Section M Evaluation Factors for Award.pdf

SECTION M

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 Basis for Contract Award:

This acquisition will utilize a Split Award between approved sources. Technical tradeoffs will not be made and no additional credit will be given for exceeding acceptability. Split percentages will be awarded based on offeror/s proposed total evaluated prices (TEPs).

Offerors will receive a percent of total available funds as calculated from the BBU-48 Split Award worksheet. Award value will be preferential to the qualified offeror with the lowest evaluated price, which is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements. The solicitation requirements include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Section L of this solicitation. The Government reserves the right to award without discussions; therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror’s best price. The government does however, reserve the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.

1.2 Number of Contracts Awarded:

The Government intends to award a contract to each successful offeror through a split-award of available funds, however; the Government reserves the right to award no contract at all or winner-take-all; depending on the number of adequate proposals and reasonableness of prices submitted.

1.3 Correction Potential of Proposals:

The Government will consider, throughout the evaluation, the “correction potential” of any proposal uncertainty. The judgment of such “correction potential” is within the sole discretion of the Government. If an aspect of an offeror’s proposal not meeting the Government’s requirements is not considered correctable, the offeror may be eliminated from the award.

2.0 EVALUATION FACTORS AND METHODOLOGY

2.1. Evaluation Factors:

In order to be considered acceptable, the contractor’s submissions requested in Section L must meet the below standards. The Government will evaluate for acceptability the factors described below:

Factor 1| Qualified Sources The contractor must be a qualified source prior to contract award in accordance with the source qualification requirements referenced in Section J of the solicitation.

Factor 2| Manufacturing Plan The contractor submitted a manufacturing plan in sufficient detail to outline how the contractor will meet production requirements of the BBU-48. The plan includes:

equipment, personnel, and manufacturing processes employed in sufficient detail to demonstrate an understanding of the requirement. The plan submission is in pdf format and contains no more than 10 pages.

Factor 3| Price Proposal The BBU-48 pricing table has been submitted with fill-in cells completed. Offeror has submitted quantity and price cells for the respective buy to dollar and FMS amounts. The proposed production units are divisible by 180 and all pricing is expressed in $x.xx format. Offeror submitted pricing for First Article Production.

2.2. Evaluation Methodology:

The basis for the split award amounts is expected to be based on the difference in total evaluated price (TEP) for each offeror. The difference in total evaluated price (TEP) is described in the following:

The split award amounts are expected to be based on the percent difference in TEP between the offerors. The split is expected to be done according to the split values in Table 1. Award values may not equate to exact split percentages due to: rounding, required ammo can quantities, and the non-splitting of individual FMS country funds.

Table 1

Difference in TEP Expected Split ≤ 10 % 50% 50%

> 10% & ≤ 25% 55% 45% > 25% & ≤ 50% 60% 40%

> 50% 65% 35%

*NOTE: Percent difference in TEP is determined as follows: ((next lowest price - lowest price)/lowest price)*100. Percent difference in TEP will be rounded to the nearest whole number. Reference BBU-48 Pricing Table for weighting and calculation of an offeror’s

TEP.

Table 1: Split of award if two offers received Two Offer Example:

Offeror #1 TEP: $20 Offeror #2 TEP: $30

The Difference in TEP between offeror #1 and offeror #2 is 50% (($30-$20)/$20*100) which would result in a 60/40 (see Table 1) split with offeror #1 receiving 60% of the total budgeted dollars and offeror #2 receiving 40% of the total budgeted dollars. In this example, if the total budgeted dollars equals $1,000,000, the award values would be as follows:

Offeror #1: $600,000 Offeror #2: $400,000

In any instance where the contracting officer determines proposed prices from one or more offerors are unreasonable when compared with recent prices and other available data, or there is no rational economic explanation or basis for the proposed prices, the Government may request additional cost or pricing data, award to one offeror, or cancel the solicitation. IAW FAR 15.402, all proposed prices will be evaluated for reasonableness”. If the Government does not receive adequate competition, the government will follow DFARS 215.371.

Balance - Offerors are cautioned against submitting an offer that contains unbalanced unit CLIN pricing. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more CLINs is significantly over or understated. The government will analyze proposals to determine whether they are unbalanced in accordance with FAR 15.404-1. An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the government.

2.3 Total Evaluated Price (TEP)

The TEP will be calculated from the BBU-48 Pricing Table using inputs from respective offerors and CLIN assigned weightings, see BBU-48 Pricing Table.

3.0 PRE-AWARD SURVEY

In accordance with DFARS PGI 223.370-4(iv) the PCO will request DCMA to conduct a pre-award survey within the Pre-Award Survey System (PASS), to include a review of the contractor’s/subcontractor’s facility, and to obtain a pre-award ammunition and explosives safety survey as a part of this source selection. Additionally, the requirements of DFARS PGI 223.370-4(iv) require that a pre-award survey be conducted before awarding any contracts involving ammunition and explosives, as defined in DFARS 252.223-7002 – Safety Precautions for Ammunition and Explosives. This requirement extends to any subcontractors a prospective contractor intends to use; therefore, to facilitate any potential PASS, the offeror shall provide a list of all locations where the work is to be performed (to include all locations/contractors outside of the United States) and indicate whether such a facility is a division, affiliate, associate contractor, or subcontractor.

Results of the PASS will be evaluated to determine each offeror’s capability to meet the requirements of the solicitation and shall be a condition of award. An offeror who is not fully compliant with pre-award safety requirements, may still receive award if a recommendation to award results from the audit; any resulting Letter/s of Intent to meet safety requirements will be incorporated into the offeror/s resulting contract award and will be a fully enforceable term of the contract.

4.0 SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS, TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, and representations and certifications, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors.

Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale.