W564KV23R0050-0002 Amendment 31 October 2023.pdf

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

See SF-30 Continuation Page for Amendment 0002

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

K 1 79

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 31-Oct-2023

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 W564KV23R0050

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

26-Sep-2023

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 X is extended, 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

31-Oct-2023

CODE

TCC-KAISERSLAUTERN

KLEBER KASERNE MANNHEIMER STRASSE 238

BLDG 3233

67657 KAISERSLAUTERN

GERMANY

W564KV 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W564KV23R0050

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0002 CHANGES

The purpose of this amendment is as follows:

a. Extend the closing date from 13 November 2023 to 20 November 2023 at 1600 (local time).

b. Incorporate revised Performance Work Statement (PWS) dated 31 October 2023.

c. Incorporate revised Addendum FAR 52.212-1 and 52.212-2.

d. Incorporate revised Attachment 1 – GWG Price Matrix dated 31 October 2023.

e. Incorporate revised PWS Attachment 1 - Staffing Requirements dated 31 October 2023.

f. Add Attachment 3 – Questions and Answers dated 31 October 2023.

Note: The Government has highlighted the changes made to the solicitation. The highlighted changes may not be inclusive of all changes and it is the responsibility of the Offeror to review the updated solicitation as of amendment 0002 in its entirety. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of this amendment by the solicitation due date and time specified in amendment 0002 IAW addendum FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors Volume 1.

End of changes

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 13-Nov-2023 04:00 PM to 20-Nov-2023 04:00 PM.

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1

SECTION II

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

A. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION (Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 Instruction to Offerors – Commercial Items

(MAR 2023)

1. Proposal Submission Requirements.

a. A representative of the firm authorized to commit the firm to contractual obligations must sign the offeror’s proposal. Blocks 12 (if applicable), 17a, 30a (signature), 30b, and 30c on page 1 of the SF 1449 must be filled in and signed by such a representative. In doing so, the contractor agrees to the contract terms and conditions as written in the Solicitation with attachments.

b. Submission of proposals shall be sent via email to Ms. Stephanie Delosreyes, Contract Specialist, stephanie.l.delosreyes2.civ@army.mil AND Mr. Labinot Shabani, Contracting Officer, labinot.shabani.civ@army.mil. The subject of the email shall be: “W564KV-23-R-0050 – Germany Wide Guards Proposal.

c. Offers are due as stated in block 8 of the “OFFER DUE DATE” block on page 1 of this document by the Local Time (Local Time means Kaiserslautern, Germany). Any portion of the proposal that is changed (as a result of negotiations or proposal revisions or modifications) should be annotated and dated. Proposals received after the required time on the due date will be handled in accordance with 52.212-1(f).

d. All offers, questions, and correspondence, shall be submitted in English. The government will not evaluate offers submitted in languages other than English.

e. Contractors shall insert their proposal total price for each CLIN/ELIN in Attachment #1 - Price Matrix.

f. The Government will evaluate the proposal using the information provided with the proposal. Failure of an offeror to submit information sufficient to evaluate the offer, or submitting information that does not follow the guidelines as stipulated herein, may render the proposal ineligible for award.

2. Questions Pertaining to the Request for Proposal (RFP).

Offerors must submit all questions to the Contracting Officer AND the Contract Specialist no later than the 10th calendar day after the issuance of this solicitation, 1600 Local Time, Kaiserslautern, Germany. The subject of the email shall be: “W564KV-23-R-0050 –Questions.” Questions must annotate a reference to the specific solicitation element to which they pertain. The Government is not required to provide responses to all questions submitted by Offerors, however, the Government will consider them and incorporate changes into the solicitation via amendment, as deemed necessary in the business judgement of the Contracting Officer. Questions received after the cut-off date may not receive a response. Offerors are responsible to query the System for Award Management website, SAM.gov, for postings of amendments, answers to questions, and other instructions or information, if any.

3. Detailed Proposal Instructions

a. All proposals, questions, and correspondence, SHALL BE submitted in the ENGLISH language and in EURO only. Offers submitted in a language other than English or in a currency that is not in EURO will not be evaluated. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited. Proposals that do not follow these guidelines or that do not include the requested minimum information may be eliminated from further consideration for award.

b. Page Limitation: If the page limits are exceeded, the pages in excess of the limit will be removed and not evaluated. The following are excluded from the page limitations: Coversheets for volumes, tables of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, indices, title pages, cross reference indexes, past performance questionnaires, and section dividers if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating parts/sections of the proposal. Additionally, pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” will not be counted. Page limitations are listed in the table below.

Proposal Content

Volume Title Digital Copies

Format Maximum Pages

I General Documents (Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents, and Certifications / Representations)

1 PDF document No page limit

II Technical 1 Electronic MS Excel, Word or PDF

75 Pages

III Past Performance 1 PDF document 20 Pages

IV Price 1 PDF document No page limit

4. Proposal Files. The Government will evaluate the proposal using only the information provided with the proposal except for information pertaining to past performance. Failure of an offeror to submit detailed information sufficient to evaluate the offer, as stipulated herein, may render your proposal unacceptable and therefore may not be evaluated.

a. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed, logically assembled, and clearly identified. A page, for purposes of this request for proposal, is defined as one side of standard 8 1/2" x 11" sheet of paper, font size (12), proportional spacing permissible, 1 inch margin on all sides, single spaced. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by solicitation number in the header and/or footer, do not include company identifying information. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. A Table of Contents shall be created, which outlines the contractor’s proposal submission. Information printed on charts and graphs may be a smaller font; however, the information must be legible. For ease of reference, consecutive page numbering with tabs is requested. Only the price proposal shall contain price information. All other proposal parts shall be void of price information. Any charts or graphs must be clearly legible, regardless of font size. Pages without information (blank pages) do not need to be numbered and shall not be reflected as page count.

b. File Packaging. WINZIP (.zip) or self-extracting exe files are not acceptable as they are routinely blocked by the domain firewall. Electronic proposals provided via e-mail shall be submitted in the formats specified above.

Maximum size limitation for e-mail receipt for the contracting office is 20 MB (including all attachments).

Proposals that are sent in multiple e-mails shall be numbered to include the total sent, for example “2 of 6.”

Prior to the closing date of the solicitation, a prudent offeror should verify with the Contract Specialist or the Contracting Officer that the Government has received all of the emails and files that comprise the offeror’s electronic proposal.

c. Content Requirements. All information shall be confined to the appropriate Volume. 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. Contractors should limit company identifying information to the cover of the submitted proposal of each section with the exception of SF 1449. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited. The following shall be included in the Narrative discussion:

(i) VOLUME I – General Documents. The volume shall include the following completed documents:

(1) Filled, signed, and dated Standard form 1449, Solicitation/Contract/Order.

(2) Acknowledgement of all RFP/Solicitation amendments

(3) List of persons authorized to negotiate or conduct discussions

(4) Contractors shall complete the provisions incorporated within this solicitation, inclusive of:

A completed copy of the representations and certifications at FAR 52.212-3 or a confirmation of the contractor’s SAM representations and certifications.

Note:

o The offeror shall complete only paragraph (b) of FAR 52.212-3 if the offeror has already completed the annual representations and certification electronically in the System for Award Management (SAM) accessed through https://www.sam.gov.

o If the offeror has not completed the annual representations and certifications electronically in SAM, then the offeror shall complete paragraphs (c) through (v) of FAR 52.212-3.

FAR 52.204-24, Representation Regarding Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment FAR 52.209-7, Information regarding Responsibility Matters FAR 52.229-11, Tax on Certain Foreign Procurements—Notice and Representation DFARS 252.204-7016, Covered Defense Telecommunications Equipment or Services DFARS 252.204-7017, Prohibition on the Acquisition of Covered Defense Telecommunications DFARS 252.229-7001, Tax Relief (Alt I)

If identified as the apparently successful offeror for award, the offeror shall submit the certification required by FAR 52.222-56 (Certification Regarding Trafficking in Persons Compliance Plan) prior to award. As an alternative, the offeror may submit the required certification with its offer.

For provisions completed by the offeror electronically as part of its annual representations and certifications, the contracting officer will consider that information instead of requiring the offeror to complete and submit those provisions. For those provisions and clauses that have not been completed electronically, the offeror must submit them with the offer, or in the specific case of FAR 52.222-56, with the offer or prior to award.

(5) Teaming Arrangements. If the resources of a parent company, affiliate, partner, joint venture member, or subcontractor, will be provided or relied upon for contract performance, (collectively hereafter referred to as team members) the offeror shall:

Provide a complete list of the corporate names (no abbreviations) of all the team members, and their addresses, points of contact, phone numbers, UEI numbers/CAGE Codes if applicable.

Explain the roles and responsibilities of each team member and the resources that each team member will provide to the offeror or be relied upon by the offeror during performance of the contract.

The information above may be used as part of the evaluation of Volume II and/or Volume III.

(ii) VOLUME II: Technical Factor. The technical proposal should be specific and complete in every detail.

Proposals that do not comply with these proposal instructions or that do not address the evaluation criteria may be considered unacceptable and may not be considered for award.

(1) Subfactor 1: Phase-in Plan. The offeror shall provide, in detail, its plans to assemble its workforce at all locations within the six-month phase-in period in accordance with (IAW) the requirements of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) as indicated below to ensure readiness prior to full performance of all contract requirements. The phase-in period shall be no longer than six months; an offeror may propose a shorter period. The phase-in plan shall address, at a minimum, detailed processes and a schedule for:

- Recruitment and hiring all required personnel IAW PWS 1.11 and Technical Exhibit 4, Staffing Plan

- Permits and Licenses IAW PWS 1.18

- Drug Abuse Testing IAW PWS 1.19

- Medical Screening IAW PWS 1.12.b

- Physical Ability Testing IAW PWS 1.15.5

- Conducting Background Checks IAW PWS 1.7.4

- Conducting Language Verification IAW PWS 1.12.a

- Obtaining Installation Access IAW PWS 1.7.3

- Training a full workforce including meeting PWS Technical Exhibit 2, Explosive Detector Dog Team

Training and Certification, during the phase-in period to assure readiness prior to full performance under the contract IAW PWS

(2) Subfactor 2: Management Plan. The offeror shall provide a plan that includes all of the following:

- Maintaining a Workforce. Details that demonstrate execution of the staffing plan (Technical Exhibit 4 of the PWS) that at a minimum describes the process for: ensuring personnel are fully qualified IAW the PWS;

how the offeror will maintain the required schedules; manage the day-to-day leave; maintain staffing, to include staffing off EDD teams, during times of vacations/holidays and during seasonal illnesses such as the flu season;

and ensuring employee retention to limit employee turnover.

- Contract Organizational Structure. An organizational and management structure demonstrating clear lines of authority and communication among all potential Access Control Points (ACPs), to include identification of which positions are performing supervisory and/or management functions. The offeror shall provide details regarding the type of management structure (e.g., centralized, decentralized), and the decision-making processes. If a teaming arrangement is being utilized, identify each team member’s roles and responsibilities.

The Offeror shall provide an organizational chart which includes key personnel as defined in the PWS.

- Risk Management Process. A risk management process for identifying and mitigating risks associated with performance of the solicitation requirements. At a minimum, address the following Government identified risk areas: Compliance with German labor law; Accomplishing training requirements and maintaining required licenses/certifications throughout the life of the contract IAW PWS paragraphs 1.12(f), 1.15, 5.2, applicable Army Regulations, and German law, and emerging safety and security Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTPs); If these situations would occur, describe how the Offeror will manage the contract performance to include employee payment, alternative payment strategies, and other forms of compensation; Performing mission essential contractor services during a crisis IAW PWS Attachment #2 – Mission Essential Contractor Services and DFARS 252.237-7024 section (b)(2)(I through v). The contractor shall submit the plan required by DFARS 252.237-7024 with its offer. In addition to the items in the provision, the offeror shall also address within the plan how it will continue to perform the essential contractor services during times of devaluation of the local currency, high/uncontrolled inflation, and cyberattacks. Note that the Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan will not be subject to page limits per the proposal instructions of this section.

(iii) Volume III: Past Performance Factor. This volume shall contain past performance information regarding Federal, State, Local, or foreign government or commercial contracts meeting the recency and relevancy standards as described in evaluation Factor 2: Past Performance. Offerors may submit past performance references for the prime offeror and/or team members as identified in Volume I: General Documents (iii). Data concerning the offeror shall be provided first, followed by each proposed team member, in alphabetical order. This volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Past Performance References. The Offeror is afforded the opportunity to provide up to seven (7) past performance references. If an offeror submits more than seven (7) references, only the first seven (7) as listed sequentially in Volume III will be considered in the past performance evaluation at the discretion of the Government. The Government is under no obligation to search for additional information in order to identify contracts/performance references. Any additional information or narrative provided beyond what is requested in this section is not required or desired, and may not be evaluated if provided.

This section shall include the following information in the following format to the extent the information is available. If the information is not available, please provide an explanation for why it is not.

(a) Contractor/Team Member place of performance, CAGE Code and DUNS (and/or UEI) Number if applicable. 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) Contract Narrative. For each reference provided, the offeror must provide a specific narrative explanation describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the PWS requirements of this RFP. The narrative should also discuss how the reference meets the recency and relevancy standards as described in evaluation Factor 2: Past Performance. For relevancy consideration, the offeror may request the Government to consider the aggregate value of multiple recent contracts performed by the same entity within a 12-month time period. If the offeror so requests, then the offeror shall provide the aggregate value and provide an explanation for its aggregate value determination. 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 offeror shall also either provide a copy of any Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters received on each contract listed, or state that there were none. If copies are provided, the offeror shall also provide a description of any corrective action implemented. The offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated, in whole or in part, and the type and reasons for the termination. If none of the contract references were terminated, the contractor shall state such.

(3) Team Members. Offerors 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 proposed team members, if any. With regard to any proposed team members, the offeror shall demonstrate that the team member will have meaningful involvement in contract performance. The offeror must also demonstrate how the team member’s past performance relates to the work it will perform, or the resources it will provide, during contract performance, and how that past performance meets the relevancy criteria as described in evaluation Factor 2: Past Performance. Resources may include the team member’s workforce, management, or facilities; however, merely furnishing financial resources is not sufficient to demonstrate meaningful involvement. With regard to proposed major subcontractors specifically, offerors must explain whether and how each major subcontractor will meet the minimum 20% threshold as discussed in evaluation Factor 2: Past Performance. The information provided for the prime offeror and each proposed major subcontractor / team member must include the entire company name, company address, CAGE Code, DUNS (and/or UEI) Number, if applicable, and type of work to be performed by citing the applicable Government PWS subparagraph number.

The Offeror shall provide a consent letter for each major subcontractor and any other team member, as defined in Volume 1, for which the offeror is submitting past performance references in its Volume III. This letter shall allow the release of their present and past performance information to the Offeror. Failure to include written consent from each major subcontractor and any other team member will result in the Government’s inability to contact the Offeror to communicate the findings from its past performance evaluation as related to those companies.

(4) New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its officers 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(s)

(a) For each reference provided, the Offeror shall complete and submit Part I of Attachment #3: Past Performance Questionnaire.

(b) For each reference provided, the Offeror shall email a copy of Attachment #3: Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), with the completed Part I, to its customer or appropriate Government or Prime contractor representative, requesting they complete the PPQ in its entirety. Completed questionnaires shall be emailed directly to both Ms. Stephanie Delosreyes (stephanie.l.delosreyes2.civ@army.mil) and Mr. Labinot Shabani (labiniot.shabani.civ@army.mil). 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 the same email addresses. The list of POCs who were sent a questionnaire shall be submitted as part of the proposal.

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-Mail to POC (month/day). Questionnaires received after the proposal due date may not be considered.

(c) Completed PPQs are not to be reviewed by the Offeror. Once the questionnaire is completed, it is considered Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). The names of the individuals who complete the questionnaires will not be disclosed to the Offeror. Note that Past Performance Questionnaires returned directly to the contracting office will not be subject to page limits per the proposal instructions of this section.

(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: Price Factor.

(1) The offeror shall provide all proposed prices based on the PWS requirements and workload data provided.

The burden of proof for the credibility of all proposed prices rests with the Offeror. All pricing shall be submitted in Euros. Attachment #1 will be used to calculate the total evaluated price (TEP).

(2) The Offeror shall complete Attachment #1 - Price Matrix for the phase-in and all out years by populating the highlighted orange cells. The Exhibit Line Item Number (ELIN) prices are separated by Unburdened Base Price and Burdened Price Excluding Base Price. Unburdened Base Price proposed shall be guard wages only. See FAR 52.212-4(t) Addendum EPA Clause for the items not included in the unburdened base price. Burdened Price Excluding Base Price proposed pricing shall include all other pricing that is not unburdened base price. All orange highlighted cells in the attachment shall be populated for compliance purposes. For areas that the Offeror intends to propose at no cost, Offerors shall populate those cells with a zero (0). Proposals received without a completed Attachment #1 - Price Matrix will be considered non-compliant and may not be considered for contract award. Any documentation furnished to support the Price Matrix are to be provided in a format chosen by the offeror that is easily traceable to the Price Matrix Attachment #1.

(3) Phase-In Price. The offeror shall submit a total firm fixed price for phase-in. This price must be inclusive of all costs associated with the phase-in actions to become fully operational on day one of operations/start of full performance. No additional phase-in costs will be considered in the future. The phase-in period shall be no longer than six (6) months, but an offeror may propose and price a shorter period.

(4) Economic Price Adjustments (EPA) for years four (4) through seven (7). Attachment #1 - Pricing Matrix, automatically calculates the EPA ELINs for all years shaded in green. There is no need for the offeror to add any amounts for the EPA ELINs as the Pricing Matrix will have locked cells for these ELINS and the Government has included a three (3) percent standard escalation rate for the EPA ELINs for price evaluation purposes. The offeror is to provide FFP pricing for non-EPA ELINS (shaded in orange in Attachment #1) for all years. The actual EPA adjustments will be made using FAR 52.212-4(t) Addendum EPA Clause prior to the applicable EPA year per the procedures set out in the clause. The index stated within the clause is to determine the year-to-year adjustment(s) from years four (4) through seven (7) only. It is not intended to direct offerors to use any specific labor index rates when preparing their proposals. Pricing for all non-EPA ELINS is at the discretion of the offerors.

(5) Estimating Techniques and Methods. When responding to the Price Proposal requirements in the solicitation, the Offeror may use any generally accepted estimating technique to develop its proposal. These techniques and basis of estimates shall be described in a word or PDF document. This shall include assumptions made to determine the monthly price (e.g. number of employees, hours).

(6) Pricing assumptions. Summarize all significant pricing assumptions, scope limitations, exceptions and /or qualifications of the Price Proposal.

(7) Period for Acceptance of Proposals/Offers. The suppliers/offeror agrees to hold the prices in its proposal firm for 180 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of proposals/offers.

(8) Cost or Pricing Information Requirements. In accordance with FAR 15.402, 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), “data other than certified cost or pricing data” may be required to support price reasonableness. If, after receipt of proposals, the Contracting Officer determines that there is insufficient information available to determine the reasonableness of the proposed pricing, the Offeror shall be required to submit additional information other than cost or pricing data. If, during the evaluation process, the Contracting Officer determines that adequate competition no longer exists, then cost or pricing data may be required. Do not complete pricing information on the SF 1449. All pricing shall be submitted via Attachment #1 - Price Matrix.

(9) This solicitation does not commit the Government to pay any costs incurred in the preparation and submission of offeror’s proposal(s) or in making any necessary studies for the preparation thereof, or for any visit the Contracting Officer may request for the purpose of clarification of the proposal or for preparation for negotiations.

Paragraph (c) of FAR 52.212-1 is replaced as follows:

Period for Acceptance of Proposals/Offers. The offeror agrees to hold the prices in its proposal firm for 180 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

Paragraph (f) of FAR 52.212-1 is supplemented as follows:

Late submissions, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers: The time specified in the solicitation for receipt of offers is 1600 local time, Kaiserslautern, Germany.

Paragraph (h) of FAR 52.212-1 is replaced as follows:

Multiple Awards. Only one award will be made and multiple awards will not be considered.

B. BASIS FOR AWARD ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2 Evaluation – Commercial Items (DEC 2022)

1. This competitive acquisition will be conducted under FAR Part 12 – Acquisition of Commercial Items with elements of FAR Part 15 – Source Selection Processes and Techniques using a Best Value Tradeoff Process as authorized at FAR 15.101-1; therefore, the proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government given appropriate consideration to the following three (3) evaluation factors will be awarded:

Technical Past Performance Price

The Technical Factor and the Past Performance Factor will be evaluated using a qualitative assessment by assigning adjectival ratings. The Technical subfactors are of approximately equal importance. The Technical Factor is more important than past performance. All non-price factors, when combined, are approximately equal in importance to price. In order to be considered for award, an Offeror must receive a rating of “Acceptable” or higher under all technical subfactors, and a rating of “Neutral Confidence” or higher under Past Performance.

The Government expects to make a single award with a possible eight-year ordering period inclusive of the six-month phase-in and a six-month option period IAW FAR 52.217-8 as a result of this RFP. The Government will make an award to the responsible Offeror (in accordance with FAR 9.1) whose proposal conforms to the solicitation and offers the overall best value to the Government based on the established evaluation criteria set forth in the solicitation.

Offerors are cautioned that the award may be made to other than the lowest price offeror or the most highly rated proposal. Additionally, the Government may incorporate into the contract, in whole or in part, performance or capabilities proposed above mandatory minimums or other attributes of a proposal deemed beneficial to the Government.

2. EVALUATION APPROACH

a. The Government intends to award without discussions resulting from the evaluation of proposals in accordance with this provision and addendum. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions.

b. All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by a team of Government personnel. Contents of written proposals and written responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) (if applicable) will be evaluated IAW with the criteria set forth below. No assumptions will be made by Government evaluators regarding areas not defined in the Offeror's written proposal.

c. Prior to award, the Government shall make an affirmative determination of responsibility by analyzing whether the apparent successful Offeror complies with the requirements of FAR 9.1. An apparent awardee found not to be responsible will not receive an award. The Government may directly determine the responsibility of the apparent successful Offerors subcontractor(s) with the requirements of FAR 9.104-4.

d. Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) Risk Assessment.

The Government will consider Risk in accordance with the provision at DFARS 252.204-7024, Notice on the Use of the Supplier Performance Risk System. The Government will consider Supplier Risk as described in the provision. The Government will NOT consider Item Risk or Price Risk as described in provision. For purposes of this Risk assessment, the Government will only consider information contained in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS). Any questions or concerns the offeror has concerning its SPRS risk assessments should be addressed as described in paragraph (d) of the provision. To be eligible for award, the offeror must be considered Acceptable in accordance with the rating descriptions below. Offerors without a Supplier Risk assessment in SPRS shall be deemed Acceptable under this factor. Offerors with an Unacceptable rating per the description below will be ineligible for award.

Acceptable: Offeror has a Supplier Risk Score of Blue, Purple, Green, or Black.

Unacceptable: Offeror has a Supplier Risk Score of Yellow, Red, or Grey.

Note: The Supplier Performance Risk System Risk Assessment will not be considered as part of any Best Value Tradeoff decision. Rather, the Risk Assessment will only be used to determine eligibility for award. For offerors deemed Acceptable under this Risk Assessment, the offerors’ Supplier Risk Score will have no bearing on the award decision.

3. EVALUATION CRITERIA

Factor 1: Technical. The Government will perform an integrated assessment of each subfactor using the criteria set forth below to determine a combined Technical Risk/Rating for each subfactor and an overall rating for the factor.

Subfactor 1: Phase-In Plan. The Government will evaluate the required content as described in 52.212-1 addenda to determine the extent to which the phase-in plan is feasible and will result in successful execution of full contract performance at all locations within or before the end of the six-month phase-in period. The evaluation will take into consideration the offeror’s proposed approach with respect to:

- Recruiting and Hiring;

- Permits and Licenses;

- Drug Abuse Testing;

- Medical Screening;

- Physical Agility Testing;

- Conducting Background Checks;

- Conducting Language Verification;

- Obtaining Installation Access; and

- Training a full workforce including Explosive Detection Dogs during the phase-in period to assure readiness prior to full performance under the contract.

Subfactor 2: Management Plan. The Government will evaluate the required content as described in 52.212-1 addendum to determine the extent to which the management plan is feasible and will result in successful performance of contract requirements in consideration of the following:

- Maintaining a Workforce;

- Contract Organizational Structure; and

- Risk Management Process.

The Technical factor and subfactor ratings and definitions are as follows:

TABLE 1 – COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

Rating Description

Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Note: The combined technical/risk rating will utilize the combined/technical risk definitions listed in Table 2, above in conjunction with the definitions in Table 3, below.

Table 2 – TECHNICAL RISK DEFINITIONS

Rating Description

Low Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor efforts and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may have a moderate potentially to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to have high potential to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will unlikely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Unacceptable Proposal contains a deficiency or a combination of significant weaknesses that causes an unacceptable level of risk of unsuccessful performance.

Evaluation Definitions:

Significant Strength is an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal with appreciable merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the considerable advantage of the Government during contract performance.

Strength is an aspect of an offeror's proposal with merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the advantage of the Government during contract performance.

Significant Weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

Weakness means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiency is a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Uncertainty is any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offer is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission, or mistake).

Factor 2: Past Performance.

a. 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.

b. The Government will focus its inquiries on the offeror’s (and team members) record of performance as it relates to the solicitation requirements, including cost, schedule, performance, and management of subcontractors.

The Government will only consider the past performance of a team member if that team member will have meaningful involvement in contract performance, and the team member’s past performance relates to the work it will perform, or the resources it will provide, during contract performance. However, regarding subcontractor team member(s) as defined in Addendum 52.212-1 Proposal Instructions Volume I, the Government will only consider major subcontractors for the purpose of past performance. For the purposes of this evaluation factor, major subcontractors are defined as members of an offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform 20% 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 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, Local, or Foreign government or commercial contracts meeting the recency and relevancy criteria discussed further below.

c. The past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance. The recency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance will be considered. More relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. A significant achievement, problem, problem resolution or lack of relevant data in any element can become an important consideration in the assessment process. An adverse finding in any element or a lack of relevant data in regards to a performance issue may result in an overall lower confidence assessment rating. The Government may also consider past performance that occurs after the RFP closing date and prior to award provided the contract meets the relevancy and currency requirements discussed below.

f. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality. To be considered, past performance references must meet the recency and relevancy standards described below.

Recency: Recency is the time period that past performance references must meet in order to be considered.

A recent contract is a contract under which any performance, delivery, or corrective action has occurred within the following time standards: within five (5) years prior to this solicitation release date, even if that contract award date is outside this five (5) year window.

Relevancy: The Government will evaluate the relevancy of past performance in terms of scope, magnitude and complexity as follows:

Relevant scope means contracts involving armed security guard services.

Relevant Magnitude means contracts with an estimated annual value equal to or greater than €10 Million. Contracts with an annual value less than the aforementioned value are not relevant and will not be considered. If the offeror requests, then the Government may consider the offeror's provided aggregate value of multiple recent contracts, where recent contracts are defined above. Aggregate value is defined as the sum value of multiple contracts performed by the same entity within a 12-month time period.

Relevant complexity means contracts for 24 hours / 7 days services guarding multiple access locations.

There are four levels of relevancy as described in the table below:

Table 3 – 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.

Quality of Performance. The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. A separate quality assessment rating is not assigned.

f. Performance Confidence Assessment: Using the table below, the Government will assess the degree of confidence it has in the expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on the Offerors demonstrated record of recent and relevant performance.

Table 4 - Past Performance Confidence Assessment Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

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 factor 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.

Factor 3: Price.

Total Evaluated Price (TEP). The Government will evaluate offers for award by calculating a TEP for each offeror.

The TEP will be calculated as the sum of the offeror’s proposed prices, from Attachment #1 - Price Matrix, for the possible eight year ordering period, including the phase-in and the six-month option period allowed under FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services. To account for the option period(s) possible under Clause 52.217-8 - Option to

Extend Services, the Government will take the price for all CLINs of Year 7, prorate it to a six-month value, and add it to the sum of all CLINs. All unit prices that comprise the TEP are contractually binding. Evaluation of all ordering periods shall not obligate the Government to the entire ordering period. An omitted price may result in proposal elimination.

The price proposal will be evaluated for completeness, reasonableness, and balance.

1. Completeness: The Government will review the pricing submission for completeness and compliance with FAR 52.212-1 and its addendum. Incomplete price submissions may not be evaluated and the proposal may be eliminated from the competition.

2. Reasonableness: The offerors price proposal will be evaluated based on the results of a price analysis, using the proposal analysis techniques and procedures as defined in FAR 15.404-1(b) and DFARS 215.404-1 to ensure a fair and reasonable price.

3. Balance: The Government will analyze…