Attachment F (Amd 0002) - Evaluation Criteria.pdf

Attachment F (Amd 0002) Evaluation Criteria Phosphor Grade 99.99% (4N) Europium Oxide (Eu2O3)

The Government intends to award a contract for the cumulative purchase of 15 Metric Tons (15,000 kilograms) of Phosphor Grade 99.99% (4N) Europium Oxide. The Government intends to award a single firm fixed price contract.

A Contractor must be determined to be responsible according to the standards of FAR Part 9, FAR 15.101-2 and FAR 52.212-2, to be eligible for award.

In accordance with (IAW) FAR 15.101-2(b)(1): All offers will first be evaluated to determine if they meet the Government’s minimum qualifications as specified in the Statement of Work (SOW). Award will be made on the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for the non-cost factors of Technical and Past Performance

IAW FAR 52.212-2(a), the Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

Factor 1: Technical Requirements

Factor 2: Past Performance

Factor 3: Price

Factors 1 and Factor 2 shall be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis:

A proposal is considered acceptable if:

(1) It addresses all technical requirements listed in the SOW.

(2) If it shows the Contractor understands all essential requirements of the solicitation and SOW, and has demonstrated a full capability to perform the prospective requirements.

(3) The Contractor provides all submittals required as stated in the Combined Synopsis/Solicitation document.

(4) Although some discussion of the proposal may be desirable, the proposal is complete to the extent that an award could be made on its present terms.

A proposal will be considered unacceptable if award cannot be made on the present terms of the proposal, and corrective action would require essentially rewriting the proposal or require the submission of an approach, which would be new or almost entirely different from that previously proposed. The proposal will also be considered if it does not include the required submittals.

An “Unacceptable” rating on Factor 1 (Technical Requirements) shall render the proposal ineligible for award, or if discussions are held, a proposal found to be “unacceptable for award” (as defined above) will be excluded. Communications may be held with the Contractor where past performance information is a factor preventing their proposal from being acceptable.

Attachment F(Amd 0002) Evaluation Criteria Page 2 of 2

FACTOR 1—Technical Requirements

Factors 1 and 2 shall be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis.

A major item and/or gross omission, which preclude meeting solicitation objectives, which cannot be corrected prior to or during discussions without major revision or complete resubmission of the proposal, will cause the proposal to be found technically unacceptable.

• Subfactor 1: Technical Compliance: The Contractor must demonstrate the capability to meet the product chemical compositions, material structural characteristics, and the ability to produce the product within the required period. The Contractor must demonstrate this capability through product specification sheets, Safety Data Sheets (SDS), examples of Certificates of Analysis (COA).

• Subfactor 2: Delivery and Delivery Schedule: The Contractor shall meet the additional technical requirements (such as packaging, labeling, and transportation) listed in Section 4.2 through 4.6 of the SOW. A proposed Delivery Schedule longer than 270 days shall be deemed unacceptable.

FACTOR 2—Past Performance

In the case of a Contractor without a record of relevant past performance, or for whom information on past performance is not available, or is so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Contractor may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the Contractor shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

The Government will evaluate past performance using information provided with the proposal and information obtained from other sources, including past and present customers, subcontractors, etc. This assessment is based on the Contractor’s record of relevant and recent (within the last 3 years) past performance information that pertains to the products and/or deliveries under a similar contract as outlined in the solicitation requirements. Documentation of recent and relevant past performance will be evaluated to determine a pattern of meeting material standards and timely delivery.

While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate, and complete past performance information rests with the Contractor.

Should the Government discover adverse past performance information to which a Contractor did not have a prior opportunity to respond, the Contracting Officer may conduct communications if deemed appropriate.

FACTOR 3—Cost

If a proposal has been determined acceptable under each of the abovementioned non-price factors, the Government will evaluate the Contractor’s unit prices to determine if they are reasonable and in the best interest of the Government. The proposal will be evaluated for price, such that it is reasonable and competitive for product specifications.