SPE60319R05110001.pdf

Please wait...

If this message is not eventually replaced by the proper contents of the document, your PDF viewer may not be able to display this type of document.

You can upgrade to the latest version of Adobe Reader for Windows®, Mac, or Linux® by visiting http://www.adobe.com/go/reader_download.

For more assistance with Adobe Reader visit http://www.adobe.com/go/acrreader.

Windows is either a registered trademark or a trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. Mac is a trademark of Apple Inc., registered in the United States and other countries. Linux is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the U.S. and other countries.

SPE603-19-R-0511

Amendment 0001: Attachment A

QAS Services in Afghanistan

A. This amendment is hereby issued to revise and replace Addendum to FAR 52.212-1

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2018), FAR

52.212-2 EVALUATION-COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014), and Section B of the solicitation. The highlighted text identifies the revisions as follows:

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS –

COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2018)

Award will be made on the basis of the proposal that conforms to the solicitation and is determined to be the “Best Value” to the Government. This solicitation does not commit the Government to pay any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of a proposal or any other costs incurred by any firm submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation.

a. During proposal evaluation, each volume will be reviewed separately. All cost/price information shall be in Volume II – OFFEROR SUBMISSION PACKAGE. No reference to cost/price shall be included in the technical proposal. Each volume shall be separately bound to facilitate evaluation.

b. Proposals will be evaluated for technical approach and related risk, past performance and price in accordance with the evaluation criteria outlined in Section M of this solicitation. Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the factors listed in this solicitation.

c. In order to receive full consideration, firms are encouraged to ensure that information provided in the Technical proposal is factual and complete. To ensure that an accurate evaluation of the proposal is made, please address the items in the order in which they appear in the solicitation.

d. A proposal will be considered UNACCEPTABLE for award if it contains deficiencies that preclude award of the contract on the present terms of the proposal, that are not correctable or the 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.

e. Offerors may provide additional technical information that will enhance the proposal.

Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation beyond those sufficient to present a complete and effective response to this solicitation are not desired and may be construed as an indication of the Offeror’s lack of cost consciousness. Hasty responses or responses which merely repeat the Performance Work Statement (PWS) will not be considered as being responsive to the requirements of this Request for Proposal (RFP).

Failure to provide the information requested may render the proposal UNACCEPTABLE and may lead to a rejection of the offer.

f. Offerors are informed that performance or capabilities proposed above mandatory minimums may be incorporated into the contract.

g. The proposal must demonstrate to the Government’s satisfaction that the offer is able to provide services that will ensure the successful accomplishment of the stated objectives consistent with the stated performance and technical parameters of the Performance Work Statement. The Government will evaluate offerors on the basis of material presented in the written proposal. Proposal information provided for one factor may be used to assess other factors if the Government deems it appropriate.

h. The Government may reject any proposal that is evaluated to be unreasonable in terms of program commitments, including contract terms and conditions such that the proposal is deemed to reflect an inherent lack of technical competence or a failure to comprehend the complexity and performance requirements of the program. The Government reserves the right to conduct a price realism analysis to determine whether the offeror understands the contract requirements. If a price realism analysis is performed and an offeror’s price is determined to be unrealistic, the offeror’s proposal will be ineligible for award.

i. The Government reserves the right to verify any information presented in the Technical/Management, Past Performance, Subcontracting Plan (if applicable) and Price Proposals.

Proposal Organization:

1. Volume I – Technical/Management

a) The technical proposal shall demonstrate the offeror’s ability to meet the Government’s requirements as set forth in this solicitation. An offeror’s Technical/Management proposal shall provide, at a minimum, the information requested in this Addendum to Clause 52.212-1(b), INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS and 52.212-2, EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014). Failure to provide the information requested by any of the evaluation factors may be considered a “no response” and a rating of “UNACCEPTABLE” given to the applicable factor or sub-factor.

b) A Technical proposal shall be submitted in response to this RFP.

Technical/Management proposals in this RFP shall be limited to 70 double-sided, 8 ½ “ x 11” pages, including Appendices and Attachments. Proposals less than 70 pages are permitted provided all required material is covered. The Table of Contents, Section I – Exceptions and the Resumes submitted for Section II (required) will NOT be considered in the page limit. Type font shall be 12 point Times New Roman with 1” margins around the page. The Non-Price Proposal shall contain two sections:

i. Section I – Exceptions – Section I shall state any exceptions taken to the Performance Work Statement. If no exceptions are being taken to the Performance Work Statement, Offerors shall state so in affirmative statement in this section.

ii. Section II – Technical/Management – The Technical proposal shall demonstrate the Offeror’s approach and ability to perform the tasks referenced in the Performance Work Statement.

The Technical Proposal shall include and address the following in separate sections:

Technical/Management Evaluation Subfactor 1: Petroleum Product Sampling and Laboratory Testing – The proposal must clearly provide a concept of operations that demonstrates the offeror’s knowledge of sampling standards, practices, product specifications, U.S. Government requirements and standards and testing standards/requirements. The proposal must provide a Quality Control Plan to include checklists that ensure inspection and witnessing of petroleum product sampling and laboratory testing services that comply with the requirements described in the PWS.

Technical/Management Evaluation Subfactor 2: Vehicle Inspection – The proposal must clearly provide a concept of operations that demonstrates the offeror’s knowledge of tank truck suitability requirements and quantity determination methods and requirements.

The proposal must provide a Quality Control Plan to include checklists that ensures inspection/witnessing of petroleum product transport vehicles comply with the requirements described in the PWS.

Technical/Management Evaluation Subfactor 3: Reporting and Deliverables – The proposal must clearly provide a concept of operations that demonstrates the offeror’s knowledge of meeting deliverables and reports in the PWS. The proposal must identify the method of delivery for the deliverables and reports. The proposal must demonstrate knowledge of which deliverables and reports to send and their format and location for each task identified in PWS C-5.0. The proposal must provide a Quality Control Plan, which include checklists that ensure accuracy and timeliness of deliverables and reports in accordance with the requirements described in the PWS.

Technical/Management Evaluation Subfactor 4: Mobilization/Stationing of Staff – The proposal must clearly provide a concept of operations that demonstrates the offeror’s knowledge of mobilization/stationing procedures of qualified staff at various locations within Afghanistan. The proposal must be able to demonstrate the offeror’s capability to mobilize and be operational within 45 days of the contract award date. The proposal must address the offeror’s ability to handle task order assignments and to provide a sufficient number of personnel to accomplish the tasks in the PWS.

Technical/Management Evaluation Subfactor 5: Qualified Personnel – The proposal must clearly provide procedures to ensure all contractor personnel are experienced, qualified, and certified to accomplish all required tasks in the PWS. The proposal must identify courses and frequencies for maintaining personnel competence and knowledge of sampling and testing requirements/standards in the PWS, and the method of documentation and certification for the personnel. The proposal must include a Training Plan that ensures personnel are qualified and certified to comply with the requirements in

PWS C-2.5. The proposal must include resumes for the three key personnel identified in the PWS (in-country Program Manager (PM), Technician, and Chemist).

2. Volume II – Price Proposal:

The Price Proposal shall include and address the following in separate sections:

a. Section I – OFFEROR SUBMISSION PACKAGE

i. Cover Page -

Offerors shall submit a cover page providing the following information regarding the offeror: (1) RFP Number; (2) Proposal Title; (3) Technical Point of Contact, including name, telephone number, FAX number, e-mail address, and mailing address; (4) Administrative/Contracting Point of Contact, including name, telephone number, FAX number, e-mail address, and mailing address; and (5) if proposing as a team, or sub-contractor arrangement, Offeror MUST provide a summary of the responsibility of each teaming partner, sub-contractor .

ii..SF 1449 and Amendments –

Offerors shall provide a signed copy of the SF 1449 and all posted amendments in this section.

iii. Exceptions –

Offerors shall state any exceptions taken to the Terms and Conditions of the Solicitation.

If no exceptions are being taken to the Terms and Conditions of the Solicitation, offerors shall state so in an affirmative statement in this section. (Reference M-0001-M72

EVALUATION OF OFFERS (EXCEPTIONS/DEVIATIONS) (DLA ENERGY APR

1997)

iv. Representations and Certifications –

Offerors shall include a completed copy of the provisions to include FAR 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications – Commercial Items (AUG 2018) ALTERNATE 1 (OCT 2014) provided in Attachment III – Offeror Submission Package, for the offeror’s convenience.

b. Section II – Price

The offeror is required to submit a price proposal addressing all pricing involved in the execution of the technical requirements. Offerors are to provide a firm-fixed-price for each Contract Line Item/Reference Number listed in provision B-0001-B34.01 SERVICES TO BE FURNISHED AND PRICES (DLA ENERGY FEB 1991) located within Attachment III – Offeror Submission Package. Offerors that fail to price every line item may be rejected for material failure. Review your offer thoroughly, ensuring that all prices haves been inserted and are correct. Do not submit pricing on your company letterhead.

3. VOLUME III, Past Performance:

The offeror shall demonstrate that it has performed services of similar scope and complexity. The offeror shall, at a minimum, provide:

i. A list of three (3) contracts that the Offeror has held in the past 3 years, in which services of similar scope and complexity were performed. A minimum of three (3) referenced contracts with a point of contact information (i.e. phone number and email address) shall be included.

ii. A summary description of the task requirements of each referenced contracts.

Reference the similarities of these tasks to the requirements in Attachment I – Performance Work Statement of this solicitation. Within past performance, the offeror must demonstrate relevant experience and success in performing tasks that are similar to those in the Performance Work Statement (PWS); providing quality assurance surveillance and supply chain visibility services.

iii. The total dollar value of each contract referenced.

iv. Attachment IV – Past Performance Questionnaire included in this solicitation is provided for the offeror to submit to the references. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires must be submitted by the reference DIRECTLY to the Government.

Offerors should follow-up with references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires.

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 offeror. Past Performance Questionnaires must be provided directly to the Government by sending them to Sean.Turner@dla.mil

To receive credit for past performance by a subcontractor, or work which the prime contractor previously performed as a subcontractor to another prime, the Past Performance Questionnaire must state in detail the nature of the work performed as a subcontractor, the total percentage of the overall contract performed as a subcontractor and the total amount of work performed as a subcontractor.

To receive credit for past performance by a Joint Venture or a Teaming Arrangement, the Past Performance Questionnaire must state in detail the nature of the work performed by either of the Joint Venture or Teaming Arrangement, the total percentage of the work performed by either of the Joint Venture or Teaming Arrangement, and the total amount of work performed by either of the Joint Venture or Teaming Arrangement. The Government may supplement past performance information provided with any other information it may obtain from any other source including its own experience with the offeror.

mailto:Sean.Turner@dla.mil

FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

(a) Basis for Award. 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. Formal source selection procedures will be used for this procurement. As such this is a best value acquisition, employing a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable process in accordance with FAR 15.101-2. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

The evaluation factors and significant subfactors that establish the requirements of acceptability are hereby set forth in this solicitation as follows:

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT

Subfactor 1: Petroleum Product Sampling and Laboratory Testing Subfactor 2: Vehicle Inspection Subfactor 3: Reporting and Deliverables Subfactor 4: Mobilization/Stationing of Staff Subfactor 5: Qualified Personnel

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

FACTOR 3: PRICE

Offerors will be evaluated and an award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting or exceeding the acceptability standards for non-price factors (Factor 1: Technical/Management and Factor 2: Past Performance). When combined, the non-price factors are approximately equal to price.

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation should be prepared in accordance with the ADDENDUM to FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2018) provision, and will be evaluated by a board of one or more Government personnel.The Source Selection Authority shall make a final selection based on each offeror’s ability to satisfy the requirements of the solicitation.

The offeror’s proposal will be evaluated against the Government’s requirements as stated in the solicitation and the PWS to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable, using the ratings and descriptions outlined in Section M – EVALUATION

FACTORS FOR AWARD, FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION –COMMERCIAL ITEMS

(OCT 2014) of the solicitation.

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT

The Government will evaluate the Technical/Management factor on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis (See Table A-1).

The Government will evaluate each offer 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.

Within this factor, there are five (5) subfactors. All five (5) subfactors are equal in importance to each other. The ratings are established in accordance with FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATIONCOMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014) and DLA Energy Contract Text

M-0001-M72- EVALUATION OF OFFERS (EXCEPTIONS/DEVIATIONS) (DLA

Energy APR 1997). Each Technical/Management subfactor will be rated either Acceptable or Unacceptable.

Table A-1 Technical/Management Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

RATINGS DESCRIPTION

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

Note: Any offeror who receives an overall Technical/Management rating of Unacceptable after final proposal revisions will not be eligible for an award.

The subfactors under Factor 1: Technical/Management (Table A-1.1) to be addressed in the Technical Proposal are as follows:

Table A-1.1

SUBFACTORS ACCEPTABLE UNACCEPTABLE

1. Petroleum Product Sampling and Laboratory Testing

2. Vehicle Inspection

3. Reporting and Deliverables

4. Mobilization/Stationing of Staff

5. Qualified Personnel

OVERALL RATING

For purposes of this evaluation the following terms will have the following definitions:

IAW FAR 15.001 - Deficiency is a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

IAW FAR 15.001 - Significant Weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

IAW FAR 15.001 - Weakness means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT

Technical/Management All subfactors will be evaluated using the ratings description above. After all subfactors have been rated, an overall proposal rating of “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” will be given.

Technical/Management Evaluation Subfactor 1: Petroleum Product Sampling and Laboratory Testing – The proposal must clearly provide a concept of operations that demonstrates the offeror’s knowledge of sampling standards, practices, product specifications, U.S. Government requirements and standards and testing standards/requirements. The proposal must provide a Quality Control Plan to include checklists that ensure inspection and witnessing of petroleum product sampling and laboratory testing services that comply with the requirements described in the PWS.

Technical/Management Evaluation Subfactor 2: Vehicle Inspection – The proposal must clearly provide a concept of operations that demonstrates the offeror’s knowledge of tank truck suitability requirements and quantity determination methods and requirements.

The proposal must provide a Quality Control Plan to include checklists that ensures inspection/witnessing of petroleum product transport vehicles comply with the requirements described in the PWS.

Technical/Management Evaluation Subfactor 3: Reporting and Deliverables – The proposal must clearly provide a concept of operations that demonstrates the offeror’s knowledge of meeting deliverables and reports in the PWS. The proposal must identify the method of delivery for the deliverables and reports. The proposal must demonstrate knowledge of which deliverables and reports to send and their format and location for each task identified in PWS C- 5.0. The proposal must provide a Quality Control Plan, which include checklists that ensure accuracy and timeliness of deliverables and reports in accordance with the requirements described in the PWS.

Technical/Management Evaluation Subfactor 4: Mobilization/Stationing of Staff – The proposal must clearly provide a concept of operations that demonstrates the offeror’s knowledge of mobilization/stationing procedures of qualified staff at various locations within Afghanistan. The proposal must be able to demonstrate the offeror’s capability to mobilize and be operational within 45 days of the contract award date. The proposal must address the offeror’s ability to handle task order assignments and to provide a sufficient number of personnel to accomplish the tasks in the PWS.

Technical/Management Evaluation Subfactor 5: Qualified Personnel – The proposal must clearly provide procedures to ensure all contractor personnel are experienced, qualified, and certified to accomplish all required tasks in the PWS. The proposal must identify courses and frequencies for maintaining personnel competence and knowledge of sampling and testing requirements/standards in the PWS, and the method of documentation and certification for the personnel. The proposal must include a Training Plan that ensures personnel are qualified and certified to comply with the requirements in PWS C-2.5. The proposal must include resumes for the three key personnel identified in the PWS (in-country Program Manager (PM), Technician, and Chemist).

To receive an overall Acceptable rating for Factor 1: Technical/Management, the proposal must be rated Acceptable in all subfactors.

Factor 2: Past Performance

The SSEB (Contract Team) will review recent and relevant past performance information and determine its quality and usefulness as it applies to the procurement. Past Performance will be rated as Acceptable or Unacceptable (See Table A-2).

Additionally, the Government may use any other data available for evaluation, including but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, the Defense Contract Management Agency, past and present customers and their employees, other subcontractors, and any others who may have useful and relevant information.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s submitted past performance to include questionnaires from three (3) current or previous contracts for relevancy based on how well the contractor performed on projects of similar dollar value, scope, and complexity.

Offerors are instructed to submit three (3) Past Performance Questionnaires that may include performance still in progress; however, the contracts should have a minimum of one (1) year of performance history and no more than three (3) years old from the closing date of this solicitation. The Past Performance questionnaire located under Attachment IV of this solicitation will be used to solicit information from offeror’s submitted references in the following areas: (1) Quality of Service, (2) Schedule, (3) Cost Controls, (4) Management of Key personnel, (5) Small Business (if applicable), (6) Regulatory Compliance, (7) Business Relationships.

Recency and Relevancy are evaluated as part of the Acceptable/Unacceptable ratings.

Recent past performance is defined as past performance on contracts performed within the past three years. The evaluation will determine the degree to which a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is relevant to the effort to be acquired through this acquisition. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration shall be given to those aspects of an offeror’s contract history that would give the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will satisfy the current procurement. This relevancy assessment shall measure the extent of similarity between the service effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming arrangements, and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance.

Upon determining how recent past performance was, relevancy, and how well the offeror performed, past performance will be rated “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” using the rating and descriptions outlined in the DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table A-2, as follows:

Table A-2

Past Performance Evaluation Ratings

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 below)

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 1: The adjectival ratings Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, and Unacceptable reflect the ratings in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). However, under the DoD’s streamlined process for evaluating Past Performance under Lowest Price Technically Acceptable, ratings of Acceptable and Unacceptable must be used. The contracting officer has reviewed the CPARS rating standards and the Contractor Past Performance Questionnaire, Attachment IV, and determined that CPARS and Questionnaire ratings of Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory and Marginal will equate to an Acceptable rating. Ratings of Unsatisfactory will equate to an Unacceptable rating.

A record of 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. Offerors are advised that the Government may use past performance information obtained from centralized past performance databases and sources other than those identified by the offeror.

Note 2: 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. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a “Neutral” rating shall be considered “Acceptable.”

Evaluation for Joint Ventures and Teaming Arrangements will be performed by evaluating the 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. 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.

Note 3: A proposal receiving a rating of Unacceptable in this factor after final proposal revisions will be ineligible for award.

Factor 3: Price

A Requirements contract with Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) Task Orders will result from this solicitation. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes IAW FAR 52.212-2

– Evaluation – Commercial Items as follows:

Three-year Base Period** CLINs 0001-0005

Two-year Option Period** CLINs 0006-0010

**Please note: The CLIN structure is for example purposes only. The actual CLIN structure may vary as EBS system constraints allow only for sequential numbering and may be affected by the number of resultant awards.

(1) Price evaluation will be accomplished as follows:

a) Estimated tasks per CLIN (CLINs 0001 – 0005) × offered base unit price per task = total base price per CLIN. The sum total of CLINs 0001 – 0005 equals the total three-year base price.

b) Estimated tasks per CLIN (CLINs 0006 – 0010) × offered option unit price per task = total option price per CLIN. The sum total of CLINs 0006

– 0010 equals the total two-year option price.

c) Sum total price of CLINs 0006 - 0010/24 × 6 = total price for six-month extension.

d) Total price for three-year base period + total price for two-year option period + total price for six-month extension = the total evaluated price.

(2) Two-year Option Period: In accordance with FAR 52.217-9, Option to Extend the Term of the Contract, the Government may extend the term of this contract by written notice to the contractor within 30 days of contract expiration; provided the Government gives the contractor a preliminary written notice of its intent to extend at least 45 days before the contract expires. The preliminary notice does not commit the Government to an extension.

(3) Option (Extension Provision): In accordance with FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, the Government has the unilateral right to extend any resulting contract under the same terms and conditions for a total of not more than six months. The total price for the six-month extension will be evaluated by adding the total prices of CLINS 0006 - 0010/24 × 6.

(4) The offeror’s submitted price may be evaluated for price realism to determine whether the offeror understands the requirements and to determine the firm’s responsibility in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(d)(3). The Government reserves the right to conduct a price realism analysis to determine whether the offeror understands the contract requirements. If a price realism analysis is performed and an offeror’s price is determined to be unrealistic, the offeror’s proposal will be ineligible for award.

The lowest priced Offeror will be the lowest evaluated price derived from the sum total of CLINs 0001-0005 for the three-year base period, the sum total of CLINs 0006 – 0010 for the two-year option period, and the six-month extension period.

The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

Competitive Range:

If discussions are conducted, the Government will establish a competitive rage comprised of all the highly rated proposals unless the competitive rage is further reduced for purposes of efficiency in accordance with FAR 15.306(c)(2) - Exchanges with Offerors after Receipt of Proposals.

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced.

Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of Provision)

B. The period of performance listed in B-0001-B34.01 SERVICES TO BE FURNISHED AND PRICES (DLA ENERGY FEB 1991) is revised as follows:

B-0001-B34.01 SERVICES TO BE FURNISHED AND PRICES (DLA ENERGY FEB

1991)

The services to be furnished during the period specified herein and the unit prices are as follows:

A Service Provider (SP) shall perform tasks in the performance of Quality Assurance and Surveillance (QAS) and Supply Chain Visibility Services (SCVS) under the contract, which include the inspection, witnessing and verification services of fuel products; transportation of fuel products; and other services related to fuel and/or fuel products on behalf of the United States Government and DLA Energy.

CLIN pricing for each location is listed below. Detailed requirements of the solicitation are contained in Section C - DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATION/PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT.

Afghanistan Supply Chain Visibility Services Performance Period from 01 March 2020 through 28 February 28 2023*

CLIN Task Service

Material Number

Description Total Estimated Tasks Base Price per

Task Total Price

TANK TRUCK

ISSUES/LOADS

(Reference PWS

Section 3.1)

V20000026 OCONUS -

Inspection Services 13,500

Tasks

Base Price per Task Total Price

PIPELINE

DELIVERIES

Section 3.2)

Inspection Services 540

Base Price per

A, B or C

TESTING

Section 3.3)

V20000028

OCONUS -

Witness/QA and

QS

A Testing = 600 B Testing = 9 C Testing =9

SUPPLY CHAIN

REPORTING

Section 3.4)

Inspection Services 825

ON/OFF

REVENUE

Section 3.5)

Inspection Services 30

Performance Period from 01 March 2023 through 28 February 2025*

Tasks Option Price per

TANK TRUCK

ISSUES/LOADS

Section 3.1)

Inspection Services 9,000

PIPELINE

DELIVERIES

Section 3.2)

Inspection Services 360

A, B or C

TESTING

Section 3.3)

V20000028

OCONUS -

Witness/QA and

QS

A Testing = 400 B Testing = 6 C Testing = 6

CLIN

Description

Total Estimated

Option Price Per

SUPPLY CHAIN

REPORTING

Section 3.4)

Inspection Services 550

Option Price Per

ON/OFF

REVENUE

Section 3.5)

Inspection Services 20

PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE*

BASE PERIOD (CLINS 0001 – 0005): 01 March 2020 through 28 February 28 2023 OPTION PERIOD (CLINS 0006 – 0010): 01 March 2023 through 28 February 2025

* The period of performance is subject to change contingent upon the contract award date.

Please note: The CLIN structure above is for example purposes only. The actual CLIN structure may vary as EBS system constraints allow only for sequential numbering and CLIN structure maybe be affected.

NOTE: IAW FAR 52.217-8 OPTION TO EXTEND SERVICES (NOV 1999), the contractor is accepting that prices for the extension(s) not to exceed six months (if exercised) will remain the same as the offered prices under DLA Energy Contract Provision B-0001-B34.01 SERVICES TO BE FURNISHED AND PRICES (DLA ENERGY

FEB 1991).

C. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

B-0001-B34.01 SERVICES TO BE FURNISHED AND PRICES (DLA ENERGY FEB 1991)

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED:

PAGE OF PAGES

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED:

PAGE OF PAGES

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED:

PAGE OF PAGES

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

6. ISSUED BY

CODE

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)

CODE

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

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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 Offers 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.

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:

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).

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 AMERICA

15B. 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

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.

PAGE OF

1.5 Amendment of Solicitation/Modification Contract skim Standard Form - Amend Acrobat Distiller 4.0 for Windows D:20001018094515Z D:20090422155830-04'00'

CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE