Solicitation Amendment W5168W26RA0070004_SF 30.pdf

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.

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) 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 electronic communication 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 letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication 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 NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, 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.)

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

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The purpose of Solicitation Amendment Block 14 (Description of Amendment/Modification):

0004 is to execute the following administrative and evaluation updates:

1. The optional 6-month extension of services IAW FAR 52.217-8 is hereby removed in its entirety from this solicitation.

2. Issue Evaluation Notices (ENs) to each offeror.

3. Updated Solicitation Section M, paragraphs 2.3.1 -2.3.2.

4. Added FAR Clauses 52.222-33 Alt III and 52.222-34 Alt II to the solicitation.

All other items and conditions remain unchanged.

Section I - Contract Clauses

Additional Information/Notes

The following clauses were added:

FAR Clauses Incorporated by Reference Number Title Effective Date Alternate/

Deviation Variation Effective Date

52.222-34 Project Labor Agreement. (Deviation 2026- O0038) (Alternate II)

Feb 2026 Alternate II Feb 2026

Section L - Instructions, Conditions, & Notices to Offerors or Quoters

The following clauses were added:

FAR Clauses Incorporated by Reference Number Title Effective Date Alternate/ Variation

W5168W26RA0070004

Deviation Effective Date

52.222-33 Notice of Requirement for Project Labor Agreement. (Deviation 2026-O0038) (Alternate III)

Feb 2026 Alternate III Feb 2026

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

Miscellaneous text in this section has been modified to:

Basis For Award

1.0 AWARD FOR ALL OF THE WORK

The Government intends to award a Single Award Indefinite-Quantity Indefinite-Delivery (IDIQ) Job Order Contact (JOC) for construction services using Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Best Value source selection process at Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania, under FAR 15.3, as supplemented by the DFARS, and AFARS. Award will be made to the responsible Offeror (FAR 9.104) whose proposal conforms with the material requirements of the solicitation and who is determined to be the LPTA proposal. An offeror's proposal shall be ineligible for award if it does not receive an "Acceptable" rating in both Technical Capability and Past Performance.

1.1 COMPLIANCE WITH TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Offerors are cautioned to submit sufficient information in the format specified in the proposal preparation instructions. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the Request for Proposal (RFP) may result in the Offeror being removed from consideration for an award. Any exceptions to the RFP terms and conditions must be fully explained and justified. Offerors are cautioned that taking an exception may render the offeror ineligible for award.

1.2 REJECTION OF PROPOSAL

The Government may reject any proposal that is evaluated and determined to be unacceptable or that it failed to comply with the solicitation terms and conditions.

1.3 AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS

In accordance with FAR 52.215-1, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and make award without discussions (except clarifications under FAR 15.306(a)). Initial proposals should therefore contain the Offeror's best terms.

If discussions are necessary, the Contracting Officer may establish a competitive range based on proposal ratings. Offerors in the range will be invited to submit final proposal revisions, which will be evaluated the solicitation criteria. The Government does not anticipate further discussions per after final revisions, though the competitive range may be reopened if deemed necessary.

2.0 FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

Evaluation criteria consist of Factors and Subfactors. The proposal will be evaluated under two evaluation factors: Technical Capability and Past Performance. Technical Capability has one subfactor as listed below:

Factor 1: Technical Capability

Subfactor 1: Management Approach

Factor 2: Past Performance

Factor 3: Price

2.1 FACTOR 1 - TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

The Technical Capability factor will include one subfactor described below. The Government's technical evaluation team will evaluate the technical capability sub-factor on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis. If the subfactor is rated Unacceptable, this will result in the overall Technical Capability factor being determined Unacceptable and will render the offeror ineligible for award.

Only those proposals determined to be Acceptable for Factor 1: Technical Capability will be considered for an award. Factor 1 and Sub-factor 1 will receive one of the adjectival ratings defined in Table 1 below:

Table 1 - TECHNICAL CAPABILITY RATINGS

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

2.1.1 TAB A - SUBFACTOR 1: MANAGEMENT APPROACH

The Government will evaluate whether commitment letters and resumes were provided for all Key Personnel, and whether all Key Personnel meet the requirements of the SOW.

a. Staffing, Recruitment, and Retention Plan - Address the processes for hiring, training, and replacing personnel within required timeframes; and provide methods to reduce turnover.

b. Organizational Structure - Provide a narrative and chart showing authority, decision-making, supervision, span of control, and accountability, including subcontractors/partners where applicable.

c. Management Relationships - Explain relationships between corporate and on-site management, across technical disciplines, and with subcontractors, including integration into the structure.

d. Task Order Management - Describe approach to managing multiple, concurrent task orders requiring diverse skills across multiple locations.

e. Key Personnel - Identify all required positions, rationale for designation, and minimum qualifications (degree, certifications/licenses, relevant experience, etc.). Must designate a Program Manager, Superintendent, Quality Control Manger, and Safey and Health Officer with full authority over contract operations for their positions as delineated in paragraph 9 of the PWS.

Proposals that do not address all elements above will be rated "Unacceptable."

2.2 FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

2.2.1 The Government's past performance evaluation team will assess the Offeror's (including parent or affiliated or predecessor company or Joint Venture prime partner companies) probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The Government will consider the recency and relevancy of past performance information compared to the requirements detailed in the SOW, the source of the information, the context of the data and general trends in the Offeror's performance and any associated risk. To develop an overall rating, the Government's evaluation will take into account relevant information submitted by each Offeror as part of its proposal and the Government's assessment and evaluation of other sources of information. Other sources of information for past performance may are not limited to the Contractor Performance Assessment include, but Reporting System (CPARS) reports, Electronic Subcontractor Report System (ESRS), other databases, questionnaires and interviews.

2.2.2 The Past Performance evaluation will be accomplished by reviewing aspects of an Offeror's recent and relevant Past Performance, focusing on and targeting performance which is relevant to the effort as it directly relates to the work similar in scope, magnitude and complexity being procured under this solicitation. The past performance data shall be evaluated based on the demonstration of a successful history of past contract performance as outlined below. The past performance information provided in the proposal and obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of recency and relevancy of past performance as defined below.

2.2.3 The Past Performance evaluation will evaluate the extent of the Offeror's (including parent or affiliated or predecessor company or Joint Venture prime partner companies) ability to perform the solicitation's requirements successfully in the areas of:

- Quality

- Schedule

- Cost Control

- Management

- Small Business Subcontracting

- Regulatory Compliance

2.2.4 Assigned Ratings. The Past Performance Factor will be rated on an acceptable or unacceptable basis using the ratings defined below:

Table 2 - Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Rating Definition

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.

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: 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 (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.

The Government reserves the right to consider Past Performance Questionnaires received after the due date for receipt of the proposal. The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information and the right to consider other relevant past performance information. The Government may call customers, provided by the Offeror, to whether or not inquire about the Offeror's past performance. The government does not assume the duty to search for data to cure the problems it finds with the information provided by the Offeror. The burden of providing thorough and complete past performance information remains with the Offeror.

2.3 FACTOR 3 - PRICE

2.3.1 Price Proposal (Coefficients). Price will not be scored or rated. The price analysis techniques and procedures described under FAR Part 15.404-1(b) (DFARS CD 2026-O0048) will be the primary means of assessing whether the price submission is reasonable, complete and balanced. In assessing price reasonableness, completeness and balance the Government will also evaluate all offerors for award purposes by calculating the weighted proposal coefficients for each offeror in order to develop a single composite coefficient for each proposal. The weighted proposal coefficient will be calculated by multiplying each offeror's coefficient by the estimated contract weight (i.e. 85% Normal Hours, 5% Other than Normal Working Hours and 10% for Non-Pre- Priced) for each CLIN contained in Section B of the solicitation. The weighted proposal coefficients will then be added together to develop the single composite coefficient. Any coefficient cannot extend beyond 2 decimal places and any number beyond the second decimal place shall be dropped for evaluation and award.

The Offeror's total price will be for the 5-year ordering period.

a. Overall Proposal Evaluation: The proposal will be evaluated for the following:

i. Completeness - The Government will review the coefficient factors to ensure that all information proposed conforms to the requirements specified in the price volume instructions of the RFP.

ii. Compliance with pricing volume instructions of the RFP - The proposal submitted by the offeror will be evaluated for compliance based upon the submission requirements contained in pricing volume instructions of the RFP.

iii. Reasonableness - A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business.

iv. Unbalanced Pricing - The offeror's Price proposal will be evaluated for unbalanced pricing as defined in FAR 15.404-1(g) (DFARS CD 2026-O0048). Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over-or understated as indicated by the application of cost and price analysis techniques. Offerors are cautioned that a proposal the Government assesses to be unbalanced as to price may either be rejected or determined unacceptable for award. See FAR 15.404-19(g) (DFARS CD 2026-O0048) for information on unbalanced pricing.

v. Errors - The Offeror's 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 KO.

2.3.2 Total Evaluated Price (TEP): The TEP shall be used for evaluation of price reasonableness and for the purpose of determining best value for award. The TEP will be the sum of the 5-year ordering period. The TEP shall be calculated as follows:

a. The sum of all normalized CLIN values contained in Section B of the solicitation, as provided by the government multiplied by the applicable coefficients for each CLIN. See below example of the standard evaluation formula.

Total Evaluated Price (TEP)= (Normalized CLIN Dollar Value x Offeror's Proposed Coefficient).

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

2.3.4 Balanced Pricing. The government will evaluate all CLINs coefficients for balanced pricing.

Offerors are cautioned against submitting an offer that contains unbalanced pricing. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items (including Base and Option Periods) is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. Offers that are determined to be unbalanced may be rejected if the lack of balance poses a significant risk to the Government.

2.3.5 Completeness/Accuracy. The Offeror's proposal shall comply with the Price volume instructions in the solicitation.

2.3.6 Reasonableness. A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business.

2.3.7 Contract Face Value. The face value of the contract shall normalize for all proposals Offerors in determining the amount that will be used for the face value of the contract.

3.0 RFP REQUIREMENTS, TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Offerors are required to meet all RFP requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as factors/subfactors.

Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the RFP may result in the Offeror being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the RFP terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale.

3.1 Solicitation Documents: The following are required for award as a matter of solicitation compliance, but they are not included in the source selection evaluation, nor will they be considered the basis . in for award

SF1442 (Solicitation, Offer and Award) - The Government will review each proposal to ensure Offerors fully completed the SF1442, acknowledged all amendments and provided the cognizant point of contact information, to include identification of the individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government. Failure to meet these requirements will result in the proposal being deemed non-responsive and make the Offeror ineligible for award of a contract.

Representation, Certification, and Other Statements of Offerors - The Government will review the online representations and certifications and/or the Section K submission of each offeror to ensure they are current and accurate. Failure of an offeror representations and certifications are ensure current and accurate, to include small business certification under NAICS 236220, will result in the proposal being deemed non-responsive and make the offeror ineligible for award of a contract.

Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan - The Government will review each proposal to ensure the offeror has submitted a Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan that meets the requirements delineated in DFARS Provision 252.237-7024, Notice of Continuation of Essential Contractor Services. Failure to submit an acceptable plan will make the offeror ineligible for award of a contract.

Bonding Capacity - The Government will review each proposal to ensure the Offeror has submitted the requested bonding information as delineated in Instructions to Offerors, 5.1.9 Tab H - Additional Required Documents. Failure to submit acceptable bonding information will make the offeror ineligible for an award of a contract.

Agreement(s)/Subcontract(s) - The Government will review each proposal to ensure the Offeror has submitted a copy of the agreement(s) and/or subcontract(s) entered into by the parties for all subcontractor(s), teaming partner(s), Mentor-Protege, Joint Venture(s), etc. proposed to perform 10% or greater of the proposed effort, based on total proposed price. Failure to submit acceptable agreements/subcontracts will make the offeror ineligible for an award of a contract.

DIRECTOR MICC IRC, 2371 INFANTRY POST ROAD

FORT SAM HOUSTON, TX 78234-0000

UNITED STATES

CARIE TREZEVANTTE, EMAIL: CARIE.G.TREZEVANTTE.CIV@ARMY.MIL TELEPHONE: 520 944-7350 AdminBy:

SCD: PAS: