Attachment_0003_-_Evaluation_of_Offers.pdf

Evaluation of Offers

1. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD: The Government plans to award this acquisition utilizing Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection procedures in accordance with FAR 15.101-2, as supplemented. Technical tradeoffs will not be made and no additional credit will be given for exceeding acceptability. Award will be made to the acceptable offeror with the lowest evaluated price, which is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements utilizing LPTA procedures. The Government intends to award without discussions and negotiations. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions and negotiations if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer. Selection of the successful offeror will be made following an assessment of each proposal against the solicitation requirements and the cited evaluation criteria. The criteria will be used to evaluate and assess the information provided by the offerors in response to the information called for in all sections of this RFP.

2. CORRECTION POTENTIAL OF PROPOSALS: The Government will consider, throughout the evaluation, the "correction potential" of any proposal uncertainty. The judgment of such "correction potential" is within the sole discretion of the Government. If an aspect of an offeror's proposal not meeting the Government's requirements is not considered correctable, the offeror may be eliminated from the competitive range.

3. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY: Technical acceptability will be evaluated on all offers.

Only those offers determined to be technically acceptable, either initially or as a result of discussions, will be considered for award. Price will be evaluated and the proposals will be listed from lowest to highest price based on the total evaluated price. Award will be made to the lowest evaluated priced proposal meeting the acceptability standards for the non-cost factors.

4. RESPONSIBILITY: The Government will determine responsibility by analyzing whether the apparent successful offeror complies with the requirements of FAR 9.1.

4.1 The Government reserves the right to reject proposals that are unreasonably low or high in price. Unsuccessful offerors will be notified in accordance with FAR 15.503.

5. EVALUATION CRITERIA: Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Processes in accordance with FAR 15.101-2 will be utilized. Offers will be submitted and will be evaluated in accordance with the Evaluation Section below. It is the Government’s intent to make a single award. Award will be based on Firm Fixed range pricing per Kilowatts (KW)/hour in accordance with Attachment 0008, Pricing Matrix. The Government will evaluate offers using the non-cost evaluation factors of: Technical Capability/ Transition Plan, Quality Control Plan, Management Plan, and Environmental Compliance Plan. The proposals will be evaluated to determine whether the offerors' methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the solicitation. The proposals will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement of the solicitation has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the Instructions to Offerors of the solicitation. The offeror's proposal will be evaluated on its thoroughness, soundness, and comprehension of the requirement as to high likelihood of success.

These factors and major elements are outlined below.

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL. These factors will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. If an offeror fails to achieve an “Acceptable” rating on any one of these factors, it will receive an Unacceptable for Technical and will not receive further consideration for award.

Factor A: Technical Capability/Transition Plan will be evaluated to determine offerors understanding of the quality methods and techniques for meeting the performance standards and customer requirements. The evaluation shall include a review of the offeror’s proposal to design, furnish, install, commission, operate and maintain the Camp Arifjan power purchase agreement load demand and their ability to provide labor to support the requirements as stated in the Performance Work Statement as well as the offeror’s plan to Transition/Phase-In from the old requirement to the current requirement.

Acceptable: Based on the information provided the offeror demonstrates a thorough understanding of the quality methods and techniques for meeting performance standards and customer requirements; demonstrates the offeror's ability to design, furnish, install, commission, operate and maintain the Camp Arifjan power purchase agreement load demand and their ability to provide labor to support the requirements as stated in the Performance Work Statement. The offeror’s Proposal includes a detailed Transition Plan that identifies a clear timeline to ensure full contract performance in accordance with the PWS.

Unacceptable: The offeror's proposal does not demonstrate a thorough understanding of the quality methods and techniques for meeting performance standards and customer requirements;

and/or does not demonstrate the offeror's ability to design, furnish, install, commission, operate and maintain the Camp Arifjan power purchase agreement load demand and their ability to provide labor to support the requirements as stated in the Performance Work Statement. The offeror’s Proposal does not include a detailed Transition Plan that identifies a clear timeline to ensure full contract performance in accordance with the PWS.

Factor B: Quality Control Plan will be evaluated to determine the offeror’s understanding of the quality methods and techniques required for meeting performance standards and customer requirements. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the offeror’s capability to maintain a quality control plan and provide specific methods and policies for accountability, repair, and inventory management. The proposal will also be evaluated to determine the offeror’s ability to provide a plan for Quality Assurance Surveillance, including methods to be used for communications with the Government and measuring customer satisfaction in accordance with the PWS and Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP)/Performance Requirements Summary

(PRS).

Acceptable: Based on the information provided, the offeror's proposal demonstrated a thorough understanding of the quality methods and techniques needed for meeting performance standards and customer requirements; demonstrates the offeror's capability to maintain a quality control program; demonstrates the offeror’s capability to provide for accountability, repair, and inventory management; and includes methods to be used for communications with the Government and for measuring customer satisfaction per the requirements of the QASP/PRS.

Unacceptable: The offeror’s proposal does not demonstrate a thorough understanding of the quality methods and techniques needed for meeting performance standards and customer requirements; and/or does not demonstrate the offeror's capability to maintain a quality control program; and/or does not demonstrates the offeror’s capability to provide for accountability, repair, and inventory management; and/or does not include methods to be used for communications with the Government and for measuring customer satisfaction per the requirements of the QASP/PRS.

Factor C: The Management Plan will be evaluated to determine the offeror’s ability to acquire, train, and maintain staffing levels to meet the requirements of the PWS. The evaluation shall include a review of the offeror's chain of command structure for contractor personnel. It will be evaluated to determine the offeror's ability to provide a sound management approach and a thorough understanding of the actions, procedures, and timeliness required to meet the start of full contract performance in accordance with the PWS. The evaluation shall also include a review of offeror’s details for recruiting and retaining the staffing necessary to reach full performance levels in accordance with the PWS.

Acceptable: Based on the information provided the offeror's proposal fully demonstrates the ability to provide the resources to acquire, train, and maintain staffing levels; includes a management chain of command structure for contractor personnel; provides a sound management approach and a thorough understanding of the actions and procedures required to meet the start of full contract performance on this contract; and includes the offeror's details for recruiting and retaining the staffing necessary to reach full performance levels in accordance with the PWS.

Unacceptable: The offeror's proposal does not demonstrate the ability to provide the resources to acquire, train, and maintain staffing levels, and/or does not include a management chain of command structure for contractor personnel, and/or does not provide a sound management approach, and/or does not provide a thorough understanding of the actions and procedures required to meet the start of full contract performance on this contract; and/or does not include the offeror's details for recruiting and retaining the staffing necessary to reach full performance levels in accordance with the PWS.

Factor D: The Environmental Compliance Plan shall be specific, detailed and complete enough to demonstrate a clear understanding of all environmental regulations and policies established by the Governments of the United States (identified in the PWS references) and the State of Kuwait and in accordance with the PWS, attachment 0001.

Acceptable: Based on the information provided the offeror’s Proposal was specific, detailed and complete enough to clearly and fully demonstrate a thorough understanding of the environmental regulations and policies for meeting performance standards and customer requirements as specified in the PWS and provided a sufficient plan to designate a staff member as an ECO.

Unacceptable: Based on the information provided, the offeror’s Proposal was not specific, detailed and complete enough to clearly and fully demonstrate a thorough understanding of the environmental regulations and policies for meeting performance standards and customer requirements and/or did not provide a sufficient plan to designate a staff member as an ECO.

6. It is the responsibility of the offeror to provide complete and thorough explanations for all factors as required. Submission of Technical Capability/Transition Plan, Quality Control Plan, Management Plan, and Environmental Compliance Plan factors are required with the initial proposal, and the Government is not obliged to make another request for the required information

7. Offerors for the Power Purchase Agreement requirement who receive an Acceptable for the Technical Factor will be evaluated on price.

PRICE

a. Price will be an evaluated Factor; however, it will not be rated. The FAR requires that contracts be awarded at prices that are fair and reasonable. The Contracting Officer is responsible for the determination of price reasonableness for the base and each option period.

The Government will evaluate price reasonableness IAW FAR 15.404-1(b); the Government may use any one or a combination of the techniques listed at FAR 15.404-1(b)(2) to determine the price fair and reasonable. The Government expects adequate price competition (FAR 15.404- 1(b)(2)(i)); therefore, a comparison will be made of prices received. However, the Government also reserves the right to require submission of data other than certified cost or pricing data adequate to determine the reasonableness of an offer if competition is inadequate for that purpose.

b. Offerors shall completely fill all blue highlighted cells within the pricing matrix and IAW the instructions in the Instructions to Offerors. Failure to completely fill in all blue highlighted cells could render the offeror ineligible for award.

c. Prices shall be evaluated for the entire period of performance, inclusive of the four one-year option periods and the 6 month extension authorized by FAR 52.217-8. The prices for each period of performance will be added together to reach a Total Evaluated Price. Thus, the total evaluated price will include the twelve month base period, four one year option periods, and 6 months at half the option period four evaluated price. Evaluation of the options will not obligate the Government to exercise the Options.

d. The proposals will be evaluated for Unbalanced Pricing as required by FAR 15.404-1(g).

An Offeror may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance exists and poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

BASIS FOR AWARD. Award will be based on the evaluation of technical factors and price. There will be one award for the Camp Arifjan, Zone 6 PPA. The Technical Factors will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. If an offeror fails to achieve an “Acceptable” rating on any one of the factors, it will receive an “Unacceptable rating” for Technical and will not receive further consideration for award. Offerors who receive an “Acceptable” for Technical will be evaluated on their total proposed price as stated. The technically acceptable offeror having the lowest total evaluated price will receive the award.