B08 Solicitation Amendment 01 W25G1V21R0040.pdf

SEE SCHEDULE

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

amendment 01 is to change the Contract Specialist from Maureen Myrethel to David Kern. Please send all proposals and correspondence to the new Contract Specialist.

This amendment also incorporates all questions and answ ers into the solicitation. See attachment Questions and Answ ers 1 through 21 and incorporates the UPDATED PWS Revision 1.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 13

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 24-Aug-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 W25G1V21R0040

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

29-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 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

24-Aug-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:

W25G1V21R0040

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The Issued By organization has changed from

ACC-APG, TOBYHANNA DIVISION

MAUREEN MYRTHEL 570-615-9535

MAUREEN.MYRTHEL.CIV@MAIL.MIL

FAX 570-615-6794

TOBYHANNA PA 18466-5100

to

ACC-APG, TOBYHANNA DIVISION

DAVID K KERN 570-615-8733.

DAVID.K.KERN2.CIV@MAIL.MIL

FAX 570-615-6794

TOBYHANNA PA 18466-5100

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM

1. This requirement will result in a single award firm fixed- price (FFP) construction contract for Roof Replacements for building 5, bays 3 and bldg. 334 at Tobyhanna Army Depot, Tobyhanna, PA 18466 In Accordance With (IAW) the attached Statement of Work (SOW).

2. All proposals must be submitted electronically via email to the contract Specialist, David Kern, at David.K.Kern2.civ@mail.mil

3. DISCLOSURE OF MAGNITUDE: In accordance with FAR 36.204 – Disclosure of the Magnitude of Construction Projects, the estimated magnitude of this requirement is:

Between $500,000 and $1,000,000.

4. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: 90 calendar days from issuance of Notice to Proceed.

5. APPLICABLE DAVIS BACON ACT WAGE DECISION:

Construction Type: Building General Decision Number: PA20210098 Modification Number: 7 Date: 07/16/2021

6. SITE VISIT: In accordance with FAR 52.236-27, a pre-proposal site visit will be held on Wednesday, August 4, 2021 at 10:00 AM EST. The meeting location will be Building 20 (Guard Shack/Security), Tobyhanna Army Depot, Tobyhanna, PA 18466.

mailto:David.K.Kern2.civ@mail.mil

This site visit is highly encouraged. Those planning to attend must e-mail the Contract Specialist, David.K.Kern2.civ@mail.mil and the COR, jeffrey.c.pruzinsky.civ@mail.mil NLT noon on August 2, 2021 with the number of people attending the visit. A 648-c background check will be required for entrance to the facility. If the background check is not complete before the date and time of the site visit, please arrive two hours early to complete the background check.

Contractors are not permitted to take pictures at the site visit. Pictures will be taken by the COR and made available after the conclusion of the site visit and approval for release.

Due to COVID-19 restrictions, all individuals not vaccinated will be required to wear a mask during the site visit.

7. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS: All questions must be submitted in writing to the Contract Specialist. Offerors are instructed NOT to contact any TYAD personnel, as this may result in a delay of answers. Questions must be received NLT Wednesday, August 18, 2021 at 3:00 PM EST. These questions and answers will then be posted to https://SAM.gov and incorporated into the solicitation and any resultant contract via amendment.

Solicitation Closing date and time is August 27, 2021 at 3:00 p.m. EST.

8. All offerors must be found responsible in accordance with FAR Subpart 9.1 - Responsibility of Prospective Contractors. In accordance with DFARS 252.204-7004, lack of a SAM (System for Award Management, www.SAM.gov) database registration may result in an offeror being ineligible for award.

9. The Government is not obligated to issue an award as a result of this solicitation and reserves the right to cancel at any time prior to award. The Government shall not be liable for any bid or proposal costs incurred, nor is it obligated to provide rationale for canceling.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

a. Only electronic proposals will be accepted. Electronic proposals shall be mailto:Maureen.Myrthel.civ@mail.mil mailto:jeffrey.c.pruzinsky.civ@mail.mil

Submitted to the Contract Specialist through email at David.K.Kern2.civ@mail.mil. Any portion of the proposal that is changed

b. This is small business set-aside. The applicable NAICS code is 238160 (Roofing Contractor). The size standard is16.5M.

c. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

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, and Certifications / 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 a 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.

The following additional restrictions apply:

b. File Packaging. Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. All price breakdown information to aide in the cost/price evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format and viewable in Microsoft Excel 2007.

**Please note – Self extracting exe files are not acceptable.

mailto:David.K.Kern2.civ@mail.mil

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) Section 1 – Sub-factor 1. This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s Technical approach to the SOW. The offeror will provide information to substantiate the following:

• KEY POINT 1 # Offeror shall include a Technical Proposal which demonstrates the ability to provide the full requirement of the Statement of Work (SOW). Offeror’s Technical Proposals shall be clear, concise, and include all the information required by this SOW in sufficient detail for effective evaluation. To be found technically acceptable the Offeror’s technical proposal, including any supporting documentation, should clearly reference requirements identified in the Statement of Work. The Technical Proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements and specifications; but, rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements and specifications. Phrases such as “will comply” or “standard techniques will be employed” in response to the Government’s specifications and requirements found in the SOW should be avoided.

This evaluation will result in a determination of technical acceptability or unacceptability. The technical proposal will be evaluated as Acceptable/Unacceptable.

Technical Proposals shall include a narrative that will address but not be limited to the following:

• Provide all labor, material, tools, equipment, and supervision necessary to complete the installation of 60 mil reinforced EPDM membrane Fully Adhered Roofing System or equal, including new flashing, ISO insulation, cover board, and tapered insulation.

• The roof system shall have a minimum 20 year warranty with no dollar limit that covers the full system water-tightness, and is from the single source manufacturer. The offeror will document the warranty and the contractors’ ability to address emergency warranty issues In Accordance With the SOW.

• Installation of ISO (Polyiso) roof insulation (to achieve an R-value of 30) over the existing insulation and poured gypsum concrete.

• Installation of tapered insulation to achieve a minimum 1/8 existing taper on roof. (Building 5 Bay 3 ONLY)

• Installation of EcoStorm VSH cover board (or approved equal to meet 95% recycled materials requirement) over ISO insulation.

• Installation of a roofing system composing of a fully adhered, 60 mil reinforced

• EPDM membrane. Material shall be Carlisle Sure-Seal system or similar product to meet or exceed specifications in Appendix 2.

• This work shall include tying into both parapets on the North (adjacent to bay 2) and South (adjacent to bay 4) side of Building 5 bay 3.

• Installation of new dark bronze colored metal edging around roof perimeter (to be approved/designed per manufactures warranty).

• Installation of curbs around any existing roof penetrations to ensure a minimum 12 curb is achieved where possible.

• Installation of rubber walk boards from roof access point to all mechanical units as per manufacturer’s warranty.

• Installation of new scuppers and downspouts.

• All new roof fasteners must be factory coated and installed to avoid penetrating of electrical conduit and boxes which may be mounted against or near the bottom of Building 5 Bay 3 Scope of Work Page 4 of 12 the interior roof area.

• Perform sample pull tests on anchors prior and provide results on pull out strengths achieved to COR prior to installing new insulation

• All work shall follow the UFC 3-110-03 (Roofing) requirements or those included in this document, whichever is more stringent.

• All seam overlaps shall be per manufacturer’s requirements.

(2) Section 2 – Sub-factor 2. This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s Capability and Experience. The Offeror will provide information to substantiate the following:

• KEY POINT #1 Offeror’s proposed construction schedule, to include start and end times for any and all construction tasks for this project. Offeror must be able to complete the requirements of the PWS within 90 days of notice to proceed.

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

(ii) VOLUME II – Cost/Price. The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Electronic Copy. 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 SF33 and continuation sheets.

(3) General Instructions. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR) 15.402 and 15.403-1, certified cost or pricing data are not required based on the fact that adequate competition is expected for this procurement. 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. Past Performance will be evaluated by reviewing the Contractor Performances Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). Offerors must submit three (3) examples of past performance. The examples shall have been performed within the past three (3) years. Past performance examples will be evaluated for recency, relevance and quality. Past Performance must receive an acceptable rating to be considered for award. Past Performance will be rated as Acceptable/Unacceptable.

(a) 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

(b) Relevance is defined as fulfilling the same or similar requirement for the same or similar services under the same or similar circumstances.

An example which is considered to be ideally on-point is one which satisfied the same technical requirement for the same quantity, provided to a Government customer, and within the same delivery timeframe as required under this solicitation. It is not required to submit examples which are ideally on-point; however, offerors should strive to provide those examples which are as relevant as possible.

(c) Quality is evaluated as overall customer satisfaction, including but not limited to: performance of the services/supplies provided; timeliness of delivery; willingness to negotiate and accommodate changes; cost control; processing of warranty claims, performance of maintenance agreements; availability of general customer support

(d) Three (3) examples of past performance shall be included in the offeror’s proposal. Each example shall have the following information:

• Contract or Sales Number

• Date of Sale

• Services provided

• Award price/cost

• Delivery schedule (start and final completion)

• Customer/Agency name

• Contact information to include name, position, phone and e-mail.

(e) Should the offeror provide more than three (3) examples of past performance, the Government is not obligated to contact more than the first three. Offerors should confirm that the POC telephone numbers are accurate and in service; failure to provide valid telephone numbers does not obligate the Government to further pursue those examples of past performance.

(e) In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.

(f) Nothing in this solicitation prohibits the Government from obtaining and considering past performance from any source available.

(g) Negative information obtained using past performance evaluations will be provided to the offeror to be addressed unless such negative information or circumstances have already been addressed by the offeror.

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

CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS

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

(2) 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 33 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 G – Contract Administration Data Section K – Representations, Certification and Other Statements of Offerors

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

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

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 equal to 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 will be 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 SUB-FACTORS 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 Technical Approach

b. Sub-factor 2 Capability and Experience

All sub-factors must receive a rating of at least “Acceptable” in order to be considered for award.

Evaluation of the offeror’s proposal shall address each Technical sub-factor as it applies to the Performance Work Statement (PWS). A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section. During evaluation of each proposal, the Government will assign each Technical sub-factor an acceptable/unacceptable rating.

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 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 proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

2. The Technical factor is divided into the following two sub-factors which will each be individually evaluated using a combination acceptable/unacceptable ratings:

Sub-factor 1: This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s proposed technical approach to the requirements in the SOW. Marginal levels of overall technical understanding of the requirements in the SOW 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 Offeror shall include a Technical Proposal which demonstrates the ability to provide the full requirement of the Statement of Work (SOW). This evaluation will result in a determination of technical acceptability or unacceptability. The technical proposal will be evaluated as Acceptable/Unacceptable.

Sub-factor 2: This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s Capability and Experience.

The technical proposal will be evaluated as Acceptable/Unacceptable.

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

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.

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.

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 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. The Offeror’s proposed fixed-price CLINs may be evaluated, using one or more of the techniques described in FAR 15.404-1 in order to determine if they are fair and reasonable.

b. Overall Cost/Price Proposal Evaluation: The overall Cost/Price proposal will 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.

2) Unbalanced Pricing: The Offeror’s overall Cost/Price proposal will be evaluated for unbalanced pricing as defined in FAR 15.404-1(g). An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government (see FAR 15.404-1(g)(1) through FAR 15.404- 1(g)(3)).

3) 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.

4) Total Evaluated Price: The Total Evaluated Price consists of summing the Offeror’s proposed fixed-price CLIN prices (CLIN 0001 and CLIN 0002).

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 PWS.

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 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.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition 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.

D. DISCUSSIONS

1. GENERAL INFORMATION. In accordance with FAR 15.306(d), discussion sessions with each offeror may be held. Should discussions take place, all offerors in the competitive range will be allowed a minimum of two (2) calendar days to submit Final Proposal Revisions.

(End of Summary of Changes)