Evaluation_Criteria.docx

Evaluation Criteria

Site Wide Transformer oil analyses

NB193000-15-02905 | 15-193-2557

1352.215-75 Evaluation criteria (APR 2010)

Basis for Award: This is Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Source Selection. Award will be made to the offeror deemed responsible in accordance with FAR 9.104, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements and is rated technically acceptable in all evaluation factors, and is the lowest price, trade-offs are not permitted. A finding of unacceptable in any single evaluation factor renders the entire proposal unacceptable and therefore not available for award. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. The Government anticipates that if options are exercised, they will be exercised at the time of award for the basic requirement.

TECHNICAL: To be determined technically acceptable, an offeror must be determined technically acceptable in each of the factors identified below.

Factor 1 - Experience Modification Rating (EMR) – Acceptable/Unacceptable:

The Government will affirm that the offeror provided proof of insurance Experience Modification Rating (EMR) of 1.0 or less from the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI) or its calculating State Agency. If not eligible for NCCI rating, then the offeror must present other proof from their insurance company documenting their EMR of 1.0 or less.

Factor 2 – Experience. To be determined technically acceptable, an offeror must demonstrate:

Offeror has successfully performed as a prime contractor for at least three (3) similar projects with a contract value greater than $5,000 each in the past four (4) years or currently underway which involve transformer oil sampling and analysis services EXPERIENCE: NIST will evaluate the projects the offeror describes in its proposal to determine the extent of the offeror’s experience as a prime contractor performing work similar to that which will be required under this contract. (Technical Factors 2 Ranking***Acceptable – meets experience as a prime contractor on three similar projects greater than $5,000; Unacceptable – Does not meet experience.)

Factor 3 –Key Personnel. To be determined technically acceptable, an offeror must demonstrate that:

The Key Personnel shall have at least 3 years of experience with similar trades to the proposed project. The Key Personnel shall each have successfully completed at least three (3) transformer oil sampling and analysis services.

Key Personnel: NIST will evaluate the offeror’s proposed key personnel to determine their ability to perform the roles for which they are proposed.

(Technical Factors 2 Ranking***Acceptable – Key personnel has 3 yrs. of experience with projects and has completed three projects; Unacceptable – Does not meet experience.)

Factor 4 – Past Performance. To be determined technically acceptable, an offeror must demonstrate:

The Offeror shall submit telephone numbers and e-mail addresses for references for each project described in the Offeror’s Experience evaluation factor 2. Offeror's shall ensure that all references and their contact information is current and correct prior to proposing the references in the proposal submission. Only the firms who have satisfactory or higher scores on factors 2 and 3 will be checked.

Past Performance: NIST will evaluate past performance for the experience Factor 2. Experience must be satisfactory. In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror will be evaluated neither favorably nor unfavorably.

(Past Performance Ranking*** A = Acceptable; U= Unacceptable; N=Neutral)

The Government reserve the right to consider data obtained from sources other than those described by the Offerer in its proposal.

Adjectival Ratings: The following adjectival ratings shall be used in the evaluation of the Evaluation Factors 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Price will NOT receive an adjectival rating.

Technical Acceptable / Unacceptable Ratings

Acceptable

ALL of the minimum acceptable criteria are clearly met by the proposal. The offeror’s proposal meets the performance and technical capability requirements defined in the SOW and specifications. NOTE: Once the proposals have been determined to be “technically acceptable,” award will based on price only.

Unacceptable

Not all of the minimum acceptable criteria are met by the proposal. An unacceptable proposal contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal fails to meet specified minimum performance and technical capability requirements defined in the SOW and specifications.