Page_2.pdf

Amendment 0008 is hereby issued to revise the following (changes are highlighted in blue):

1. Attachment IA and IB has revised Performance Work Statements for NAS Pensacola and NAS Whiting Field

Revised section C-1.4.1 Air Show Fueling Services of NAS Pensacola

Revised section C-1.4.1 Air Show Fueling Services of NAS Whiting Field

2. Attachment IIA, IIB, IIC, IID has revised Collective Bargaining Agreements and Wage Determinations for NAS Pensacola and NAS Whiting Field. CBA and WD applies as follows:

Under the new NAS Pensacola - CBA:

- NAS Pensacola

- Forrest Sherman Field

- Pensacola

- Saufley Field

- Corry Station

- Silverhill

- Summerdale

- Barin

Under the current NAS Pensacola Wage Determination:

- Defense Fuel Support Point (DFSP) Pensacola

Under the new NAS Whiting Field - CBA:

- NAS Whiting Field

- OLF Site 8

- OLF Spencer Field

- Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ)

- Choctaw

- Holly

- Santa Rosa

- Pace

- Brewton

- Harold

- Wolf

- Evergreen

*****NOTE: Revised proposals are not requested at this time. However, they will be requested soon after discussions and clarifications.*****

3. Incorporating paragraph (j) (highlighted in blue) under ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1 –

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (APR 2014).

j) Performance or capabilities proposed above mandatory minimums may be incorporated into the contract.

4. Incorporating tables and detailed information (highlighted in blue) regarding subfactors under ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2 – EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014).

Basis for Award. The Government will award two (2) separate firm fixed price contracts (NAS Pensacola and NAS Whiting Field) resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror(s) whose offer(s) conform to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. Formal source selection procedures will be used for this procurement. As such this is a best value acquisition, employing a Tradeoff Process in which award may be made to other than the lowest priced offeror or other than the highest technically rated offeror, in accordance with FAR 15.101-1.

There are four (4) evaluation factors: The Technical/Management factor is more important than the Past Performance factor and the Socioeconomic/Subcontractor Plan factor. Past Performance and Socioeconomic/Subcontractor Plan are equally important. When combined the non-Price factors (Technical/Management, Past Performance and Socioeconomic/Subcontractor Plan) are significantly more important than Price.

Each proposal will be evaluated for compliance with solicitation terms and conditions, the Performance Work Statement, FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014), and applicable DLA Energy Contract Provisions, established evaluation criteria and standards, as well as evaluation of any exceptions/deviations in accordance with DLA ENERGY M-0003 M72 – EVALUATION OF OFFERS (EXCEPTIONS/DEVIATIONS) (DLA ENERGY APR 1997) to determine if the offered exceptions/deviations are acceptable or material enough to make the offer completely or partially unacceptable.

Factor 1: Technical/Management

The Government will evaluate each offeror’s technical/management proposal based upon the offeror’s understanding of and capability to accomplish the work as stated in the solicitation. The offeror must demonstrate in its proposal a complete understanding of the Performance Work Statement provided in the solicitation. The technical proposal and the stated evaluation criteria are the sole basis on which the Government will evaluate the technical merits of what is offered, how the offeror’s claims of performance capacity are supported, and the ability of the offeror to perform in accordance with the requirements of the Performance Work Statement. The technical/management evaluation includes an evaluation of risk.

Note: An offeror may choose to submit technical proposal for both locations (NAS Pensacola and NAS Whiting Field). If offeror wishes to submit technical proposal for only one location (NAS Pensacola or NAS Whiting Field), offeror will only be evaluated for the proposed location.

The Technical/Management factor will be rated Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Unacceptable. The four subfactors, which are of equal importance will be rated Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Unacceptable. The subfactors will be evaluated separately and then combined to determine an overall Technical/Management factor rating.

The subfactors for NAS Pensacola are as follows:

Subfactor 1: Operations - Technical, managerial, and operational details of supporting normal and contingency operations, accounting, and fuel quality assurance/surveillance on multiple fuel systems capable of meeting all of DLA Energy’s service requirements.

The proposal must provide a detailed concept of fuel operations that includes all the following:

knowledge of the required receipt, storage, issue, and transfer functions, fuel quality assurance/surveillance requirements, inventory and accounting requirements, and ensures all requirements for normal daily operations are surpassed, including the ability to handle simultaneous operations at NAS Pensacola which includes Defense Fuel Support Point (DFSP) Pensacola, Forrest Sherman Field, Pensacola and its supported activities of Saufley Field and Corry Station, and its active outlying fields of Silverhill, Summerdale, and Barin. The proposal provides fuel servicing equipment (e.g. refuelers, defuelers, pantographs, hose carts, used oil and utility vehicles) of such age, condition, and specifications as to eliminate risk of mechanical failures, breakdowns, or other maintenance problems. The fuel servicing equipment is provided in numbers which meet the requirement to respond to workloads within the required response times, locations, and schedules outlined in the PWS. Proposal will address capability to meet 24X7 fueling requirement, equipment contingency plans, and response to surge or contingency operations to ensure no mission delay, mission failure, or disruption to operations. Proposal also provides other required equipment that meets mission requirements.

Subfactor 2: Maintenance - Technical, managerial, and operational details of planning and conducting preventive and recurring maintenance and identifying and resolving corrective maintenance items and repairs.

Proposal details an understanding of the requirements in the PWS, from API to operator level, and provides a detailed approach to all maintenance performance requirements for fuel distribution systems and equipment including operator, preventive, and recurring maintenance in accordance with applicable regulations and best commercial practices; as well as, the record keeping requirement associated with all maintenance. The proposal provides information on number and type of maintenance personnel, tools, spare parts, and equipment; or sub-contracting and purchasing plans; which exceed the requirement and ensure the facility will be repaired to the highest standards. All components will be operational, and maintenance records annotated/current within 24 hours. The proposal acknowledges the contractor as the singular point of contact for all stakeholders and associated agencies for managing, scheduling, coordinating, reporting, and recording of all maintenance actions and observations in the facility. The proposal demonstrates a preventative maintenance concept which ensures constant attention to preserving the condition the facility, components, and equipment; including a robust approach to corrosion control which will eliminate corrosion on all surfaces; including out of reach surfaces and components. Proposal demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the increased recurring maintenance requirements with details to ensure all recurring and enhanced maintenance is performed in accordance with the PWS requirements and recorded in the CMMS as required. Proposal demonstrates an understanding of the scope of repairs to be performed and how that scope applies to the components in this type of facility.

The proposal demonstrates an approach to making repairs which details an immediate response to component malfunctions, and ensures repairs within contract scope are completed as required to eliminate any risk of mission delay, mission failure, or fuel spills from in-scope deficiencies and ensure compliance with all PWS requirements.

Subfactor 3: Personnel/Training - Technical, managerial, and operational details to ensure contractor personnel have requisite skills and associated training to accomplish all government requirements.

The proposal must provide personnel to perform operations, maintenance, fuel quality surveillance, inventory, accounting, safety, and environmental tasks, grounds keeping, and administrative support exceeding government estimate of personnel requirements. Procedures are implemented to ensure all contractor personnel have requisite skills and associated training to accomplish all tasks specified in the PWS. Proposal provides personnel and training performance requirements details. Key personnel (Corporate Fuels Officer, Terminal Manager) have extensive, diverse fuel terminal management experience in all aspects of fuel operations as specified in the PWS. Proposal includes details regarding all needed recurring/refresher training.

Subfactor 4: Safety/Environmental – Technical, managerial, and operational details of planning and conducting operations in compliance with environmental laws and regulations and safety policies and procedures.

Proposal indicates that procedures are implemented to ensure strict compliance with Environmental Protection Plan and all applicable local, state, federal, and international laws and regulations as evidenced by the proposal including a thorough discussion of environmental issues pertaining to receipt, storage, and issue of petroleum products. The proposal provides environmental performance requirements details for fuel handling operations to include (a) Listing of required permits, and (b) Spill prevention and remediation. Indicates that the Terminal Manager and the majority of personnel have environmental certifications for training in Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER).

Procedures are implemented to ensure all operations are conducted in accordance with safety laws, regulations, and best commercial practices. The proposal demonstrates contactor’s knowledge and understanding of safety performance requirements (e.g. work in explosive or oxygen deficient atmospheres, sloping/shoring of excavations, confined space work rules, etc.). Proposal will provide detailed safety performance requirements for fuel handling operations and actions required for treatment as necessary.

The subfactors for NAS Whiting Field are as follows:

Subfactor 1: Operations – Technical, managerial, and operational details of supporting normal and contingency operations, accounting, and fuel quality assurance/surveillance on multiple fuel systems capable of meeting all of DLA Energy’s service requirements.

The proposal must provide a detailed concept of fuel operations that includes all the following:

knowledge of the required receipt, storage, issue, and transfer functions, fuel quality assurance/surveillance requirements, inventory and accounting requirements, and ensures all requirements for normal daily operations are surpassed, including the ability to handle simultaneous operations at NAS Whiting Field which includes its active outlying fields of OLF Site 8 and OLF Spencer Field, Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ) bases or Naval Out Lying Fields Choctaw, Holly, Santa Rosa, Pace, Brewton, Harold, Wolf, and Evergreen. The proposal provides fuel servicing equipment (e.g. refuelers, defuelers, pantographs, hose carts, used oil and utility vehicles) of such age, condition, and specifications as to eliminate risk of mechanical failures, breakdowns, or other maintenance problems.

The fuel servicing equipment is provided in numbers which meet the requirement to respond to workloads within the required response times, locations, and schedules outlined in the PWS. Proposal will address capability to meet 24X7 fueling requirement, equipment contingency plans, and response to surge or contingency operations to ensure no mission delay, mission failure, or disruption to operations. Proposal also provides other required equipment that meets mission requirements.

Subfactor 2: Maintenance – Technical, managerial, and operational details of planning and conducting preventive and recurring maintenance and identifying and resolving corrective maintenance items and repairs.

Proposal details an understanding of the requirements in the PWS, from API to operator level, and provides a detailed approach to all maintenance performance requirements for fuel distribution systems and equipment including operator, preventive, and recurring maintenance in accordance with applicable regulations and best commercial practices; as well as, the record keeping requirement associated with all maintenance. The proposal provides information on number and type of maintenance personnel, tools, spare parts, and equipment; or sub-contracting and purchasing plans; which exceed the requirement and ensure the facility will be repaired to the highest standards. All components will be operational, and maintenance records annotated/current within 24 hours. The proposal acknowledges the contractor as the singular point of contact for all stakeholders and associated agencies for managing, scheduling, coordinating, reporting, and recording of all maintenance actions and observations in the facility. The proposal demonstrates a preventative maintenance concept which ensures constant attention to preserving the condition the facility, components, and equipment; including a robust approach to corrosion control which will eliminate corrosion on all surfaces; including out of reach surfaces and components. Proposal demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the increased recurring maintenance requirements with details to ensure all recurring and enhanced maintenance is performed in accordance with the PWS requirements and recorded in the CMMS as required. Proposal demonstrates an understanding of the scope of repairs to be performed and how that scope applies to the components in this type of facility.

The proposal demonstrates an approach to making repairs which details an immediate response to component malfunctions, and ensures repairs within contract scope are completed as required to eliminate any risk of mission delay, mission failure, or fuel spills from in-scope deficiencies and ensure compliance with all PWS requirements.

Subfactor 3: Personnel/Training – Technical, managerial, and operational details to ensure contractor personnel have requisite skills and associated training to accomplish all government requirements.

The proposal must provide personnel to perform operations, maintenance, fuel quality surveillance, inventory, accounting, safety, and environmental tasks, grounds keeping, and administrative support exceeding government estimate of personnel requirements. Procedures are implemented to ensure all contractor personnel have requisite skills and associated training to accomplish all tasks specified in the PWS. Proposal provides personnel and training performance requirements details. Key personnel (Corporate Fuels Officer, Terminal Manager) have extensive, diverse fuel terminal management experience in all aspects of fuel operations as specified in the PWS. Proposal includes details regarding all needed recurring/refresher training.

Subfactor 4: Safety/Environmental – Technical, managerial, and operational details of planning and conducting operations in compliance with environmental laws and regulations and safety policies and procedures.

Proposal indicates that procedures are implemented to ensure strict compliance with Environmental Protection Plan and all applicable local, state, federal, and international laws and regulations as evidenced by the proposal including a thorough discussion of environmental issues pertaining to receipt, storage, and issue of petroleum products. The proposal provides environmental performance requirements details for fuel handling operations to include (a) Listing of required permits, and (b) Spill prevention and remediation. Indicates that the Terminal Manager and the majority of personnel have environmental certifications for training in Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER).

Procedures are implemented to ensure all operations are conducted in accordance with safety laws, regulations, and best commercial practices. The proposal demonstrates contactor’s knowledge and understanding of safety performance requirements (e.g. work in explosive or oxygen deficient atmospheres, sloping/shoring of excavations, confined space work rules, etc.). Proposal will provide detailed safety performance requirements for fuel handling operations and actions required for treatment as necessary.

Overall technical/management evaluation ratings will be Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Unacceptable.

Color Rating Adjectival Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple 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.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

Note: Any offeror who receives a rating of Unacceptable or Marginal in any factor or sub-factor after final proposal revisions will not be eligible for award.

Factor 2: Past Performance.

The Government shall review the offeror's recent and relevant past performance and determine its quality and usefulness as it applies to this procurement. Additionally, the Government may use other data available to its evaluators, including but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), and the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, past and present customers and their employees, other subcontractors, and any others who may have useful and relevant information.

The past performance will be rated Acceptable or Unacceptable. A record or poor performance may be considered an indication that the offeror has failed to conform to contract requirements and/or to standards of good workmanship, adhere to contract schedules, including the administrative aspects of performance, provide reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction, and/or display a business-like concern for the interests of the customer.

Evaluation for Joint Ventures and Teaming Arrangements will be performed by evaluating the past performance of each partner in accordance with the procedures outlined above. The ratings for each partner will be combined and the Joint Venture or Teaming Arrangement will receive one rating.

Offerors are instructed to submit three (3) Past Performance Questionnaires that may include the performance still in progress; however, it should have a minimum of one year of performance history and and the history should not be older than three years from the closing date of this solicitation. The past performance evaluation shall consider whether the offeror’s relevant present/past performance effort involved similar magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. The evaluation shall also evaluate the offeror’s past performance to determine how well the offeror performed on those efforts.

A questionnaire (Attachment V) format will be used to solicit information from an offeror’s submitted references in the following areas: (1) schedule, (2) management of key personnel, (3) quality of services, and (4) business relations. The Government will review this past performance information and determine its quality and usefulness as it applies to the procurement.

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 past performance. In the context of acceptability, “Unknown” shall be considered Acceptable. A record of acceptable past performance will not result in a favorable assessment of an otherwise unacceptable proposal. As a Joint Venture, each partner’s experience and past performance may be evaluated and weighted against their respective roles identified in the Joint Venture agreement. This evaluation may be combined for a final past performance rating.

Recency and Relevancy are evaluated as part of the Acceptable/Unacceptable ratings. Past performance ratings will be assigned using an Acceptable or Unacceptable rating.

Adjectival Rating Description

Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note above)

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Note: A Past Performance Evaluation Rating of Acceptable shall be required in order to be considered for award.

Factor 3: Socioeconomic/Subcontracting Plan:

The Government will evaluate small business offerors on their submitted Socioeconomic/Subcontracting Proposal goals in accordance with FAR 15.305 (a)(5) and contract provision M-0001 M7 Socioeconomic Evaluation. For other than small businesses, offerors will be evaluated on their submitted Socioeconomic Proposal and its accurate reflection on Attachment IV DLA Energy SMALL BUSINESS Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 19.704. Upon consideration of the offeror’s proposed subcontracting to Small Business, HUBZone Small Businesses, Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses, Small Disadvantaged Businesses, and Women-Owned Small Businesses, and Historically Black Colleges and Universities or Minority Institutions and the offeror’s degree of commitment to implementing proposed opportunities, the Government will assign a rating of Acceptable or Unacceptable based on the overall percentage goal of subcontracting dollars to the aforementioned groups and the complexity level, variety of participation, and specifically identifying firms that will perform the subcontracted work. Small businesses submitting a Socioeconomic/Subcontracting Proposal will be assigned a rating of Acceptable.

Color Rating Adjectival Rating Description

Green Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

Factor 4: Price

Two (2) separate Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contracts (NAS Pensacola and NAS Whiting Field) will result from this solicitation. The Government will perform evaluation of the offered prices in accordance with the terms of the solicitation. Prices will always be evaluated for reasonableness.

Note: An offeror may choose to submit prices for both locations (NAS Pensacola and NAS Whiting Field). If offeror wishes to submit prices for only one location (NAS Pensacola or NAS Whiting Field), offeror will only be evaluated for the proposed location.

NAS Pensacola Price:

A total MUCG price offered for LINE 0001 (Base years 1-4) will be multiplied by 48. The total MUCG price offered for LINE 0002 (Option years 5-8) will be multiplied by 48. Option (Extension Provision) price: In accordance with FAR 52.217-8 – Option to Extend Services, the Government has the unilateral right to extend any resulting contract upon the same terms and conditions for a total of no more than six-months. To account for the option period(s) possible under 52.217-8 (maximum of six-months), the Government will evaluate the option to extend by adding six-months of the Offeror’s performance period price to the Offeror’s total price.

The sum of the aforementioned products will be the offeror’s evaluated price for NAS Pensacola. This price will then be used for comparison to all offerors’s MUCGs.

NAS Whiting Field Price:

A total MUCG price offered for LINE 0001 (Base years 1-4) will be multiplied by 48. The total MUCG price offered for LINE 0002 (Option years 5-8) will be multiplied by 48. Option (Extension Provision) price: In accordance with FAR 52.217-8 – Option to Extend Services, the Government has the unilateral right to extend any resulting contract upon the same terms and conditions for a total of no more than six-months. To account for the option period(s) possible under 52.217-8 (maximum of six-months), the Government will evaluate the option to extend by adding six-months of the Offeror’s performance period price to the Offeror’s total price.

The sum of the aforementioned products will be the offeror’s evaluated price for NAS Whiting Field.

This price will then be used for comparison to all offerors’s MUCGs.

The Government reserves the right to perform a price realism analysis to determine whether the offeror understands the requirements and to determine the firm’s responsibility IAW FAR 9.104-1(b). If price realism is performed and an unfavorable determination is made, the Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest price offeror.

The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the prices are significantly unbalanced.

The Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest evaluated offer.

The Government reserves the right to limit the number of offers included in the competitive range for the purposes of efficiency in accordance with FAR 15.306(c)(2).