A0007.pdf

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1 3

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

21 August 2008

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable) ARMY GOCO Korea

6. ISSUED BY CODE SCO600 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

ATTN: Waleska Pierantoni-Monge/DESC-BXC Defense Energy Support Center PPN: 6.1 8725 John J. Kingman Road, Suite 2945 Ft. Belvoir, VA 22060-6222 Phone: (703) 767-9343 Fax: (703) 767-9338 Waleska.Pierantonimonge@dla.mil

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (NO., street,city,county,State,and ZIP Code) ( ) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

x

SP0600-08-R-0516

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10 JUNE 2008

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

BIDDER CODE: CAGE CODE:

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 Offers [ ] is extended [x] is not extended.

Offers 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 ACKNOWLEGMENT 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, [ X ] is required to sign this document and return 1 copies to the issuing office.

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

SEE PAGES ATTACHED

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Items 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

ALICIA C. WILLIAMS

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C.DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C.DATE SIGNED

NSN: 7540-01-152-8070 30-105 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE

SP0600-08-R-0516

A00007

1. This amendment is hereby issued to revise Clause M28.100 EVALUATION OF OFFERS (DESC OCT 2003) and incorporate questions and responses (page 3) into the above referenced solicitation.

2. All other terms and conditions remain the same.

M28.100 EVALUATION OF OFFERS (DESC OCT 2003)

(a) Award of this contract shall be made by using source selection procedures. Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation should be prepared in accordance with the PROPOSAL FORMAT AND CONTENT clause and will be evaluated by a board of one or more Government personnel. Final selection shall be made by the Source Selection Authority based on an overall assessment of each offeror’s technical and price proposals. Judgment on the part of the Government evaluator(s) is implicit in the entire source selection process. The resultant contract shall represent the best overall value to the Government.

(b) For purposes of this solicitation, the combined non-price factors (Factors 1, and 2) are more important than Factor 3. However, as proposals become more equal in their non-price evaluation, the price becomes more important.

(1) PRICE EVALUATION. The Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest evaluated offer. The low offer will be determined by computing the total cost to the Government for the twenty-year period of performance.

(2) EVALUATION FACTORS. Proposals will be rated and ranked against the evaluation factors listed below. Factors 1 and 2 are equal in importance and significantly more important than Factor 3. Subfactors A, B and C under Factor 1 are equal in importance.

FACTOR 1 TECHNICAL /MANAGEMENT

Subfactor A Demonstration of understanding the operational and maintenance requirements to be provided.

Subfactor B Demonstration of understanding the Personnel Qualifications and Staffing levels to enable the accomplishment of the requirements to be provided.

Subfactor C Demonstration of understanding the Accounting and Inventory performance requirements to be provided.

FACTOR 2 PAST PERFORMANCE

The Government will evaluate the offeror's past performance. In doing this, the Government may consider information in the offeror’s proposal and information obtained from other sources, including past and present customers and their employees, other subcontractors, and any others who may have useful information.

Offerors lacking relevant past performance history shall receive a neutral evaluation for past performance.

A record of acceptable past performance will not result in a favorable assessment of an otherwise unacceptable proposal.

FACTOR 3 PRICE

(c) After each evaluation, each of the non-price factors described in (b) (2) above will be given one of the following ratings:

(1) Acceptable

(2) Unacceptable

Proposals may be rated differently within each category, i.e., two proposals may receive an acceptable rating, but one may be more acceptable than the other.

(DESC 52.209-9F95)

SP0600-08-R-0516

A00007

Questions and Responses:

1. Question: Offeror respectfully requests clarification on Figure3 “Estimated Closure Dates” and Note 1, page 19 of the referenced solicitation. It is imperative that we know the projected timeframe for operations and closure of the Camp Eagle, Camp Long, Camp Red Cloud, Camp Stanley, and Yongsan in order to effectively price the requisite resources for each of these locations. We understand there may be an indeterminate consideration presently but we request that a minimum timeframe for operations be defined so we can provide DESC and the Army an accurate price offer taking into consideration all labor, equipment, and overhead cost necessary to provide fuel facilities services at each of these locations for a prescribed period of time. In absence of a definitive operations/closure period it is very difficult to provide you a meaningful offer.

Government Response: As of now, we have no anticipated closure dates for any of the locations. The contractors will have to bid their offers for all sites remaining in operation.

2. Question: M28.100 Evaluation of Offers, subpara. (a) states that proposals should be prepared in accordance with the “PROPOSAL FORMAT AND CONTENT” clause. Where specifically is that clause? An electronic global search failed to produce it.

Further, Factor 1, sub factors A and C appear to evaluate data not called for in the solicitation. Please clarify what will be used to evaluate those to sub factors.

Government Response: See Clause L201- INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS (GOCO) on page 108 of the solicitation. Clause M28.100 Evaluation of Offers has been revised in this Amendment (Page 2).

3. Question: M28-100-States you will grade for Format and Content: In section L the government states the Technical Data and number of copies, Resumes and you state the positions and where they will be dual hated. Then Past Performance and then Price which is in the first section of the Bidders Submission Package. Our we to presume that the Format for this is at the contractors discretion and just use the outline as proposed in Section L?

Government Response: See revised Clause M28.100.

4. Section L.201 requires Technical Data submission of 1) resumes, 2) personnel staffing, 3) numbers and types of vehicles, and 4) Contract Compliance Plan. Section M28.100 details the Evaluation of Offerors and identifies 3 Factors with sub-factors which will determine who will be awarded the contract. Amendment 0004, section C, question 2 deleted the requirement for a CCP to be submitted with the proposal. Based upon the stated requirements of Section L and the deletion of the CCP in the Technical, how are the requirements in Section M going to be evaluated. Please clarify or explain what is required in the Technical Data.

Government Response: See revised Clause M28.100.