W56HZV16R0099-0003.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. Contract ID Code Page Of

2. Amendment/Modification No.

3. Effective Date

4. Requisition/Purchase Req No.

5. Project No. (If applicable)

6. Issued By Code 7. Administered By (If other than Item 6) Code

8. Name And Address Of Contractor (No., Street, City, County, State and Zip Code)

9A. Amendment Of Solicitation No.

9B. Dated (See Item 11)

10A. Modification Of Contract/Order No.

10B. Dated (See Item 13) Code Facility Code

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 amendments: (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 ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS

It Modifies The Contract/Order No. As Described In Item 14.

A. This Change Order is Issued Pursuant To: 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 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 15C. Date Signed 16B. United States Of America 16C. Date Signed

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

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITIONS UNUSABLE

30-105-02 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

SEE SCHEDULE

X

Cost Plus Fixed Fee

0003 2017JAN06

W56HZV

U.S. ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND

WARREN, MICHIGAN 48397-5000

RORY THELEN

EMAIL: RORY.G.THELEN.CIV@MAIL.MIL

W56HZV-16-R-0099

2016DEC02

X

X

/SIGNED/

2 signed

SEE SECOND PAGE FOR DESCRIPTION

1 6

CONTINUATION SHEET

Reference No. of Document Being Continued Page of

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION A - SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

Buyer Name: RORY THELEN

Buyer Office Symbol/Telephone Number: CCTA-ASG-B/(586)282-7862

Type of Contract 1: Cost Plus Fixed Fee

Kind of Contract: Research and Development Contracts

*** End of Narrative A0000 ***

Amendment 0003

The purpose of this Amendment 0003 is to update the language in paragraphs M.7.1; M.7.2; and M.7.3, found in Section M of this solicitation.

*** END OF NARRATIVE A0004 ***

2 6

W56HZV-16-R-0099 0003

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1.1 Overview

The Government intends to award one cost-reimbursement contract as a result of this solicitation. An award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is eligible for award and, per the Source Selection Authority's decision, represents the best value to the Government in accordance with the criteria set forth below.

The offeror's proposals must be eligible for award in accordance with M.1.3. Additionally, there are three (3) factors which will be considered in a Best Value Tradeoff:

(a) Factor 1: Past Performance (M.5)

(b) Factor 2: Cost/Price Factor (M.6)

(c) Factor 3: Small Business Participation Factor (M.7)

The relative order of importance of these Factors is described in paragraph M.4 below.

M.1.2 Proposals which are eligible for award in accordance with Section M.1.3 will be subject to the Source Selection Trade-off process, considering both the evaluation Factors and their relative order of importance as cited in Section M.4.1, to identify the proposal which represents the best value and is the most advantageous to the Government.

M.1.2.1. The Government will weigh the evaluated proposals (other than the Cost/Price Factor) against the total evaluated cost/price to the Government. As part of the best value determination, the relative strengths, weaknesses, and risks of each proposal will be considered in selecting the offer that is most advantageous and represents the best value to the Government.

M.1.2.2 The Government may choose not to award a contract where it concludes that no proposal exists that both: (i) complies with all solicitation terms and conditions; and (ii) is judged at least technically acceptable, offering at least a reasonable probability of achieving program requirements.

M.1.2.3. Importance of Cost/Price

Award will be made to the Offeror whose proposal is: (1) is otherwise eligible for award under M.1.3 below, and (2) represents the best value to the Government. This may not be the offeror with the lowest evaluated cost/price. However, the closer offerors' evaluations are to each other in those Factors other than the Cost/Price Factor, the more important cost/price becomes in the decision. Notwithstanding the relative order of importance of the four evaluation Factors stated herein, cost/price may be controlling when:

(a) proposals are otherwise considered approximately equal in non-cost/price factors; or

(b) an otherwise superior proposal is unaffordable; or

(c) the advantages of a higher rated, higher cost/price proposal are not considered to be worth the cost/price premium.

M.1.3 To be eligible for award:

(a) The offeror must be determined responsible (see Section M.3.1.5); and

(b) The proposal must include no Deficiencies (per FAR Part 15.001)

M.2 Rejection of Offers

The Government may reject any proposal if in the Government's best interest. Examples include, but are not limited to, the following proposal conditions. A proposal may be rejected when it:

(a) Merely offers to perform work according to the solicitation terms or fails to present more than a statement indicating its capability to comply with the solicitation terms without support and elaboration as specified in Section L of this solicitation; or

(b) Is unbalanced as to price. An unbalanced offer is one which is based on pricing significantly higher or lower for one given period versus another period or the price of one or more contract line items is significantly over- or under-stated. There must be a direct relationship between the effort expended and its price for each CLIN and performance period;

(c) Fails to meaningfully respond to the proposal preparation instructions that are specified in Section L of this solicitation; or

3 6

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

(d) Is unaffordable; or

(e) Proposes exceptions to the attachments, exhibits, enclosures, or other solicitation terms and conditions; or

(f) Offerors who take exception to any term or condition of this solicitation, or that fails to provide information, representations, or certifications as required in Sections K and L of this solicitation may result in rejection of the proposal without further evaluation.

M.3 Evaluation and Source Selection Process

M.3.1 Evaluation Process

Selection of the successful offeror(s) will be made following an assessment of each proposal, based on the response to the information called for in Section L and against the solicitation requirements and the evaluation criteria described herein. Proposals will be evaluated as specified herein under each Factor. The Government may conduct a crosswalk between the information provided in the offeror's proposal volumes to assess whether the offeror has submitted consistent proposal information.

M.3.1.2 Source Selection Authority (SSA)

The SSA is the official designated to direct the source selection process and select the best-value offeror for contract award.

M.3.1.3 Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB)

A SSEB has been established by the Government to evaluate proposals in response to this solicitation. The SSEB comprises technically qualified Government personnel who have been selected to conduct the evaluation in accordance with the Evaluation Criteria herein.

Careful, full, and impartial consideration will be given to the evaluation of all proposals received pursuant to this solicitation.

M.3.1.4 Award with Discussions

In accordance with FAR 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisition (ALT 1) in Section L, which advises whether the

Government intends to conduct discussions with offerors who are within the Competitive Range, discussions are expected to be conducted in accordance with FAR Part 15.306. Since written and oral discussions are limited prior to any competitive range determination (FAR

Part 15.306 (c)), it is vitally important that the offeror's initial proposals are complete and comprehensive.

M.3.1.5 Determination of Responsibility

Per FAR 9.103, contracts will be placed only with contractors that the PCO determines to be responsible. Prospective offerors, in order to qualify as sources for this acquisition, must be able to demonstrate that they meet the standards set forth in FAR 9.104. In addition, the Government may assess the offeror's financial and management capabilities to meet the solicitation requirements. The

Government reserves the right to conduct a Pre-Award Survey on any or all offerors or their subcontractors to aid the PCO in the evaluation of each offeror's responsibility. No award can be made to an offeror who has been determined to be not responsible by the

PCO. To make sure that the offeror meets the responsibility criteria at FAR Part 9.104, the Government may:

(a) Arrange a visit to the offeror's plant and perform a necessary Pre-Award Survey, or

(b) Request that the offeror provide financial, technical, production, or quality background information.

If the requested information is not submitted within seven (7) calendar days from the date of the receipt of the request, or if an offeror refuses to allow the Government access to the offeror's facility, the Government may determine the offeror non-responsible. If the Government visits the offeror's facility, the offeror shall have current data relevant to the proposal available for Government personnel to review.

M.4. Evaluation Criteria:

M.4.1. There are three (3) evaluation Factors for Best Value Tradeoff.

(1) Past Performance

(2) Cost/Price

(3) Small Business Participation

Relative Order of Importance

4 6

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

Past Performance is more important than Cost/Price. Cost/Price is more important than Small Business Participation.

As required to be defined by FAR 15.304(e), the non-Cost/Price factors are significantly more important than Cost/Price when combined.

M.4.1.1 Importance of Cost/Price. Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal is: (i) otherwise eligible for award under M.1.3, (ii) is technically acceptable, and (iii) represents the best value to the Government. This may not be the offeror with the lowest Total Evaluated Cost/Price. However, the closer the offerors' proposals are to each other in those Factors other than Cost/Price

Factor, the more important Cost/Price becomes in the decision. Notwithstanding the relative order of importance of the evaluation

Factors stated herein, Cost/Price may be the deciding factor when:

(a) proposals are otherwise considered approximately equal in non-Cost/Price Factors; or

(b) the advantages of a higher-rated, higher Cost/Price proposal are not considered to be worth the Cost/Price premium.

M.5. Past Performance Factor (Factor 1, Proposal Volume I)

M.5.1. The Past Performance Factor will be evaluated using an assessment of the extent to which it can be expected that the offeror will successfully meet the SimBRS contract requirements based on the offeror's stated record of past performance on recent and relevant contracts as it relates to the offeror's proposed solution. This assessment will result in a Confidence Rating which will be based upon the extent to which recent prior past performance is relevant to the contract requirements as listed in L.2.1 in this solicitation.

M.5.1.1. The Government will evaluate the information obtained to determine the degree of similarity in scope, magnitude and complexity, between the contracts submitted for review under this factor and the effort required for this solicitation. Those contracts with the greatest ability to predict an offeror's success for this solicitation will be rated the most relevant.

M.5.1.2. The Government will also evaluate how well the offeror performed on these contracts via responses to the Past Performance

Questionnaires (reference paragraph L.2.1.4 of this solicitation). The offeror may also be evaluated based on other internal Government or private source information. In this regard, the Government may utilize the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System

(CPARS), the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), and/or any other available Government resources to identify recent and relevant offeror performance and ratings.

M.5.1.2.1. Past Performance information will be combined to determine a Confidence Level, representing the degree to which it can be expected, based on the offeror's past performance, that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

M.5.2. Unknown Risk: Offerors without a record of relevant Past Performance, upon which to base a meaningful performance risk ____________ prediction, will be rated as "Neutral", which is neither favorable nor unfavorable.

M.5.3. The primary purpose of the information submitted for the above Factor is for evaluating past performance. The offeror shall not assume that substantiating data submitted for this Factor will be considered in the evaluation of other Factors of the proposal.

However, the Government reserves the right to utilize Volume IV substantiating data in other areas of the evaluation at its sole discretion.

M.6. Evaluation of Volume 2: Cost/Price Factor

M.6.1 The Government will evaluate the Cost/Price Factor as follows (Reference the proposal submission information required in Section

L):

M.6.1.1. Total Evaluated Cost/Price

M.6.1.1.1 The Total Evaluated Cost/Price for this effort will include: (i) the total evaluated Cost/Price for the completion of Task

Order 001; and (ii) the proposed Composite Labor Rates, across all five (5) potential ordering periods for all eight (8) composite labor categories on the basis that it affects the potential total cost/price over the potential contract period.

M.6.1.1.2 The assessment of the Total Evaluated Cost/Price for the completion of Task Order 001 and proposed composite labor rates will include consideration of the reasonableness, cost realism, and completeness, as follows:

M.6.1.1.2.1 Reasonableness: The Government will evaluate the cost/price reasonableness of the offerors' proposed costs/prices to ensure ______________ that, in their nature and amount, they do not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business. The techniques described in FAR 15.404-1(b) and FAR 15.404-1(c) may be employed by the Government to determine that a cost/price is fair and reasonable and not excessive.

M.6.1.1.2.1.2 Cost Realism: The Government will conduct a cost realism analysis in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(d) to determine the ____________ realism of the proposed elements of cost for this effort. The Government will evaluate cost realism by independently reviewing and

5 6

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

evaluating the specific elements of the offeror's proposed cost estimate to determine whether the cost realistically reflects the offeror's proposed approach to meet program requirements and objectives. The result of the cost realism evaluation will be a determination of the most probable cost to the Government (which consists of cost and fee, if applicable). The most probable cost will be determined by adjusting the offeror's proposed cost to reflect any additions or reductions to cost elements to realistic levels based on the results of the cost realism analysis.

M.6.1.1.2.1.3. Completeness: The Government requires complete proposals with respect to cost/price. A complete cost/price proposal shall ____________ include all information required by the solicitation.

M.7. Small Business Participation Factor (Factor 4, Proposal Volume V)

M.7.1.* The Government will evaluate the extent of the offeror's approach to achieving the Government's objective of providing maximum practicable opportunities in meeting the small business participation goals identified in this solicitation. The evaluation will be based on the extent of small business participation proposed and credibility of the data provided in the proposal measured against the

Small Business Participation Factor goals for this solicitation. As part of this assessment, the Government will consider the offeror's performance in complying with past Small Business Subcontracting Plans if they were required on prior contracts. Please note the objectives/goals as reflected in the pricing spreadsheet (Attachment 0005 GFPM), which is defined as the total proposed amount for all of the Basic CLINs and all of the Option CLINs. The Government's small business participation goals for this solicitation are:

11.6% for Small Business (SB)

1.6% for Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB)

1.6% for Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB)

1.0% for HUBZone Small Business (HZSB)

1.0% for Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB)

1.0% for Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB)

M.7.2.* Evaluation of Proposed Goals Above or Below Government Objectives/Goals

Where the offeror proposes small business participation higher than the Government's goals and the Government has determined that achievement of said small business participation is credible, or where the offeror is assessed as credibly being able to achieve or exceed the Government's goals, the Government may assign the offeror a strength against its proposal. Where the offeror proposes small business participation lower than the Government's goals, or where the offeror is assessed as not credibly being able to achieve the

Government's goals, the Government may assign a weakness or significant weakness against its proposal.

M.7.3.* Contractual Goals

If the awardee is other than a small business, the data submitted as part of the Small Business Participation Factor shall be consistent with the Small Business Subcontracting Plan which will be incorporated in the resultant contract, regardless of whether the Offeror proposed goals for the Small Business Participation Factor above, at, or below the Government's solicitation goals.

*Updated by Amendment 0003.

*** END OF NARRATIVE M0002 ***

6 6