Technical Evaluation Factor_ISWM.pdf
PDF 155 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Integrated Solid Waste Management for Hill AFB
- Solicitation number
- FA820126Q0026
About this file
This is a Source Selection Information document—specifically a technical evaluation form for an Integrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM) Service Contract. The document is a blank template for evaluating contractor proposals against established minimum criteria across three technical sub-factors.
The evaluation form assesses proposals on three primary technical sub-factors: Work Plan, Standards, and Capability. The Work Plan sub-factor requires contractors to describe labor and supervision, equipment and materials, work accomplishment approach, inspection schedules, refuse disposal procedures, and safety protocols for government property and personnel. The Standards sub-factor evaluates the contractor's capability to perform to contract standards, local, state, and federal regulations, with emphasis on safety, sanitation, and customer service. The Capability sub-factor assesses the contractor's ability to provide required containers, compactors, equipment, storage, emergency services, special events management, recyclable materials handling, maintenance, and personal protective equipment (PPE). Each sub-factor contains evaluation criteria marked as either "Acceptable" or "Unacceptable," with space for evaluator comments explaining the rationale and proposal location references. The evaluator, Anna M. Robinson, must sign the completed form and provide general comments. The document references FAR clauses 52.212-1 and 52.212-2 for commercial item evaluation factors and a Performance Work Statement dated 4 June 2026 as the basis for evaluation criteria.
View the file
Other files
Show all 30
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104 for
Integrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM) Service Contract
Contractor: Name of Evaluator: Anna Robinson
Volume I - Technical Acceptability
Factor One: Technical Sub-Factor One: Work Plan - Minimum criteria is met when the proposal included the following as required in FAR 52.212-1 paragraph 3.2.1.1, FAR 52.212-2 paragraph 2.2.1, and the PWS dated 4 June 2026 paragraph 1, 2, 3, and 4 with all subparagraphs:
Acceptable
Unacceptable
Why: Where in the Proposal (i.e. page, paragraph, throughout, etc.)?
OR
Why Not: What part of FAR 52.212-1 - Instruction to Offeror (ITO) - Addendum, FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation - Commercial Item Evaluation Factors for Award Addendum, PWS, etc. did the proposal not fully address?
A. Describes the labor, including supervision. Describes the equipment, tools, materials, and vehicles. Describes the other equipment, items, and services it will provide to adequately meet contract requirements.
Comments:
B. Describes approach to accomplishing the work, including processes, schedules, frequency of inspections, and proper disposal of all refuse. Describes the plan to ensure the safety of Government property and personnel as well as contractor employees.
C. Indicates an adequate understanding of the requirements. Provides convincing rationale how their approach will meet all the essential requirements with little potential for schedule disruption, increased cost, or degradation of performance.
Comments:
Sub-Factor Two: Standards - Minimum criteria is met when the proposal included the following as required in FAR 52.212-1 paragraph 3.2.1.2, FAR 52.212-2 paragraph 2.2.2, and the PWS dated 4 June 2026 paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 with all subparagraphs:
OR
Why Not: What part of FAR 52.212-1 - Instruction to Offeror (ITO) - Addendum, FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation - Commercial Item Evaluation Factors for Award Addendum, PWS, etc. did the proposal not fully address?
A. Describes the capability to perform to the standards in the contract as well as local, state, and federal regulations and others as describes in the PWS paragraph 1. Has focus on safety, sanitation, and customer service.
B. Indicates an adequate understanding of the requirements. Provides convincing rationale how their approach will meet all the essential requirements with little potential for schedule disruption, increased cost, or degradation of performance.
Comments:
Sub-Factor Three: Capability - Minimum criteria is met when the proposal included the following as required in FAR 52.212-1 paragraph 3.2.1.3, FAR 52.212-2 paragraph 2.2.3, and the PWS dated 4 June 2026 paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 with all subparagraphs:
OR
Why Not: What part of FAR 52.212-1 - Instruction to Offeror (ITO) - Addendum, FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation - Commercial Item Evaluation Factors for Award Addendum, PWS, etc. did the proposal not fully address?
A. Lists and describes its capability to provide: all required types of containers, compactors, or other equipment; storage;
emergency services; and special events.
Comments:
B. Lists and describes its capability to: handle recyclable materials; perform maintenance; and provide personal protective equipment (PPE) to adequately service the installations.
Comments:
C. Indicates an adequate understanding of the requirements. Provides convincing rationale how their approach will meet all the essential requirements with little potential for schedule disruption, increased cost, or degradation of performance.
Evaluator Signature: Anna M. Robinson Acceptable Unacceptable Comments in general:
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .