evaluation of the technical factors, and past performance, an overall non-price factors rating of Acceptable (A) or Unacceptable (U) will be assigned to each offeror’s non-price factors proposal.

1. The following adjectival ratings and rating descriptions will be used to assign a rating to each technical factor. Use upper case letter ratings for major technical factor ratings. The addition of plus (+) or minus (-) to an adjective rating is not allowed.

Table A-1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable (A) Proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable (U) Proposal does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

The weaknesses and/or deficiencies (as defined below) of each proposal for each non-price evaluation factor which influenced the assigned adjectival rating shall be identified.

Definitions

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

Significant Weakness

A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

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

2. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

Past Performance shall be evaluated when using the LPTA process, unless waived by the PCO in accordance with FAR 15.101-2(b). Past performance will be rated on an “acceptable” or “unacceptable” basis using the ratings in the following table:

Table A-2. Past Performance Evaluation Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable (A)

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 (U) Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have 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 (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

(a) Aspects of Past Performance Evaluation. The past performance evaluation results is an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum past performance solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertain to the products and/or services outlined in the solicitation requirements. There are two aspects of the past performance evaluation.

(1) The first is to evaluate whether the offeror’s present/past performance is relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. The criteria to establish what is relevant are unique to each LPTA source selection. For this solicitation, a relevant project is defined as a change of occupancy maintenance work valued approximately 80,000,000 (JPY) or more per year including all options for maintenance of at least 80 single and/or multi-family units per year submitted as Corporate Experience under Factor 1.

(2) The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. The past performance evaluation performed in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information from customers on how well the offeror performed those past contracts.

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basis requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced.

Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

f) Debriefing Procedures.

Debriefing procedures are identified in FAR Part 15.505 (Pre-award debriefing of offerors) and 15.506 (Post-award debriefing of offerors).

g) Points of Contact.

Your point of contact for this solicitation is:

NAVFAC FE PWD Atsugi FEAD ACQ Contract Specialist: Ms. Miki Masuda Telephone: Commercial 046-763-32545 or DSN 264-2545 E-mail: Miki.Masuda.JA@fe.navy.mil

6. Wrap-Up – Contract Specialist

Inquiries regarding the Request for Proposal (RFP) shall be submitted electronically in English using the Pre- Proposal Inquiry Form provided with this solicitation by 8 September 2020. The point of contact (POC) for inquiries is Ms. Miki Masuda by email at Miki.Masuda.JA@fe.navy.mil.

sponses to inquiries will be provided in the form of an Amendment and posted to the website https://beta.sam.gov/. The Government may not respond to inquiries submitted after the inquiry due date specified above.

7. Site Tour – Project Manager. Site tour was conducted prior to pre-proposal conference.

8. Q&A

Q1. What is the “Size Standard” shown on the SF1449 Block 10.

A1. The amount shown on the block 10 can be referenced to determine the size of business such as “Small Business”. FAR Part 19 Small Business Program does not apply in Japan.

Q2. Two companies attended the Pre-Proposal conference and Site Visit. Are we the only competitors for this acquisition?

A2. No. Any contractors without attending the conference and site visit are eligible to submit a proposal.