SF30_SPE1C121R00050003.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

See Block 14

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE SPE1C1 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

CODE FACILITY CODE

SPE1C121R0005

X

2020 OCT 28

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of OffersX X is extended, is not extended.

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT 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.

1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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:

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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:

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to issuing office.

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

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

15A NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning

DLA TROOP SUPPORT

C AND T SUPPLY CHAIN

700 ROBBINS AVENUE

PHILADELPHIA PA 19111-5096

15C. DATE SIGNED 16C. DATE SIGNED

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

Opening/Closing Date Changed to:

2020 OCT 28 / 2020 DEC 11

TIME 3:00 PM

See Attached Continuation Sheet(s).

(X)

CHECK ONE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

13. THIS APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 2 OF 15 PAGES

CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE

SPE1C121R0005 - 0003

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES OR COSTS

A. The solicitation is extended until December 11, 2020 at 3:00 PM EDT for proposal submission only. See F below for Product Demonstration Model directions.

B. The Women's Air Force Lightweight jacket is deleted from the solicitation in its entirety. The solicitation is for the Men's Air Force Lightweight Jacket only.

C. The production lead time is hereby amended from 90 days to 210 days after award. Subsequent orders will be 90 days.

D. The contract period is amended from a one year base period to a two year base period.

E. The guaranteed minimum requirement for the Men's Air Force Lightweight Jacket is amended from 12,504 to 25,008 for the two year base period.

F. The requirement for a pre production sample is hereby deleted and replaced with a Product Demonstration Model. The direction for submission are as follows:

PRODUCT DEMONSTRATION MODELS (PDM):

All product demonstration models are due by December 11, 2020 at 11:00 AM EDT. Hand deliveries by other than commercial carrier are not authorized due to COVID-19. Any carrier may be used, as long as the carrier is able to provide a verifiable tracking number.

Offerors are cautioned that the mailroom is open from 8:00 AM EDT to 11:00 AM EDT Monday through Fridays (aside from Federal holidays). Any deliveries received outside of those hours will be rejected.

It is solely the offeror's responsibility to ensure its product demonstration models (PDMs) are received on-time, considering the day and time limitations of the receiving office listed below.

TIMELINESS OF ANY OFFEROR'S SUBMISSION WILL BE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING:

The timeliness of the solicitation, and any subsequent amendments, will be based upon:

The receipt time stamp appearing on the following email address's inbox: Randall.mcarthur@dla.mil

The timeliness of the PDM will be based on: the date/time listed in the tracking information provided. Tracking information MUST clearly indicate that the carrier had taken receipt of the PDM package(s) no later than 11:00 AM EDT on December 11, 2020, in order for the PDM to be considered as having been submitted on-time. Otherwise, CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 3 OF 15 PAGES

SPE1C121R0005 - 0003

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES OR COSTS (CONTINUED)

the PDM will be considered late.

Offerors are cautioned to save their receipt from the carrier which should have a time and date stamp of when the transaction occurred. Fill in the carrier and tracking number for the PDM below:

CARRIER:____________________________________________

TRACKING NUMBER:___________________________________

FAILURE TO SUBMIT A PDM WITH THE OFFEROR'S PROPOSAL AT THE TIME AND DATE OF THE

INITIAL CLOSING OF THE SOLICITATION WILL CAUSE THE OFFEROR'S ENTIRE PROPOSAL TO

BE REJECTED.

G. The following is added to Section L of the combined synopsis/solicitation.

PRODUCT DEMONSTRATION MODELS

Instructions for submitting Product Demonstration Models (PDMs) to DLA Troop Support

(a) The offeror shall submit PDMs, as specified below, as part of its proposal. PDMs will be submitted at no expense to the Government and must be received prior to the time and date set forth for closing of offers. PDMs will be returned at the offeror's request and expense so long as the PDM(s) is(are) not destroyed by testing, retained by the Government as a manufacturing standard, and/or unless otherwise specified by the solicitation. PDMs will become Government property unless return is requested within 30 days after date of award.

Description: Men's Air Force Lightweight Jacket

NSN: 8405-01-298-6881(s)

Size: 40 Regular

No. of Units Required: 1

(b) Offerors will be required to submit one (1) PDM for each item and each production facility/place of performance. The PDMs will be evaluated for conformance to each item's specification characteristics.

Failure of the PDMs to conform to all such characteristics will result in rejection of the entire proposal.

Failure to furnish PDMs by the time and date specified in the solicitation may be cause for rejection of the entire offer if not otherwise acceptable under the provisions for considering late offers.

The following applies only when checked as paragraph (c):

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 4 OF 15 PAGES

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES OR COSTS (CONTINUED)

[ ] If the PDM will be used as a manufacturing standard, for the successful offeror(s), the Government will return one approved PDM which will serve as a manufacturing standard. Products delivered under any resulting contract shall conform to the approved PDM as to the characteristics listed for test or evaluation and shall conform to the specification/commercial product description characteristics.

[X] It is preferred that the materials used to manufacture the PDM be in accordance with any specifications defined in the Item Description of this solicitation. However, if the offeror uses alternate materials to manufacture the PDM(s) a letter must be supplied with them stating (i) which materials depart from the end item specification and (ii) that, although the materials used in producing the PDM(s) differ from those specified, the materials required by the specification will be utilized under any resultant contract.

Note: The use of alternate materials will not affect the rating of the PDM, either favorably or negatively when the use of the alternate materials is identified in accordance with the requirements of this section. However, the Government reserves the right to give a negative rating to PDM(s) that is (are) made with materials that depart from the end item specification and the use of those alternate materials was not identified in accordance with the requirements of this section. Accordingly, to preclude a negative assessment of a PDM that is comprised of materials that are not in accordance with the specification(s), it is in the offeror's best interest to identify any and all alternate materials that have been used.

Although the offeror is permitted to use alternate materials to construct the PDM(s), the offeror is not permitted to utilize alternate manufacturing operations or change the construction/design of the PDM.

The PDM shall be manufactured (i) at the same facility as the production quantity and (ii) must be in accordance with applicable specifications, including the placement of the labels, unless otherwise identified.

Note:

1. A PDM is required from each place of performance/manufacture on the subject offer. The offeror shall produce both the PDM(s) and the production quantity at the same facility and certify to this effect by submission of the PDM(s). The offerors shall list the place of manufacturer under the Place of Performance Clause within the solicitation.

2. Approval of the PDMs as part of this technical proposal does not relieve the potential awardee from the requirements of the solicitation.

3. Manufacturing operations for the placement of labels must be completed to indicate compliance with the specification description. The labels need not be printed for the purpose of the PDM(S);

however, the end item size must be indicated.

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 5 OF 15 PAGES

SPE1C121R0005 - 0003

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES OR COSTS (CONTINUED)

4. Failure of the PDMs to conform to all such specification characteristics will result in rejection of the entire proposal

5. PDM(s) shall only be furnished with the offeror's proposal at the time and date of the initial closing of the solicitation. Subsequent submissions will not be permitted, even if deficiencies exist in the PDM(s) submitted. Therefore, the offeror must furnish its best effort at this time. Corrections to the PDM(s) will not be accepted by the Government.

6. Operations for the placement of labels must be completed to indicate compliance with the specification description. The labels need not be printed for the purpose of the PDM(S); however, the end item size must be indicated.

7. Failure of the PDMs to conform to all such specification characteristics will result in rejection of the entire proposal

8. PDM(s) shall only be furnished with the offeror's proposal at the time and date of the initial closing of the solicitation. Subsequent submissions will not be permitted, even if deficiencies exist in the PDM(s) submitted. Therefore, the offeror must furnish its best effort at this time. Corrections to the PDM(s) will not be accepted by the Government.

H. Reference page 81 of the combined synopsis/solicitation. Section M is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:

Addendum to FAR 52.212-2

SECTION M

The following paragraph of 52.212-2 is amended as indicated below:

1. Paragraph (a) is hereby expanded to read as follows:

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, cost or price, and other evaluation factors considered. The Government will award a contract only to the business concern whose technical proposal establishes that it can meet the requirements of the Government. Specifically, offerors will be individually evaluated and rated against the following factors: Past Performance, Product Demonstration Models (PDMs), and Price. Past Performance is more important than PDMs. For this solicitation, all evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are -

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 6 OF 15 PAGES

SPE1C121R0005 - 0003

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES OR COSTS (CONTINUED)

[ ] significantly less important than cost or price. As the evaluated cost/price becomes more equal, relative importance of all other evaluation aspects becomes more significant.

[ ] approximately equal to cost or price.

[X] significantly more important than cost or price. As other evaluation aspects become more equal, the evaluated cost or price becomes more important.

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

Non-Cost/Price Evaluation Criteria:

To ensure timely delivery and a quality product, this acquisition will be procured using Best Value Source Selection procedures. The use of Best Value procedures will allow the Government to comparatively evaluate technical merit, as well as, price to select the source which demonstrates the highest probability of successful performance at a fair and reasonable price. This acquisition will be negotiated since the determination of the best value to the Government will use the Tradeoff Process (adjectival ratings) in accordance with FAR 15.101-1 for award.

The first non-cost or non-price evaluation technical factor is Past Performance - Performance Confidence Assessment is the most important factor which considers the likelihood of successful performance under this requirement of an offeror based on the recency and relevancy of past performance and the quality and delivery performance under commercial and Government contracts. The second non-cost or non-price evaluation factor of PDM(s) is the next important technical factor as it clearly shows an offeror's capability and understanding of the specification.

For award evaluation purposes Technical Merit will be significantly more important in the award evaluation process than cost/price. Proposals will be evaluated based on past performance, PDMs and then, price.

The following technical evaluation factors (to include sub-factors and the associated elements) are listed in descending order of importance and will be used for the award evaluation:

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL EVALUTION FACTORS:

1) Past Performance/Performance Confidence Assessment

Sub-factors:

a. Past Performance Recency

b. Past Performance Relevancy

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 7 OF 15 PAGES

SPE1C121R0005 - 0003

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES OR COSTS (CONTINUED)

c. Quality/Delivery Performance

Elements:

i. Quality of Supply/Products

ii. Delivery Performance

An overall rating will be assigned for the Past Performance Evaluation Factor - Performance Confidence Assessment based on the combined evaluation of all three sub-factors: Past Performance Recency, Past Performance Relevancy, and Quality/Delivery Performance. The Past Performance sub-factors are of equal importance as are the elements under Quality/Delivery Performance.

The Government will reserve the right to consider Past Performance information that occurs following the closing of the solicitation as well.

2. Technical Factor - Product Demonstration Models (PDMs) - Offerors are required to submit one (1) PDM for each item in accordance with “Instructions for Submitting Product Demonstration Models to DLA Troop Support”.

The Men's Air Force Lightweight Jacket will be evaluated in accordance with PD/CID/Spec: MIL-J-87250 dated 4 November 1988, Pattern Date 19 May 2014.

The required size is as follows:

Description: Men's Air Force Lightweight Jacket

NSN: 8405-01-298-6881(s)

Size: 40 Regular

No. of Units Required: 1

The Product Demonstration Model(s) will be evaluated for conformance to the specification for the Men's Air Force Lightweight Jacket - sample size 40 Regular, along with interim changes to the PD for determining quality workmanship and conformance with design and performance requirements.

NOTE: The results for the PDM will be rated in accordance with the rating definitions found in the

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 8 OF 15 PAGES

SPE1C121R0005 - 0003

“Additional Source Selection Evaluation Procedures” section of this addendum.

Price Evaluation Criteria:

After the final technical evaluations are completed the offeror's total price for all items will be evaluated. The offeror's total evaluated price will be calculated by multiplying each term's proposed unit price for each item by that term's corresponding order limitation (maximum) quantity then, totaling the Base Year and each Option Term's total dollar value price for all items to arrive at the total evaluated price for all items. All non-price evaluation factors, when combined are significantly more important than price; therefore, as the non-price evaluation ratings become more equal, the cost/price fair and reasonableness determination will become more important.

Offeror(s) are cautioned that failure to submit PDM(s) or Proposal pricing inclusive of the Two Year Base Period will result in the rejection of their proposal.

NOTES:

Under the first evaluation factor Past Performance - Performance Confidence Assessment:

All three (3) sub-factors: Past Performance Recency, Past Performance Relevancy, and Quality/ Delivery Performance will be evaluated to formulate a final Past Performance Confidence Assessment rating.

The Government will consider the offeror's past performance under U.S. Government contracts or other contracts for three years prior to the solicitation closing. 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 not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and will receive a neutral rating.

There are three (3) sub-factors to the past performance evaluation factor:

a. Sub-factor a: Past Performance Recency

Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant, and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. For this acquisition, prospective offers shall submit past performance information over the last three-year period prior to the solicitation closing date, regardless of the contract type: commercial or Government.

b. Sub-factor b: Past Performance Relevancy

Determines how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 9 OF 15 PAGES

SPE1C121R0005 - 0003

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES OR COSTS (CONTINUED)

the source selection. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration should be given to those aspects of an offeror's history of contract (or subcontract) performance that provides the most context and gives the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will successfully satisfy the current requirement. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to, the following: similarity of product/service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of key personnel (for services), and extent of subcontracting/teaming.

c. Sub-factor c: Quality/Delivery Performance

i. Element 1: Quality of Supplies/Products

The offeror's degree of conformance to contractual requirements, responsiveness, and effectiveness in addressing issues, quality of products, quality of customer service, and conformance to cost/ price requirements or goals, will be evaluated in the qualitative past performance ratings.

ii. Element 2: Delivery Performance

For delivery performance, the offeror's ability to deliver items within the terms of the contract, as well as the responsiveness and effectiveness in addressing problems meeting performance requirements will be evaluated. The offeror's delivery performance will be evaluated by using your SPRS contract data, the history record of performance, for Federal Supply Class (FSC) 8405 (Outerwear, Men's) and 8410 (Outerwear, Women's). The weighted average score of both FSCs will be used to come to an overall SPRS score as both Federal Supply Class Codes are similar enough to be equal. To get this overall score we will multiply the 8405 (Outerwear, Men's) score by the amount of records under that FSC. We will do the same for FSC 8410 (Outerwear, Women's) then add the overall score results for 8405 and 8410. This total will then be divided by the total amount of records under both FSCs 8405 and 8410 to come to the Overall SPRS Score for the vendor.

The Government will consider the offeror's past performance under U.S. Government contracts or other contracts from the period three years prior to the solicitation closing date.

The Government will reserve the right to consider Past Performance information that occurs following the closing of the solicitation as well.

The following applies to all Sub-Factors (a, b, and c) under the first factor Past Performance - Performance Confidence Assessment:

NOTE: Evaluation of Past Performance will also be based on results from information provided in accordance with the Government's independent contact with an offeror's prior customers and any other relevant past experience. If the Government's information conflicts with assertions made in the offeror's proposal, the offeror may be asked to clarify this information if negotiations are opened. Proposal information provided for one sub-factor may be used to assess other sub-factors if the Government deems it appropriate.

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 10 OF 15 PAGES

SPE1C121R0005 - 0003

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES OR COSTS (CONTINUED)

The Government will contact previous customers based on information provided by the offeror. Information received from previous customers will be used as part of this evaluation process. Evaluation will not necessarily be based only on this information, but also on the Government's independent contact with offeror's prior customers and any other relevant past experience.

Offerors are advised that the Government may use information gained from any source known to the Government to evaluate past performance, provided such information is recent (as defined in the solicitation).

If any past performance information provided by the offeror is utilized in evaluating the offeror's proposal, a past performance questionnaire will be utilized to contact references and rate proposals.

Once Past Performance Recency, Past Performance Relevancy, and Quality/Delivery Performance of products are considered as described above, a final past performance confidence assessment rating will be assigned.

Under the second evaluation factor Product Demonstration Models (PDMs):

1. Offerors will receive a rating for the PDM factor. A “FAIL” rating for any PDM will remove the offeror from consideration for award.

2. A PDM is required from each place of performance/manufacture on the subject offer. The offeror shall produce the PDM(s) and the production quantity at the same facility(s) and certify to this effect by submission of the PDM(s). The offeror shall list the place of manufacture under the Place of Performance Clause within the solicitation.

3. Approval of the PDM as part of this technical proposal does not relieve the potential awardee from the requirements of the Combined Synopsis/Solicitation.

4. Manufacturing operations for the placement of labels must be completed to indicate compliance with the specification/commercial item description. The labels need not be printed for the purpose of the PDM;

however, the end item size must be indicated.

Additional Source Selection Evaluation Procedures:

a. EVALUATION PROCESS

Offerors are required to submit technical proposals as prescribed in the “Instructions for Proposals” of this solicitation. Each technical proposal and/or model will be evaluated against the technical factors specified in the “Evaluation Factors for Award” section of this solicitation. After the technical evaluation, each proposal will be

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 11 OF 15 PAGES

SPE1C121R0005 - 0003

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES OR COSTS (CONTINUED)

rated as cited on the pages which immediately follow. Proposals so technically deficient as to make them technically unacceptable will be rejected as unacceptable, regardless of the cost or price offered. No discussions will be held with rejected offerors, nor will any rejected offeror be given an opportunity to revise its offer to correct those deficiencies in order to become satisfactory after date and time set for receipt of initial offers.

1. Technical Evaluation

a. Rating Definitions:

1. PAST PERFORMANCE - PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT - 1st Evaluation Factor

The Government will evaluate three (3) distinct sub-factors of Past Performance: Past Performance Recency, Past Performance Relevancy, and Quality/Delivery Performance. The Past Performance sub-factors are of equal importance.

Sub-factor a: Past Performance Recency

For this acquisition, prospective offers shall submit past performance information over the last three-year period prior to the solicitation closing date, regardless of the contract type: commercial or Government.

The Government will utilize the following adjectival ratings to evaluate Past Performance Recency:

RECENT

Offeror's past performance during the three years prior to the closing date, as well as its recent performance up until the time of award, will be considered as recent.

NOT RECENT

Any performance outside of or greater than three years prior to the closing date will be considered “not recent” and will not be further evaluated for past performance relevancy or quality/delivery performance.

Sub-factor b: Past Performance Relevancy

The Government will utilize the following adjectival ratings to evaluate Past Performance Relevancy:

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 12 OF 15 PAGES

VERY RELEVANT

Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

RELEVANT

Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

SOMEWHAT RELEVANT

Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

NOT RELEVANT

Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

NEUTRAL

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror's performance record is so sparse that no meaningful rating can be reasonably assigned.

Sub factor c: Quality/Delivery Performance

The Government will utilize the following adjectival ratings to evaluate Quality/Delivery Performance:

OUTSTANDING

Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low. The offeror's past performance record indicates the offeror consistently meets or exceeds most contract requirements. Past contractual performance has been accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the offeror have been highly effective.

GOOD

Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate. The offeror's past performance record indicates the offeror consistently meets or exceeds some contract requirements.

Past contractual performance has been accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the offeror have been effective.

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 13 OF 15 PAGES

SPE1C121R0005 - 0003

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES OR COSTS (CONTINUED)

ACCEPTABLE

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate. The offeror's past performance record indicates the offeror met contract requirements. Offeror's record of past performance contains reports of some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the offeror appear to have been or were acceptable.

MARGINAL

Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high. The offeror's past performance record indicates the offeror has not met some contract requirements. Offeror's record of past performance contains reports of serious problems for which the offeror did not identify corrective actions or proposed corrective actions that were only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

UNACCEPTABLE

Proposal does not meet requirement of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable. The offeror's past performance record indicates the offeror has not met most contractual requirements, recovery was not accomplished in a timely manner, and proposed corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

NEUTRAL

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror's performance record is so sparse that no meaningful rating can be reasonably assigned.

Past Performance Confidence Assessment - Overall Rating

The following ratings will be utilized to arrive at the overall rating for Past Performance. The rating is arrived at by combining the Past Performance Recency, the Past Performance Relevancy and the Quality/Delivery Performance sub-factors. This overall rating is known as the Past Performance Confidence Assessment:

The Government will utilize the following adjectival ratings to evaluate the Past Performance Confidence Assessment:

SUBSTANTIAL CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

SATISFACTORY CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

NEUTRAL CONFIDENCE

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror's performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 14 OF 15 PAGES

SPE1C121R0005 - 0003

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES OR COSTS (CONTINUED)

evaluated favorable or unfavorable on the factor of past performance.

LIMITED CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

NO CONFIDENCE

Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance.

2. PRODUCT DEMONSTRATION MODEL (PDM) - 2nd Evaluation Factor

The following ratings will be utilized to evaluate the PDM(s):

PASS

Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation. Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. The proposal's strengths and weaknesses are considered offsetting or having little or no impact on the contract performance when the PDM substantially meets the stated requirements of the acquisition documentation (i.e., specification; commercial item description;

purchase description; etc.) and the PDM either does not contain a weakness or contains a weakness or weaknesses that are either easily correctable in production or require preventative corrective action in production which can be accomplished.

FAIL

Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high. The PDM does not clearly meet the stated requirements of the acquisition documentation (i.e., specification; commercial item description; purchase description, etc.), but has potential to become acceptable through significant corrective action. The PDM exhibits a significant weakness or weaknesses that indicate that the offeror did not completely understand the technical requirements and exhibits a low probability to produce an acceptable item.

NOTE: Weaknesses are defined as deviations from the requirements as specified in the specification, commercial item description, purchase description, etc. The terms weakness and deficiency are synonymous and interchangeable.

CONTINUATION SHEET REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED: PAGE 15 OF 15 PAGES

2. Business Evaluation

Each proposal will be evaluated against the requirements of the solicitation. The Government will evaluate cost or pricing data or limited pricing information, if requested, with initial proposals or during discussions, in accordance with FAR Subpart 15.4.