Attachment_B-Technical_Evaluation_Factors-Refrigerated_Gases.pdf

Attachment B: Technical Evaluation Factors

1. The Government will evaluate all responses received using the evaluation criteria set forth hereby.

2. The Government will award a contract resulting from this requirement on the basis of best value, technical factors and price considered. The best value analysis will take into consideration the results of the technical evaluation, price evaluation, and the ability to complete the work within the Government's required schedule. The analysis will document that the award represents the best value (considering price, technical features, administrative costs, etc.) to meet the

Government’s needs. Technical and past performance, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. The Government reserves the right to award a contract to the responsible offeror whose offer is most advantageous to the Government, technical merit, price, and other factors considered.

3. All aspects of the response are subject to discussion, including price, technical approach and terms and conditions. However, the Government reserves the right to not conduct discussions prior to award. If conducted, at the completion of discussions, the contractor will ensure his technical plan and price quote reflects the mutual understandings of the requirement and if requested, submit a revised technical plan and price quote to the Contracting Officer. The technical plan should consist of the contractor’s intent and approach to this particular effort, any considerations that should be made by the government, as well as any additional information that expresses the Contractor’s position above others for this effort.

4. If an award will be made without conducting discussions, contractors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their quote (e.g., an adverse past performance information to which the contractor has not previously had an opportunity to respond) or to resolve minor or clerical errors.

5. The Government may request clarifying information from the contractor, as it relates to its quote.

6. The Government reserves the right to make a single award as a result of the RFQ. In addition, the

RFQ may be amended or canceled as necessary to meet the Government’s requirements.

7. The Government reserves the right to make an award without further discussions of the quotes received. Therefore, it is important that your quote be submitted initially on the most favorable terms from both the technical and costs standpoints.

8. Technical proposals will be evaluated using below adjectival rating:

Adjective Risk Level Description

Excellent Very Low The proposal has exceptional merit and reflects an excellent approach which will clearly result in the superior attainment of all requirements and objectives.

This clearly achievable approach includes several advantageous characteristics of substance, and very few disadvantages, which can be expected to result in outstanding performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is very low as the proposal provides solutions which are unquestionably feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered very low risk in that they are exceptionally clear and precise, fully supported, and demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirements.

Good Low The proposal demonstrates a sound approach which is expected to meet all requirements and objectives. This sound approach includes advantageous characteristics of substance, and few relatively minor disadvantages, which collectively can be expected to result in satisfactory performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is low as the proposal contains solutions which are considered feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered to reflect low risk in that they are clear and precise, supported, and demonstrate an understanding of the requirements.

Acceptable

Neutral The proposal demonstrates an approach which is capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. The approach includes both advantageous and disadvantageous characteristics of substance, where the advantages are not outweighed by the disadvantages. Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages are likely to result in acceptable performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate, as the proposal solutions are generally feasible and practical. These solutions may also be considered to reflect moderate risk in that they may be somewhat clear and precise, partially supported, and/or demonstrate a general understanding of the requirements.

Marginal High The proposal demonstrates an approach which may not be capable of meeting all requirements and objectives.

The approach has disadvantages of substance and advantages, which if they exist, are outweighed by the disadvantages. Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages present a low or questionable likelihood of resulting in satisfactory performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is high as the proposal contains solutions which may not be feasible and practical. These solutions may also be considered to reflect high risk in that they lack clarity and precision, are generally unsupported, and/or do not demonstrate a complete understanding of the requirements.

Unacceptable Very High The proposal demonstrates an approach which, based on a very high risk, will very likely incapable of meeting all requirements and objectives. This approach has several disadvantages of substance, and advantages which, if they exist, are outweighed by disadvantages.

Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages are unlikely to result in satisfactory performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is very high as the proposal contains solutions which are not feasible and practical.

The solutions may also be considered to reflect very high risk in that they lack any clarity or precision.

9. Technical Evaluation Criteria

Proposals will be evaluated based on the following evaluation criteria in the manner described below:

9.1 Technical Approach

This technical evaluation criterion will be evaluated as a whole; no sub-factors will be applied.

This criterion will assess Offeror’s proposal for information that demonstrates the following:

The Contractor’s proposal shall address each area of the purchase description in sufficient detail to demonstrate a clear understanding of the specific characteristics needed to fulfill these requirements. The proposed technical approach shall be evaluated for the capability of the contractor to deliver oxygen, nitrogen and carbon dioxide that meets or exceeds specifications set forth in this solicitation and within a 72 hour (3 days) after receipt of order. Contractor can provide lease, maintenance and telemetry system on the Airgas bulk gas tanks listed. Contractor will respond to calls on tanks or telemetry service within 2 hours via phone or e-mail and provide on-site service within 48 hours of request. Additionally, the contractor is to provide annual and thorough inspections on all tanks including the telemetry system described in this solicitation.

The inspection shall include a complete inspection of the condition of the tanks including the piping, valves, and fittings. Capability in these areas shall be viewed favorably.

9.2 Past Performance

This technical evaluation criterion will be evaluated as a whole; no sub-factors will be applied.

This criterion will assess Offeror’s proposal for information that demonstrates commitment to customer satisfaction and timely delivery of high-quality services.

The Contractor shall provide at least two (2) past performance references completed during the past five (5) years with knowledge of the contractor’s relevant skills and experience related to the requirements outlined in the purchase description.

References shall include the following information:

1) Name of Organization

2) Description of requirement and specific responsibilities of the Offeror as they relate to the purchase description

3) Point of contact name, title, phone, and e-mail

4) Total contract value

5) Contract period of performance

10. Price/Cost

The cost/price proposal submitted will be evaluated for fair and reasonableness pricing. Offerors shall complete Attachment C: Price Schedule Template and submit it with the response. For a price to be considered reasonable, it must represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay when consideration is given to prices in the market.