B08 W25G1V-21-R-0033 Solicitation Amendment 0003.pdf

0011651324

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this Amendment is to update the solicitation per the Questions and Answ ers dated 29 July 2021. The follow ing changes have been made:

1. Sub-factor 1 page limit has increased to 10 pages.

2. Volume III Past Performance has a maximum number of 3 projects each for the Contractor and Major Subcontrator.

3. Sub-factor 2 page limit has increased to 12 pages.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 16

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 29-Jul-2021

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W25G1V21R0033

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

16-Jul-2021

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offer 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) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

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

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

29-Jul-2021

CODE

ACC-APG, TOBYHANNA DIVISION

11 HAP ARNOLD BLVD

TOBYHANNA PA 18466-5100

W25G1V 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W25G1V21R0033

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

a. Only electronic proposals will be accepted. Electronic proposals shall be submitted via the DoD SAFE Service site, https://safe.apps.mil NOTE: The Offeror is encouraged to test the DoD SAFE site in advance of the due date of proposals to familiarize themselves with the system. A “drop-off” code is required for non-DoD Offerors. Offerors who do not have a CAC must submit a request for the “drop-off” code to Kristi-Jo Noel at kristi-jo.m.noel.civ@mail.mil at least ten

(10) days prior to the proposal due date; once a code is provided it is only good for fourteen (14) days. The Government will not consider proposals that were delayed or otherwise not timely delivered to the SAFE Service site because of an issue with the Offeror or the Government's service providers, to include email maintenance, firewall or delivery to any other email box (e.g. junk). Therefore, the Offeror should anticipate delays in transmission and are advised to plan ahead and to begin transmitting their proposal in time to ensure successful delivery prior to the close of the solicitation. It is the Contractors responsibility to confirm that the proposal and all documents are received by the Contract Specialist by the closing date/time.

Emails, faxes or hard copy proposals will not be accepted.

b. This is a competitive set-aside under the 8(a) program. The applicable NAICS code is 236220 (Commercial and Institutional Building Construction). Offerors that do not meet the set-aside and geographical location requirement will not be considered for award. In accordance with 13 CFR 124.507(b)(2), this determination shall be made by the SBA District Office servicing the apparent successful offeror.

c. In order to be considered for award, offerors must submit the following with their proposal:

Volume Title Digital Copies Maximum Pages I Technical 1 See Technical

Volume Description

II Cost/Price 1 No Page Limit

III Past Performance 1 See Past Performance Volume Description

IV Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents, Certifications and Representations

1 No page limit

NOTE: Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated.

Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed or not read and will not be evaluated by the Government.

2. PROPOSAL FILES

a. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled.

Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of the page. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and Request for Proposal (RFP) number in the header and/or footer. A Table of Contents should be created using the Table of Content feature in MS Word. MS Word (doc) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

Margins – Top, Bottom, Left, Right – 1” Gutter – 0” From Edge – Header, Footer 0.5” Page Size, Width – 8.5” Page Size, Height – 11”

Each paragraph shall be single spaced and shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12 point minimum font size applies. Arial or Times New Roman fonts are required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be produced in landscape mode.

The following additional restrictions apply:

b. File Packaging. Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. All price breakdown information from subcontractors shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format and viewable in Microsoft Excel 2016. **Please note – Self extracting exe files are not acceptable.

c. Content Requirement. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file.

The offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

The following shall be included in the Narrative discussion:

(i) VOLUME I – Technical.

The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Capability and Experience – Sub-factor 1. (Ten (10) pages maximum) The Offeror will provide information to substantiate the following:

KEY POINT #1 Offeror’s proposed design and construction schedule, to include start and end times for any and all design submittals and construction tasks for this project.

KEY POINT #2 - Experience and capability of managing construction projects of similar size and scope as this requirement.

KEY POINT #3 - Explain in detail how your firm will perform the minimum percentage required, 15%, with your own forces. Note: An offeror who has the capability to perform both as a General contractor and self-perform a major element of construction, for example, Electrical, or Mechanical or Roofing, may be afforded additional consideration in the evaluation.

(2) Organization – Sub-factor 2. (Twelve (12) pages maximum) The Offeror will provide information to substantiate the following:

KEY POINT #1 Names, duties, and levels of responsibility of key personnel to include the Project Manager, Site Superintendent(s), Quality Control Manager (QCM), and Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO).

Indicate to whom the QCM and SSHO report to (i.e. Lines of authority).

Provide resumes that identify education, training, and experience managing construction projects for all proposed key personnel. Provide conditional letters of employment for any proposed key personnel not currently an employee of the offeror. Note: The Site Superintendent and the SSHO will be allowed to act as one (Dual Hat).

KEY POINT #2 Provide a list of the in-house trades that the offeror employs. Provide the number (not names) of these employees, and if they are full-time, part- time etc. If applicable, describe the support and interface with your home office or corporate headquarters for such aspects as financial, management, and technical support.

KEY POINT #3 Provide a list of proposed major sub-contractors and their trades that you intend to use on this project. Include a Sub-contract Information and Consent Form for each proposed major sub-contractor.

Failure to comply with the RFP requirements for Sub-contract Information and Consent Form may result in an adverse assessment of an offeror’s proposal and reduce or eliminate its chance of being selected for award.

Tell us if you have worked together in the past. If yes, on what kind of jobs? If applicable, the offeror will describe the previous project(s) worked with each major subcontractor.

(3) Quality Control – Sub-factor 3. (Two (2) pages maximum) The Offeror will provide information to substantiate the following:

KEY POINT #1 Address how quality deficiencies will be addressed on this project. Include, as a minimum, meetings, inspections, submittal reviews, correction of non-compliant work and how the offeror intends to ensure non-reoccurrence and reporting of quality problems to the Government.

KEY POINT #2 Discuss your procedures for contract closeout (Punch list, as builts, etc.).

(4) Safety – Sub-factor 4. (One (1) page maximum) The Offeror will provide information to substantiate the following:

KEY POINT #1 Describe your firms Safety Program, in general, and provide as a minimum details on training, documentation and its plan to ensure adherence to OSHA Standards and the USACOE EM 385-1-1 (Safety Manual).

(ii) VOLUME II – Cost/Price.

The volume shall be organized into the following sections and shall contain a breakdown of costs for each CLIN:

(1) Electronic Copy. Files will not be password protected. Electronic links are only permissible within the Cost Volume. If files contain links, the links must be intact and maintained through all revisions. The Offeror shall not include pivot tables in Excel spreadsheets. The Offeror shall provide a completed Section B Supplies or Services and Prices of the solicitation.

(2) Compliance. Failure to comply with the RFP requirements for Cost information may result in an adverse assessment of an offeror’s proposal and reduce or eliminate its chance of being selected for award. Offerors shall ensure that the information presented in this volume is consistent and correlates with the information contained in the other proposal volumes. Also, the Offeror shall ensure that the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and fully supports the amounts set forth in the SF1442 and continuation sheets.

(3) General Instructions. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.402 and 15.403-1, this procurement will be exempt from certified cost or pricing data as a result of anticipated competition. Information other than certified cost or pricing data may be provided in contractor format providing that sufficient information is made available. Information submitted shall be prepared following the instruction in FAR 15.403-5. If after receipt of proposals the Contracting Officer determines that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions at FAR 15.403-1 apply, the Offeror may be required to submit cost or pricing data. Additionally, in the event that adequate competition is not obtained, the Contracting Officer may incorporate FAR 52.215-20 entitled, “Requirements for Cost or Pricing Data or Information Other Than Cost or Pricing Data,” into the solicitation and request a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data. There are no page limitations for this volume. Proposal information included in this volume which is not directly related to Cost will be disregarded.

(iii) VOLUME III – Past Performance.

This volume shall contain past performance information regarding similar contracts.

This volume shall not exceed 25 pages plus five pages for each major subcontractor, excluding Past Performance Questionnaire Forms. Offerors shall submit three (3) Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past five years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Relevant efforts are defined as construction projects that are the same as or similar to the effort (as compared to North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 required by the RFP. Data concerning the offeror shall be provided first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor, in alphabetical order. The Offeror shall also submit the written consent of its major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of its subcontractor’s past performance information to the Offeror. In addition, letters of commitment shall be included for all major subcontractors for their past performance to be considered. This volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Section 1 – Contract Descriptions. This section shall include the following information in the following format.

(a) Contractor/Subcontractor place of performance, CAGE Code and DUNS Number. If the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and Point of Contact (POC) within the prime contractor organization (name, and current address, e-mail address, and telephone and fax numbers).

(b) Government contracting activity, and current address, Procuring Contracting Officer’s name, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

(c) Government’s technical representative/Contracting Officer’s Representative and current email address, telephone and fax numbers.

(d) Government contract administration activity and the Administrative Contracting Officer’s name, and current e-mail address, telephone and fax number.

(e) Government contract administration activity’s Pre-Award Monitor’s name, and current e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

(f) Contract Number and, in the case of Indefinite Delivery type contracts, GSA contracts, and Blanket Purchase Agreements, include Delivery Order Numbers.

(g) Contract Type (specific type such as Fixed-Price (FP), Cost Reimbursement (CR), Time & Material (T&M), etc.). In the case of Indefinite Delivery contracts, indicate specific type (Requirements, Definite Quantity, and Indefinite Quantity) and secondary contract type (FP, CR, T&M, etc.).

(h) Awarded price/cost.

(i) Final or projected final price/cost.

(j) Original delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion or work.

(k) Final or projected final, delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

(2) Section 2 – Performance. Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed in Section 1, Contract Description, describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirement of this RFP.

(a) For any contracts that did not/do not meet original schedule or technical performance requirements, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence. The offerors shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary. All Requests for Deviation and Requests for Waiver shall be addressed with respect to causes and corrective actions. The offerors shall also provide copy of any Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action implemented by the offeror or proposed subcontractor. The offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination.

(b) For all contracts, the offeror shall provide data on all manufacturing warranty returns. Data shall delineate total number of warranty returns, number of Could

Not Duplicate (CND), number of failures attributable to GFE component failures, and number and nature of failures attributable to the offeror’s delivered product.

(3) Section 3 – Sub-contracts. The offeror shall provide an outline of how the effort required by the RFP will be assigned for performance within the offeror’s corporate entity and among the proposed subcontractors. The information provided for the prime offeror and each proposed major subcontractor must include the entire company name, company address, CAGE Code, DUNS Number and type of work to be performed by citing the applicable Government Scope of Work subparagraph number. This includes all subcontractors who will be providing critical hardware/services or whose subcontract is for more than 15% of the total proposed cost/price. This section will further include written consent of major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of their subcontractor’s past performance information to the Offeror. In addition, letters of commitment shall be included for all major subcontractors

(4) Section 4 – New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its offices and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information should be included in the files described in the sections above. Letters of Commitment shall be included in the proposal for these employees in order to be considered.

(5) Past Performance Questionnaire. For all contracts identified in Section 1, Contract Descriptions, a Past Performance Questionnaire must be completed and submitted.

The offeror shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire and e-mail the questionnaire to both the Government contracting activity and technical representative responsible for the past/current contract. The POCs shall be instructed to electronically complete Part II of the questionnaire and e-mail the entire questionnaire to the Contracting Office no later than the proposal due date, to kristi-jo.m.noel.civ@mail.mil The offeror shall e-mail to the Contracting Officer a list of all the POCs who were sent a questionnaire. The Government must receive this list no later than the proposal due date. The POC List shall be submitted in Word for Windows Table Format to include the following fields: Solicitation Number; Company Name; Contract Number;

Government Agency; POC Last Name, First Name; POC Title; POC Telephone Number; POC E-mail Address; and Date E-Mailed to POC.

(6) Submissions. Offerors are discouraged from providing points of contact with another contractors’ facility, i.e., in case an offeror (or one of his/her team members) is in a subcontract with another contractor who has submitted a proposal on the same requirement. Offerors shall provide and submit the prime contract number and all Governmental agency POCs in lieu of subcontract numbers or prime contract POCs in situations as described above.

(iv) VOLUME IV – SOLICITATIONS, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND

CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS

(1) Offerors must submit an Offer Guarantee with the Proposal.

(2) Offerors must submit confirmation of compliance with FAR Clause 52.225-11, Buy America-Construction Material

(3) Certifications and Representations – Each offeror shall complete (fill-in and signatures) the solicitation sections indicated below using the file (without modification to the file) provided with the RFP. An authorized official of the firm shall sign the SF 1442 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission.

Section A – Standard Form 1442 (SF 1442), Solicitation, Offer and Award Section K – Representations, Certification and Other Statements of

Offerors

(4) All Amendments must be acknowledged on the SF1442 as well.

(5) Offerors are cautioned that “parroting” of the Technical requirements of the SOW, and other solicitation attachments, with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

BASIS FOR AWARD

A. The award will be made based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the three (3) evaluation factors: Technical, Cost/Price and Past Performance.

The Technical factor is more important than the Cost/Price factor, which is more important than the Past Performance. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for the Technical factor (to include all sub-factors). Offerors are cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest cost offered. NOTE: ALL NON-PRICED FACTORS COMBINED ARE MORE

IMPORTANT THAN COST/PRICE.

B. FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors and sub-factors will be used to evaluate each proposal:

Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the

Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and sub-factors described below. The Government reserves the right to make award based upon the Cost/Price factor in the event that the Technical, and Past Performance evaluation results of all the offerors’ proposals are substantially the same.

Factor 1: The Technical factor is further divided into the following sub-factors:

a. Sub-factor 1 - Capability and Experience

b. Sub-factor 2 - Organization

c. Sub-factor 3 – Quality Control

d. Sub-factor 4 – Safety

Sub-factor 1 is more important than Sub-factor 2. Sub-factor 2 is more important than Sub-factor 3. Sub-factor 3 is more important than Sub-factor 4.

Evaluation of the offeror’s proposal shall address each Technical sub-factor as it applies to the Building 7, Bays 1 & 2 Scope of Work. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph D of this section.

During evaluation of each proposal, the Government will assign each Technical sub-factor an adjectival rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings.

Factor 2: Cost/Price: The resulting award will be a Firm-Fixed-Price contract. Price reasonableness will be utilized in the evaluation of the Firm-Fixed-Price effort.

Factor 3: Past Performance: Each offeror’s past performance will be reviewed to determine recency, relevancy and confidence assessment.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be evaluated by the Source Selection Team (SST).

1. The overarching evaluation approach for all factors and sub-factors is as follows:

a. Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the RFP.

b. Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the technical requirements within the required schedule.

2. The Technical factor is divided into the following sub-factors:

Sub-factor 1: This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s proposed Capability and Experience for the basic contract and all options. Marginal levels of overall Capability and Experience could indicate a lack of understanding concerning mission requirements and may result in the entire proposal receiving an unfavorable rating and/or being eliminated from the competitive range. The evaluation will focus on the offerors’:

KEY POINT #1 WITH DESCRIPTION: Breakdown of schedule for Building 7, Bays 1 and 2 Renovation, to include design and construction phases.

KEY POINT #1 WITH DESCRIPTION: Description of the offeror’s experience and capability in managing construction projects for the dollar levels, disciplines, and specifications being required in the Building 7, Bays 1 and 2 Renovation project.

KEY POINT #2 WITH DESCRIPTION: Detailed explanation on how offeror will perform the minimum percentage required, 15%, with your own forces.

Do they have the capability to perform both as a General contractor and self-perform a major element of construction, for example, Electrical, or Mechanical or Roofing.

Sub-factor 2: This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s Organization. The evaluation will focus on the offerors’:

KEY POINT #1 WITH DESCRIPTION: Providing of names, duties and levels of responsibility of key personnel to include the Project Manager, Site Superintendent(s), QCM and SSHO. Indicate to whom the Quality Control and Safety Managers report to (Lines of authority). Did they include the education, training and experience in managing construction projects of the key personnel. If employee is not a current employee, provide a conditional offer of employment if award is received.

KEY POINT #2 WITH DESCRIPTION: Did the offeror providing a list of the in-house trades that they employ. Providing the number (not names) of these employees and if they are full-time, part- time etc. If applicable, was a description of the support and interface with your home office or corporate headquarters for such aspects as financial, management and technical support included.

KEY POINT #3 WITH DESCRIPTION: The list of major subcontractors and their trades that are intended to be used on these projects. Is a Subcontract Information and Consent Form included in the proposal for the named subcontractors for their consideration? Does the proposal include narrative advising if the offeror and proposed sub-contractor have previously worked together with a description of the jobs.

Sub-factor 3: This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s Quality Control. The evaluation will focus on the offerors’:

KEY POINT #1 WITH DESCRIPTION: Description on how quality deficiencies will be addressed on this project. The discussion included as a minimum: meetings, inspections, submittal reviews, correction of non-compliant work and how you intend to ensure non-reoccurrence and reporting of quality problems to Government officials.

KEY POINT #2 WITH DESCRIPTION: The offerors’ procedures for contract closeout (Punch list, as builts, etc.).

Sub-factor 4: This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s Safety Program. The evaluation will focus on the offerors’:

KEY POINT #1 WITH DESCRIPTION: Discussion of the Safety Program in general, and did they provide as a minimum, details on training, documentation, and your plan to ensure adherence to OSHA Standards, and the USACOE EM 385-1-1 (Safety Manual).

In accordance with the Army Source Selection Supplement (AS3), Section 3.1, the Army methodology for evaluating Technical Approach and Related Risk is the Combined Technical/Risk Rating, (see Table 1 below). This methodology considers risk, in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Color 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.

3. Cost/Price Factor. Adjectival ratings shall not be used for offerors’ Cost/Price proposals. The Government will fully evaluate and negotiate all priced Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) for award. For award purposes, the total proposed price for all CLINs will be added together into a total sum (contract value). The evaluation of all option CLINs will not obligate the Government to exercise any option. The Offeror’s Cost/Price proposal will be evaluated as follows.

a. FFP Evaluation. For a price to be fair and reasonable, it must represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business.

b. Overall Cost/Price Proposal Evaluation: The overall Cost/Price proposal will be evaluated for the following:

1) Compliance: The Cost/Price proposal submitted by the Offeror will be evaluated for compliance based upon the submission requirements contained in the Section L- (ii) Volume II Cost/Price instructions.

2) Errors: The Offeror’s Cost/Price proposal will be reviewed for errors. The Offeror may be given an opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their proposal at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer.

3) Total Evaluated Price: The Total Evaluated Price consists of summing the Offeror’s proposed firm-fixed-price CLIN prices (CLINs 0001 through 0007).

The Total Evaluated Price will include all the priced CLINs for an overall proposed cost, however all the Option CLINS may not be exercised.

4. Past Performance Factor. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the Scope of Work.

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.

a. Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires included as Attachment 3 Past Performance Questionnaire and Attachment 4 Subcontract References attached to the Solicitation.

b. The Government will focus its inquiries on the offeror’s (and major subcontractor’s) record of performance as it relates to all solicitation requirements, including cost, schedule, performance and management of subcontractors. For the purposes of this SSP/Requirement, major subcontractors are defined as members of an offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform 15% percent or more of the proposed effort. A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of the work can become an important consideration in the evaluation process. Therefore, offerors will be reminded to include the most recent and relevant efforts (within the past five years) in their proposal. Absent any recent and relevant past performance history or when the performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will be assigned a “neutral confidence rating” and its proposal will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance. The Government may use data provided by the offeror in its proposal and data obtained from other sources, including data in Government files or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor and their current and past performance under Federal, State or Local government or commercial contracts for same or similar services as compared to the NAICS 236220.

c. Offerors shall submit three (3) Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past five years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this RFP. The Government may consider a wide array of information from a variety of sources, but is not compelled to rely on all of the information available.

d. The past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality.

(i) RECENCY: The first aspect is to evaluate the recency of the offeror’s past performance. 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.

(ii) RELEVANCY: The second aspect is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. Relevancy is not separately rated; however, the following criteria (see Table 2) will be used to establish what is relevant which shall include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming.

Table 2 - Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition 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.

(iii) QUALITY ASSESSMENT: The third aspect assesses the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. Documented results from Past Performance Questionnaires, interviews, CPARS, and other sources form the support and basis for this assessment.

e. Performance Confidence Assessment: Utilize the Performance Confidence Assessment (see Table 3 below) to select the most appropriate confidence level for each Offeror. Ensure the rationale for the conclusions reached are included.

TABLE 3 - Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Definition 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 evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the facto 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.

D. DISCUSSIONS

1. GENERAL INFORMATION. The Government intends to evaluate and make an award without conducting discussions. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussion if the Contracting Officer determines it is in the best interest of the Government to do so. Therefore, offerors initial submission should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. Should discussions take place, all offerors in the competitive range will be allowed a minimum of three (3) calendar days to submit Final Proposal Revisions.

(End of Summary of Changes)