W58RGZ24R0117-0001.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

Firm Fixed Price

0001 2024JUN17

W58RGZ

ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND-REDSTONE

REDSTONE ARSENAL AL 35898-5280

KELLY N. BAYHA

EMAIL: KELLY.N.BAYHA.CIV@ARMY.MIL

W58RGZ-24-R-0117

2024MAY21

X

X

/SIGNED/

2 signed

SEE SECOND PAGE FOR DESCRIPTION

1 5

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: KELLY N. BAYHA

Buyer Office Symbol/Telephone Number: CCAM-CAC-B/(000)000-0000

Type of Contract 1: Firm Fixed Price

Kind of Contract: Supply Contracts and Priced Orders

*** End of Narrative A0000 ***

A-1. The purpose of Amendment 0001 to ACE soliciation: W58RGZ-24-R-0117 is to update Section M of the solicitation, update the TDP to remove drawings and supply answers to the Vendor Questions submitted.

A-2. All changes are underlined. The updates to Section M include:

- Added 'Basis of Issuance' Section M, M-1

- Updated verbiage, Change "May" to "Shall" Section M-1

- Re-alignment of steps of evaluation, re-aligned step 1-3 in Section M-1

A-3. Remove the following drawings and PDs from the TDP that were inadvertently added.

- 1081553

- 1081553 - SH01-REV A

- 1081553 - SH02-REV A

- 1081554

- 1081555

- 1005851Bsh01

- 1005851Bsh02

- 1005852Bsh01

- 1050905B

- Cloth FR GL -PD-07-12 REV 9 Final 3 May 2016-FRACU and ACP

- FINAL CLOTH FR GL-PD-07-12 REV 7 8-5-14

- GL PD 10-07 Cordura 11-6-09 (3)

A-4. Except for herein, all other terms and conditions remain unchanged and in full efect.

*** END OF NARRATIVE A0002 ***

2 5

W58RGZ-24-R-0117

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M-1. General

Basis of Award. The award will be made to the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal. Proposals will be evaluated for_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ technical acceptability but will not be ranked using the non-price Factors (and Subfactors). For an Offeror to be considered for_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ award, the proposal must receive an Acceptable rating in every non-price Factor. A proposal receiving a rating of Unacceptable in any______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ non-price Factor will not be eligible for award.________________________________________________

The Government will evaluate all proposals for technical acceptability, then conduct a price evaluation of each. The Government intends to award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications, as warranted and as described in FAR

15.306(a)).

Therefore, the offerors initial proposals should contain the offerors best terms in all areas. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the PCO later determines them to be necessary. The Government intends to award to one offeror on a Lowest

Price Technically Acceptable basis in order to procure the ACE Production requirement. A rating of Unacceptable for any factor or sub-factor shall lead to an overall rating of Unacceptable resulting in elimination of the offeror for award consideration. The source selection process will be conducted as follows:

Step One: Proposals will be evaluated for technical acceptability under the non-price factors in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in Sections M-2 and M-4. Proposal(s) will be evaluated for Technical and Responsibility Determination Factors.

Step Two: All Offerors proposals will be ranked lowest to highest by price The U.S. Government will determine each proposals total evaluated price as calculated using estimated quantities. The price data from each offerors completed Section J Attachment Price

Input Workbook Tab: ACE Prices will be used to calculate the evaluated price in accordance with Section M-3 Price. The USG will complete evaluation of price in accordance with Section M-3. The Procuring Contracting Officer may limit the competitive range to no more than five offerors.

Step Three: The U.S. Government may conduct a pre-award survey of an offeror at this point in the source selection evaluation. Award will be made upon identification of a successful offer with the lowest price and acceptable non-price factors. If at any time during the evaluation process or pre-award survey an offeror is found to be unacceptable, then the offeror may be eliminated from further evaluation. If the lowest price offeror is found unacceptable, the U.S. Government will continue evaluation with the next lowest price offeror.

A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) of subject matter experts will be established to evaluate all proposals submitted. The evaluation team will be subdivided into factor teams, Technical and Price. Each Factor Team will be led by a Factor Team Chief.

Furthermore, each Factor Team will be responsible for the evaluation of the specific volume associated with their factor. Government personnel shall serve as primary evaluators. This source selection may utilize nongovernment personnel as advisors from the following companies:

a. DCS Corporation

ATTN: Peter Mensah

Contract Manager

6909 Metro Park Dr., Suite 500

Alexandria, VA 22310-3273

Cite: Contract Number: W15P7T-17-D-0145/W91CRB-19-F-0249

Email: pmensah@dcscorp.com

Phone: (571) 227-6116

b. Wavelink

ATTN: Rhonda Madison

Project Control Analyst/Pricing

7800 Madison Blvd, Suite 504

Huntsville, AL, 35806

Cite: Contract Number: W31P4Q-18-F-B002

Email: rmadison@wavelink.com

Phone: (256) 776-7216x.710

Non-government advisors may participate in the proposal evaluation process on an as needed basis and per the formal direction of the

Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO). Responsibilities for nongovernment persons shall be specific to a subject matter expertise review and guidance as related to the responsiveness of the proposals to technical requirements. Nongovernmental personnel shall have no input in determining proposal ratings or rankings. Any nongovernment person will act as a subject matter expert in determining whether solicitation requirements can be met but will not be permitted to determine ratings or rankings.

The Pre-award Survey, if conducted, will be led by Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). Guidelines for requesting a Pre-award

Survey are provided in Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations System (DFARS) Procedures, Guidance and Information (PGI) 209.106 Pre-

3 5

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

Award surveys. The SSEB evaluations and determinations will be documented in worksheets and compiled into a final report. The SSEB will use the Virtual Contracting Enterprise Acquisition Source Selection Interactive Support Tool (ASSIST) platform for the electronic submission of proposals and recording of the SSEB evaluation documentation.

2) Evaluation Documentation

a) Worksheets. The evaluation worksheets in Appendix B- Technical and Appendix C Price shall be used to record all associated evaluation results. The individual evaluator shall record his/her rating and findings for each sub-factor on the appropriate worksheet. The worksheets shall provide the Evaluation Criteria and the Standard of Proof supporting the rating determination of acceptable or unacceptable. Individual evaluator worksheets are important as narrative support and documentation for the evaluation and shall be maintained for record purposes. The narrative justification for the evaluation results will be finalized at the conclusion of all deliberations. The Responsibility Determination Factor does not have worksheets. The Factor Team Chief will document determination in the Final Report. The Pre-award Survey, if done, will be documented in the Final Report as an appendix.

Final Report.The Final Report shall document each Factor Team Chiefs findings and determinations, in narrative description with supporting detail, upon completion of proposal evaluation.

M-2 Technical Factor Technical: Evaluated proposals will receive an Acceptable or Unacceptable rating for the Technical

Factor evaluation. The evaluation process will determine whether an offerors Production Capability, Quality Assurance, Configuration

Management, and Recent and Relevant Experience are technically acceptable in the following areas:

i.) Production Capability The evaluation will determine if the offeror meets the solicitation requirements for production capability to order, receive, manufacture, assemble and inspect, package and ship at the production rates listed below in Production Rates per

Ordering Period. The evaluation will determine if the offeror has a material/manufacturing resource planning program to support the production capability.

Production Rates per Ordering Period (Ordering Period is equivalent to 12 months) ACE Vest / Harness Assembly PN 1081467-1-X: Qty

4,000 over all sizes ACE LPU Assembly (LPU-42/P) PN 1081668-1-1: Qty 3,200 Aviation Holster Assembly PN 2-4-1027-X, Type III, Class

4: Qty 4,000 over all sizes Mouthpiece Cover PN 1081549-1-1: Qty 3,200 Bottle Pouch PN 1081761-1-1: Qty 3,200 EAWIS Basic Pouch PN

1081760-1-1: Qty 2,000 Extension Tether PN 1081572-1-X: Qty 1,900 over all sizes Personal Restraint Tether W/ Swivel PN 1050903-1-X:

Qty 1,750 over all sizes

(ii) Quality Assurance The evaluation will determine if the offeror meets the solicitation requirements for having a Quality System IAW

ANSI/ASQ/ISO 9001 or AS9100 and ISO 17025 or equivalent system as agreed between the contractor and the Government and if the offeror meets the solicitation requirements for managing subcontractor performance and quality. Evidence may be via copy of certificate or description of compliance justifying the claim of equivalency to each of the requirements within the standard under which equivalency is being claimed. The offerors process for conduct of First Article Inspection and Test will be evaluated to determine if the offeror meets the solicitation requirements for FAI/FAT IAW Solicitation Section C, Statement of Work Paragraph 5.6.

(iii) Configuration Management The evaluation will determine if the offeror has an established configuration management program that provides for receipt of USG developed engineering change proposals, internal change proposals, and status accounting process for release of documentation to manufacturing IAW EIA-649.

(iv) Relevant and Recent Experience - The evaluation will determine if the offeror has provided at least one example of recent and relevant experience for each aspect of the production requirement. Recent experience is within the last five years. Relevant experience is work that is similar in nature to each aspect of this production requirement.

M-3 Price Factor.

The Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) proposal will be evaluated in accordance with following:

Pricing evaluation shall be based on adequate price competition in accordance with FAR 15.403-1(c)(1)(i)).

Evaluated Pricing: The Evaluated Pricing (EP) will be calculated by the Price Team using Government estimated quantities and the offerors proposed pricing. The Total Estimated Price will sum the ACE CLINs, FAI/T CLINs, and Component Parts CLINs pricing as calculated by the Price Team. The Engineering Change Proposal CLIN will not be included and is not priced by the offeror. Contract Data

Requirements List (CDRLs) CLIN are not separately priced.

The offers will subsequently be evaluated utilizing price analysis techniques to determine if the price is complete, balanced and reasonable. Price analysis techniques may include but shall not be limited to historical data comparison and or comparison to

Independent Government Cost Estimate where historical data is not available.

(a) Compliance with Section L-3 VOLUME II. PRICE: The Price proposal submitted by the offeror will be evaluated for compliance based upon the submission requirements contained in Section L-3 VOLUME II. PRICE instructions.

4 5

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

(b) Unbalanced Pricing: The offerors Price proposal will be evaluated for unbalanced pricing as defined in FAR 15.404-1(g). 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 15.404-1(g) for information on unbalanced pricing.

(c) Reasonableness: The Price proposal submitted by the offeror will be evaluated to determine if it is reasonable. In accordance with

FAR 31.201-3, a cost/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

M-4 Responsibility Determination. In order to be determined Responsible, an offerors proposal must be Acceptable for all administrative matters. A compliance check of the offerors proposal against the requirements in Section L of this RFP will be conducted.

Offerors determined to be Responsible will receive Acceptable rating for the Responsibility Determination. This evaluation will include administrative matters while the necessity of conduct of the Pre-Award Survey will be determined by the PCO.

(i) Pre-Award Survey. An offeror may have to pass a full or tailored Pre-Award Survey conducted by a government team. The decision for conduct of a Pre-Award Survey will be within the Procuring Contracting Officers (PCO)discretion. The PCO may use CPARs information to determine need for Pre-Award Survey. The Pre-Award Survey, if conducted, will be conducted at the offerors manufacturing facility. Pre-

Award Surveys may also be conducted at the facilities of subcontractors if offerors propose that subcontractors produce a major end item. The following may be evaluated: Production Capability; Quality Assurance Capability to include Configuration Management, Government Property Control and Packaging; Financial Capability; and Accounting System. A deficiency or weakness in any one or more of these areas of evaluation may result in a determination that the offerors Pre-Award Survey is Unacceptable. An Acceptable evaluation is defined as Pre-Award Survey demonstrating that the offeror has the capabilities listed herein above and is capable of performing the required effort. A rating of Acceptable will be assigned to offerors determined to have an Acceptable Pre-Award Survey.

(ii) Other Administrative Matters. The proposal will be evaluated to determine that all other administrative matters are in order for potential contract with the U.S. Government. Proposals exhibiting currency and completeness in Other Administrative Matters will be rated as Acceptable. The following will be evaluated:

i) To be determined as responsive, proposals must comply with all terms, conditions, and requirements stated in the solicitation.

ii) Certifications and Representations and Other Matters. Currency with Certifications and Representations in System for Award

Management (SAM.gov), will be evaluated. If on-line SAM is incomplete, submission in response to the clauses in the solicitations

Section K will be evaluated.

iii) Eligibility for award. In good standing and debarment status will be evaluated.

iv) Possession of a current Contractor and Government Entity Code (CAGE)

v) Possession of a current Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) and DUNS Number.

*** END OF NARRATIVE M0001 ***

5 5