N5523619R0017_Amend_0004.pdf

N5523619R0017PR

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

REF: CIS SCAFFOLDING

The puropse of this amendment is to:

1) Modify Section L, pargraph 3.0 Offer (Price Proposal). See changes marked in red.

2) Modify Section M, paragraph 1.0 General, correcting listed NAICS. See changes marked in red.

3) Correct formulas in Exhibit A-E. See attached Exhibit A-E Rev1.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

See continuation pages.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 13

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 20-Apr-2020

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 N5523619R0017

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

17-Mar-2020

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

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

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

20-Apr-2020

CODE

SOUTHWEST REGIONAL MAINTENANCE CENTER

CODE 410B 3755 BRINSER STREET, STE 1

SAN DIEGO CA 92136-5205

N55236 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

Roderick Rioveros, Contracting Officer 619-556-2309 roderick.rioveros@navy.mil

N5523619R0017

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been modified:

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

OFFEROR INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 General

To compete for the contract described in Sections A through J of this Request for Proposal (RFP), Offerors must submit an offer that includes the following: (1) a price proposal, (2) technical capability proposal and (3) relevant information concerning offeror(s) past performance. Only one (1) offer will be accepted from each offeror. The Government will not accept any alternate proposals. The Government will not entertain nonconforming proposals.

If the offeror (A) fails or refuses to assent to any of the terms and conditions of this solicitation, (B) proposes additional terms or conditions, or (C) fails to submit any of the information required by paragraph (2.0), then the Government will consider the offer to be unacceptable, which will make the offeror ineligible for contract award.

2.0 Solicitation Response Requirements

The following information is required in response to the solicitation:

Section 3.0 Offer (Including Price Proposal) Original, One (1) Copy, and One (1) Electronic Copy in Excel Format (unprotected)

Section 4.0 Technical Capability Proposal

Original, Three (3) Copies, and One (1) Electronic Copy

Section 5.0 Past Performance Information At least Three (3)/Maximum of Five (5) Relevant Reference Information Sheets (RIS)

Section 6.0 Pre-Award Information Original, One (1) Copy, and One (1) Electronic Copy

Technical Capability proposals shall contain no classified material. It is the sole responsibility of the Offeror to ensure that the electronic media submitted is virus free and can be opened and read by the Government. If the electronic media cannot be opened and read by the Government, the Offeror shall have a reasonable amount of time, typically 72 hours, after notification of the same to correct the deficiency. After that time, if the electronic media cannot be opened and read by the Government, the offer may be ineligible for award. In case of conflict between the electronic copy of the proposal and the paper copy of the proposal, the paper copy shall take precedence.

3.0 Offer (Price Proposal). The offer is the document that will be used to make an award to the successful offeror(s) and must consist of the following:

a. One page transmittal letter that includes the following content: Firm’s name, CAGE code, DUNS number, address, contact name and phone number together with Standard Form SF33, “Solicitation, Offer, and Award,” with blocks 12 through 18 completed by the Offeror. Offeror must provide a period of 90 days from proposal due date for Government acceptance of the offer (complete block 12 of Standard Form (SF) 33).

b. Standard Form SF33 – Offerors must provide a unit price and total amount for contract line item numbers (CLIN 0001) in this RFP. Offeror’s total evaluated proposed price is based on CLIN 0001 which is evaluation “FACTOR 3.” CLIN 0002 is not separately priced (NSP) and should be left blank. If an offeror is uncertain whether a specific CLIN is priced or for informational purposes only, the offeror shall contact the contract specialist.

The electronic version of the offer must be submitted in the form of a CD-ROM and match the hardcopy submitted and shall be compatible with Microsoft Excel 2016. In cases where the hard copy and the electronic copy of the proposal conflict, the hard copy shall take precedence.

c. RFP Section J, Exhibits A-E, Supplies or Services and Prices – Offerors must provide a unit price and confirm total amount for all Exhibit Line Item Numbers (ELINs) in the pre-formulated Microsoft Excel spreadsheets provided in Exhibits A-E. If an offeror has any questions or is uncertain whether a specific ELIN has been formulated correctly, the offeror shall contact the contract specialist.

The electronic version of Exhibits A-E must be submitted in the form of a CD-ROM and match the hardcopy submitted and shall be compatible with Microsoft Excel 2016.

d. RFP Section K, “Representations, Certifications, and Statements of Offerors.”

e. Solicitation Amendment(s) (if any) - The offeror shall submit a signed completed copy of each amendment.

Proposal Due Date: All copies of proposals must be received by the Government at the address below no later than 24 April 2020 at 1400 Pacific Daylight Time. Offerors must send in their proposals by mail or delivery in person to the contracting address listed below. Late proposals WILL NOT be considered. Partial proposals or attachments submitted late WILL NOT be considered. Per FAR 15.208, it is the offerors’ responsibility to ensure their proposals are received by the contract specialists no later than the specified solicitation (RFP) closing date and time. To ensure the Government received your proposal, offerors are encouraged to request written acknowledgement from at least one (1) Contract Specialist from SWRMC Code 410B. NO FACSIMILE PROPOSALS, EMAILED

PROPOSALS, OR PROPOSALS UPLOADED TO THE BETA.SAM.GOV WEBSITE WILL BE ACCEPTED.

Proposal Submission:

Proposals shall be sent to:

Southwest Regional Maintenance Center Attn: Mr. Raul Alcantara, Ms. Dawn Griffin, or Mr. John Rocks, SWRMC Code-410B 3755 Brinser Street, Suite 1 Bldg 77, Room 108 San Diego, CA 92136

Offeror(s) that elect to submit proposals in person at the above address shall contact Contract Specialist Paul von Franzke at 619-556-4855 in advance for building access.

Offerors shall mark all submittals “DO NOT OPEN PACKAGE IN MAIL ROOM—FORWARD UNOPENED DIRECTLY TO RAUL ALCANTARA, DAWN GRIFFIN, or JOHN ROCKS AT CODE-410B”. The outside of the package shall clearly indicate the offeror’s name, the solicitation number and the contents of the package.

Proper completion and submission of the above items of information will constitute an offer to perform in accordance with the terms and conditions of this solicitation, including attachments and documents incorporated by reference. The offer must communicate unconditional assent to the terms and conditions of this solicitation, its attachments, and documents incorporated by reference. The Government’s acceptance of an offer will create a binding contract between the offeror and the Government.

The Government will not entertain alternate proposals. If the Offeror (1) fails or refuses to assent to any of the terms and conditions of this RFP, (2) proposes additional terms or conditions, or (3) fails to submit any of the information required by this paragraph (3.0), then the Government will consider the offer to be unacceptable, which will make them ineligible for contract award. The only way that an unacceptable offer could be made acceptable would be through discussions (see FAR 15.306(d)). However, the Government intends to award a contract without discussions, as permitted by FAR 15.306(a) and 52.215-1. Therefore, Offerors are advised to consult with the contracting officer before submitting an alternate proposal, submitting an offer that takes exception to any term or condition of this RFP, proposing any additional term or condition, or omitting any of the information requested. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions and to permit offerors to revise their proposals if it is in the Government’s best interest to do so.

4.0 Technical Capability Proposal (Factor 1)

Format The technical capability proposal should clearly demonstrate a thorough understanding and capability to perform the efforts described in the Statement of Work (SOW) of this solicitation. The Government recognizes not all technical elements can be detailed in advance, but the proposal must be sufficiently detailed to describe the organization/management and resources the offeror proposes to use to accomplish the effort described in the SOW.

The proposal shall also include a detailed description of the offeror’s relevant experience in deck covering services.

Evaluations of written information will consider completeness and clarity, degree of compliance with the solicitation, and the offeror’s approach to meeting the Government’s needs. Statements that the offeror understands and can or will comply with the contract requirements or paraphrasing the contract SOW or parts thereof, without demonstrating a concerted effort to independently create a sufficiently detailed description of the offeror’s technical capability are considered inadequate.

Technical Capability Proposal Format:

In order to maximize efficiency and minimize the time required for proposal evaluation, all offerors shall submit a technical capability statement in accordance with the format and content specified. The page count is limited to 30 pages. Both the printed and electronic copies shall meet the following format requirements:

Each page of every copy should be affixed with the date, solicitation number, firm’s name, and following legend: “Source Selection Information, See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.”

The standard typed page of the proposal document, i.e., one sheet of paper with typing on one side, shall be 8 ½ x 11inch paper

Single-spaced typed lines Tables, graphics, photographs and charts are allowed (text no smaller than 8 point font Times New

Roman) 1 inch margins all around 12 point Times New Roman font No hyperlinks Foldouts are limited to tables, graphics, photographs and charts (as opposed to text/narrative), they shall be 8 ½ x 11 inch in size and single-spaced typed lines and for page numbering purposes will each count as one (1) page.

In the event any portion of the proposal is prepared or written by anyone who is not a bona fide employee of the firm submitting the proposals, a certificate to this effect shall be furnished. The certificate shall be signed by a responsible officer of the offeror and shall also identify the person’s name, employment capacity, the name of the person’s firm, the relationship of that firm to the offeror, and the portion of the proposal written by that person.

Content

The format of each offeror's proposal shall be as stated below. The intent is not to restrict the offeror’s proposal presentation, but rather to ensure a certain degree of uniformity in the format of the responses for evaluation purposes.

The offeror’s Technical Capability proposal shall consist of three (3) sub-factors, (A) Experience, (B) Manpower/Capabilities Resources, and (C) Organization/Management. The Technical Capability proposal should clearly demonstrate the offeror’s thorough understanding and capability to perform the efforts described in the SOW contained in Section C. It is recognized that all technical elements cannot be detailed in advance, but the proposal must be sufficient to describe the Experience, Manpower/Capabilities Resources, and Organization/Management the offerors proposes to use to accomplish the requirements described in Section C. Statements that the Offeror understands can or will comply with the contract requirements, or paraphrasing the contract SOW or parts thereof are considered inadequate.

At a minimum, the offeror must provide clear concise detailed information organized as follows:

Sub-factor (A): Experience

Potential offeror must completely address each of the below paragraphs. Label paragraphs in response to correspond with each paragraph for this sub-factor.

(1) Describe the offeror’s experience in all aspects of the work requirements described in the SOW. Discuss work experience as a prime contractor or as a subcontractor that demonstrates relevancy to the work requirements described in the SOW.

(2) Provide listing of work performed within the past three (3) years from October 28, 2016 through October 28, 2019 for the level of effort similar to that of the requirements described in the SOW. Provide specific management, technical, and financial information that will describe the scope, magnitude, and complexity of the work performed.

(3) Provide experience in the management, supervision, completing, controlling, integrating, scheduling, and progressing similar to that of the requirements described in the SOW.

(4) Provide experience in managing of subcontractors, including the successful selection, scheduling, managing, monitoring and controlling of the same.

Sub-factor (B): Manpower/Capabilities Resources

Potential offeror must completely address each of the below paragraphs. Label paragraphs in response to correspond with each paragraph for this sub-factor.

(1) Provide specific information on personnel to be used to perform work under this contract including number available, location, qualifications, prior experience, etc., that shows overall capability to provide quality work in response to required time constraints. Information should reflect manpower resources currently available as well as data on manpower proposed.

(2) Describe any plans to recruit, train, or otherwise obtain adequately trained personnel to fulfill requirements of this contract.

(3) Describe the offeror’s capability to have sufficient manning, trade and facility resources to perform and complete the work described in the SOW, to include emergent requirements.

(4) The Government is not just concerned with the contractor’s manpower resources available to perform this contract in isolation. Offerors must also describe their current and projected workload in general and provide a plan to implement the anticipated requirements of this contract into their existing and projected workload obligations.

(5) Describe the offeror’s facility, proximity to the location of work, equipment, storage capacity and other relevant information as it applies to the work described in the SOW.

Sub-factor (C): Organization/Management

Potential offeror must completely address each of the below paragraphs and sub-paragraphs. Label paragraphs and sub-paragraphs in response to correspond with each paragraphs and sub-paragraphs for this sub-factor.

(1) Provide the overall approach, authority, functions, and responsibilities of the organization including:

1.1 Management

1.2 Planning

1.3 Safety and Security

1.4 Material Procurement Control

1.5 Quality Assurance

1.6 Subcontracting

1.7 Scheduling

1.8 On-Site Supervisors

(2) Provide an organizational chart that demonstrates the relationships and responsibilities as they apply to management, planning, quality assurance, subcontracting, scheduling, on-site supervision, and journey level tradesmen that demonstrates clearly defined lines of authority and control.

(3) Describe the offeror’s procedure for selecting, scheduling, managing, monitoring, controlling and interfacing with/of subcontractors. Provide names and addresses of any subcontractors to be used and the effort level/type of work the subcontractor will be responsible for.

(4) Provide the offeror’s scheduling system plan for preparing production schedules in order to accommodate multiple tasking without jeopardizing the performance period dates.

(5) Provide the offeror’s system for accurately tracking all requirements, and subsequently notifying the Government early in the availability when it becomes known that performance dates are in jeopardy.

(6) Describe the offeror’s Quality Management System (QMS). Provide Quality Assurance (QA) organization, approach, functions, and responsibilities. Discuss the procedures and processes regarding QA control, documentation, monitoring, training, implementation, and deficiency corrections/preventions.

(7) Provide a plan describing adaptability to ship schedule changes.

(8) Describe in detail a plan to accept, manage, and complete emergent requirements commencing production efforts within four hours of notification and completing all work within the performance period.

(9) Describe the offeror’s material/purchasing organization, procedures, and processes for maintaining materials and equipment to support the work described in the SOW.

(10) Describe the offeror’s property control system for ordering, receiving, accounting, storing, handling, protecting, and disposing of purchased materials to support the work described in the SOW.

(11) Describe the offeror’s procedures and processes to meet the federal, state and local laws, codes, ordinances, regulations and requirements for documentation, removal, storage, and disposal of hazardous material/waste.

(12) Describe the offeror’s safety organization, procedures, training, first aid capabilities, fire protection capability and security procedures.

5.0 Past Performance Information (Factor 2)

Prepare and submit a minimum of three (3) or maximum of five (5) Reference Information Sheets (RIS) in the format of RFP Attachment (S-1). On the RIS, include the names of references who can verify that offeror has done the type of work that is required under the contract contemplated by this RFP and who will provide information about the quality of offeror’s past performance. All of the provided references may be contacted; however, ensure that the provided reference information is up-to-date and that each reference will cooperate with us once contacted.

Do not give us the names of a reference unless offeror has made sure that we can reach that reference at the telephone number, e-mail address, and postal address that was provided, and that they will give us the required information.

Additionally, each offeror also has the opportunity to provide in its proposal any information regarding its past performance of contracts similar to the Government’s requirement, including additional information which the Government has readily available, for example, Offerors’ CPARS reports, other information considered essential to the Government’s evaluation, explanatory information of substandard or poor performance and the corrective actions taken to prevent a recurrence.

NOTE: OFFERORS ARE REQUESTED TO NOTIFY MR. RAUL ALCANTARA AND MS. DAWN GRIFFIN

EMAIL, RAUL.R.ALCANTARA1 @NAVY.MIL AND DAWN.A.GRIFFIN@NAVY.MIL OF THEIR INTENT

TO SUBMIT AN OFFER AT LEAST TWO (2) WEEKS BEFORE THE DUE DATE FOR RECEIPT OF OFFERS

SO THE GOVERNMENT CAN BEGIN ITS PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION. EARLY SUBMISSION

OF PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION IS STRONGLY ENCOURAGED.

6.0 PRE-AWARD INFORMATION

The offeror’s proposal shall contain the following pre-award information outlined below. The intent of the information is to demonstrate the offeror’s financial responsibility to complete work requirements as described in Section C of the RFP, Statement of Work. In addition, the offeror shall provide information about their Quality Management System (QMS).

Provide a narrative description of the offeror’s financial resources to perform the requirements of this contract, as part of that narrative, please provide the following information:

- Describe the offeror’s accounting system and ability to segregate accounting costs.

- Describe the offeror’s process to ensure prompt payment of subcontractors and suppliers.

- Describe the offeror’s ability to obtain insurance in accordance with DFARS 252.217-7012.

- Describe the offeror’s current and forecast financial position, as part of that narrative, offerors should provide the following information to substantiate their short-term and long-term solvency.

o Describe and provide financial statements including balance sheets, statements of income, and statements of cash flows for the three most recent completed years and the current year to date.

o Provide a Financial ratio analysis, tied to the offerors financial statements. At minimum,provide the following financial ratios for the current year to date and the previous 3 completed years:

Current Assets to Current Liabilities (Current) Ratio Acid Test Ratio (Quick) Ratio = (Current Assets – Inventory) / Current

Liabilities Total Liabilities to Owner’s Equity Ratio

- Describe the offerors ability to provide sufficient working capital to finance its operations, accounting for the standard pacing of Government financing and progress payments.

- Describe the offeror’s historical, current and projected sales, as well as a narrative description of how the offeror’s current and forecast changes to sales volume will affect is short and long term solvency.

- Describe the offeror’s historical, current and projected profitability, as well as a narrative description of how the offeror’s current and forecast changes to profitability will affect is short andlong term solvency.

- Describe and provide current bank statements for all bank accounts under offeror control.

- Describe and provide information substantiating available lines of credit, including information illustrating the existing balances and additional credit available.

- Describe the offeror’s ability to obtain other lines of credit or financing.

- If available to the offeror, provide the offeror’s most recent credit rating.

- Describe and provide substantiating documentation for any bankruptcy filings, pending lawsuits, liens, or judgments either by or against the offeror.

- If available to the offeror, provide the offeror’s Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) Comprehensive Report.

Provide documentation that the offeror’s QMS is in accordance with NAVSEA Standard Item 009-04 and has been approved by SWRMC Quality Assurance (QA) Department, or provide documentation the offeror’s QMS has been submitted to SWRMC QA prior to the subject RFP’s closing date and time. The QMS is required to demonstrate the offeror’s capability to be fully compliant with contract performance requirements and to satisfy the Government’s determination of contractor responsibility in accordance with FAR 9.104-1(e). Offerors are strongly encouraged to submit the QMS as soon as possible to give the SWRMC QA Department ample time to review and approve the QMS to ensure no delay in contractor eligibility to perform delivery orders. Point of contact email address regarding this requirement is swrmc_qa_c132@navy.mil The Contractor(s) awarded a contract as a result of the solicitation will be required to have in place, a SWRMC approved Quality Management System (QMS) in accordance with NAVSEA Standard Item 009-04, no later than the contract award date.

There is no page limit associated with 6.0 – Pre-Award Information.

SOLICITATION AND AMENDMENTS

Solicitation information and amendments will be made available through the World Wide Web through the beta SAM website at https://www.beta.sam.gov.

The solicitation, which will include the Section J RFP attachments, can be downloaded directly to the contractor’s workstations. Offerors are advised to periodically check the beta SAM website for responses to pre-solicitation inquires and any amendments that have been issued containing important information related to the solicitation.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

BASIS FOR AWARD

1.0 General. This solicitation is a Total Small Business Set-Aside under NAICS 238990. The Government intends to award a contract without discussions as permitted by FAR 15.306(a) and 52.215-1. The Government intends to award approximately three (3) indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) contracts. Each resultant contract term will be five (5) base years. The Government will award a contract to the offeror(s) whose proposal represents the best value to the Government. The Government shall determine best overall value on the basis of the following evaluation factors and sub-factors described below in 3.0. The resultant assessment shall determine the final award decision.

2.0 Offer. The Government will determine the acceptability of each offer on a pass or fail basis. The Government will consider an offer to be acceptable when it (1) manifests the offeror’s assent, without exception or imposition of condition, to the terms and conditions of this RFP, including attachments and documents incorporated by reference, and (2) includes material information required by the solicitation. If you (a) take exception to any of the terms and conditions of the RFP, (b) impose additional conditions, or (c) omit material information required by this RFP, then the Government will consider your offer to be unacceptable and you to be ineligible for contract award. (See RFP Section L, Proposal Preparation Instructions, paragraph 2.0 and 3.0). The Government reserves the right to change the terms and conditions of this RFP by amendment at any time prior to the source selection decision.

3.0 Evaluation Factors. The Government will evaluate proposals based on the factors and sub-factors shown in the table below. An offeror receiving an overall rating of marginal or below in technical capability, limited confidence or below in past performance, or if their price is considered unreasonable, will be sufficient to result in the offeror not receiving an award, regardless of the ratings received for the remaining evaluation factors.

Factors Sub-factors

1. Technical Capability A. Experience

B. Manpower/Capabilities Resources C. Organization/Management

2. Past Performance (None)

3. Price (None)

3.1 Description of Evaluation Factors and Sub-Factors

3.1.1 Technical Capability. (Factor 1). The Government will evaluate each offeror’s technical capability to perform the Government’s requirements of this solicitation by requesting a written capability statement that will consist of the following sub-factors: Organization/ Management, Manpower/Capability Resources, and Experience. Offers will be rated Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, or Unacceptable in each sub-factor in order to determine an overall technical capability factor rating. See paragraph 3.2.3 of this section for adjectival rating definitions. Each offeror’s technical capability will be evaluated on the basis of the following sub-factors:

3.1.1.1 Sub-factor A. – Experience. Under this sub-factor, the Government will review the experience claimed by the offeror for relevancy, depth, and breadth. The greatest consideration will be given to offerors with the most number of instances (breadth) of recent experience that demonstrate the highest degree of complexity (depth) and similarity to the anticipated requirement (relevancy).

3.1.1.2 Sub-factor B. – Manpower/Capabilities Resources - Under this sub-factor, the Government will assess the offeror’s plan to provide qualified personnel, number of personnel available, location, qualifications, prior experience, etc., to show overall capability to perform quality work in accordance with requirements set forth in Section C of the solicitation. The Government will assess plans to recruit, train, or otherwise obtain adequately trained personnel to fulfill requirements of this contract. The Government will assess the offeror’s ability in terms of manning available to perform the requirements under this contract, both routine and emergent, as well as in conjunction with their current and projected workload as it relates to manpower resources.

3.1.1.3 Sub-factor C. – Organization/Management. The Government will review the contractor’s overall approach, authority, functions, and responsibilities of its organization. The contractor’s organizational chart will be evaluated for the relationship and responsibilities of management, planning, quality assurance, subcontracting, scheduling, and on-site supervisors. Additional positive consideration will be given to proposals that demonstrate clearly defined lines of authority and control. The Government will assess the functions to be subcontracted as they pertain to this effort including the rationale for such and the percentage of work to be subcontracted. The Government will assess the contractor’s ability, via the submitted plans, procedures and techniques, to respond to more than one (1) requirement (simultaneous tasks for more than one (1) ship). The Government will assess the offeror’s adaptability to cope with schedule changes. Additionally, the Government will assess the offeror’s performance approach to successfully accomplishing the requirements of the solicitation, including the Statement of Work (SOW). The offeror will be required to provide, in detail, a plan to accept, manage, and complete emergent Commercial Industrial Support Services – Scaffolding Services requirements commencing production efforts within four hours of notification and completing all work within the performance period.

3.1.2 Past Performance. (Factor 2) The Government will consider the recency and relevancy of past performance information compared to the requirements detailed in the SOW, the source of the information, the context of the data and general trends in the offeror’s performance and any associated risk.

3.1.3 Price. (Factor 3) The Government will evaluate the proposed price of each Exhibit Line Item Number (ELIN) for reasonableness in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(1) and FAR Subpart 15.4. The offeror’s total evaluated proposed price will be the sum of all ELINs over the five year base period comprising CLIN 0001 in Section B of the RFP.

3.2 Application of Factors and Sub-factors

3.2.1 General. The evaluation factors and sub-factors represent key areas of importance to be considered in the source selection decision. The factors and sub-factors have been chosen to support meaningful insight between and among competing proposals. As demonstrated in their proposals, offerors shall be evaluated in terms of their ability to meet or exceed the program’s requirements stated in the SOW.

3.2.2 Relative Importance

The evaluation factors include: Technical Capability (Factor 1), Past Performance (Factor 2), and Price (Factor 3).

Of the three (3) factors, Technical Capability is more important than Past Performance, which is more important than Price. Technical Capability and Past Performance when combined is more important than Price. Within the Technical Capability factor, sub-factor (A) - Experience, is more important than sub-factor (B) – Manpower/Capability Resources and sub-factor (C) – Organization/Management combined. Sub-factor (B) and sub-factor (C) are of equal importance. Within the Past Performance factor, sub-factors (A) and (B) and (C) are of equal importance.

RELATIVE IMPORTANCE RANKING FACTORS

1 (Most Important) (1) TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES

2 (2) PAST PERFORMANCE

3 (3) PRICE

RANKING WEIGHT: FACTOR (1) > FACTOR (2) > FACTOR (3)

FACTOR (1) + FACTOR (2) > FACTOR (3)

RELATIVE IMPORTANCE

RANKING

TECHNICAL CAPABILITY SUB-FACTORS

1 (Most Important) (A) EXPERIENCE

2 (B) MANPOWER/CAPABILITIES RESOURCES

3 (C) ORGANIZATION/MANAGEMENT

RANKING WEIGHT: SUB-FACTOR (A) > SUB-FACTOR (B) + SUB-FACTOR (C)

SUB-FACTOR (B) = SUB-FACTOR (C)

3.2.3 Adjectival Ratings. The Government will perform an evaluation of the Technical Capability evaluation factors and sub-factors based on the offeror’s proposal. This evaluation focuses on strengths and weaknesses of the offeror’s proposal, resulting in the assignment of an adjectival rating for each factor and sub-factor. Price will not be assigned an adjectival rating.

i. The following adjectival ratings/definitions in the table below shall be used for evaluation of: Factor 1, Technical Capability: sub-factor (A) – Experience, sub-factor (B) – Manpower/Capabilities Resources, and sub-factor (C) – Organization/Management.

ADJECTIVAL RATING DEFINITION

OUTSTANDING Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful contract performance is very low.

GOOD Proposal meets the requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful contract performance is low.

ACCEPTABLE Proposal meets the requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful contract performance is no worse than moderate.

MARGINAL Proposal does not clearly meet the requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one (1) or more major weaknesses that are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful contract performance is high.

UNACCEPTABLE Proposal does not meet the requirements and contains one (1) or more deficiencies. The proposal is not awardable.

Additional definitions that are used when evaluating factors and each of its sub-factors are as follows:

Weakness is defined as a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiency is defined as 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.

Risk assesses the degree to which an offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor or sub-factor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Strength is an aspect of an offeror's proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

ii. Past Performance

The following adjectival ratings/definitions shall be used for the Past Performance evaluation sub-factors – relevancy and confidence:

1) Relevancy & Recency of Past Performance

The first aspect is to evaluate the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. More relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. Sources of past performance information may include information provided by the offeror, information obtained from questionnaires tailored to the circumstances of the acquisition, or any other sources available to the Government. Other sources include, but are not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings 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.

Relevancy, as it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the source solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance. Again, any measure or likelihood is a qualitative and not necessarily a quantitative measure.

Recency, as it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the time that has elapsed since the past performance reference occurred. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant within the past three (3) years from the RFP closing date of 05 Jan 2020.

2) Performance Confidence Assessment

The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the contractor performed on the contracts. In conducting a performance confidence assessment, each offeror shall be assigned one (1) of the ratings below.

OVERALL CONFIDENCE

RATING

DESCRIPTION

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.

Performance Confidence Assessment is an evaluation of the likelihood (or Government’s confidence) that the offeror will successfully perform the solicitation’s requirements. This evaluation is based upon past performance information and is a qualitative and not necessarily a quantitative measure.

4.0 Source Selection Decision. The Government will make a source selection decision based on the Tradeoff process method in accordance with FAR 15.101-1. The Government intends to award a contract to the responsible offeror(s) whose proposal demonstrates the best value by exhibiting the greatest overall technical merit and performance confidence assessment at a reasonable price. Best value means the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government’s estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement (FAR 2.101).

Accordingly, the Government may be willing to pay a reasonable premium for a contract offering superior overall technical merit and past performance. Conversely, the Government may select a lower-price, lower-rated proposal if the Government determines that the premium associated with the higher-rated proposal is not justified. In making its best value determination the Government shall consider technical merit (i.e., all non-price factors taken together) to be significantly more important than the total evaluated price. However, the importance of total evaluated price as an evaluation factor will increase with the degree of equality in overall technical merit of competing proposals.

(End of Summary of Changes)