W911QY-24-R-0018 M320 Amendment 0001.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

The purpose of this amendment is to clarify in Section M.1.1. this is a low est priced, technically acceptable acquisition.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 4

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 29-Jul-2024

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 W911QY24R0018

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

25-Jul-2024

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 is extended, X 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 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

29-Jul-2024

CODE

W6QK ACC-APG NATICK

CONTRACTING DIVISION

BLDG 1 GENERAL GREENE AVENUE

NATICK MA 01760-5011

W911QY 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W911QY24R0018

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION

M.1. BASIS FOR AWARD

M.1.1. The objective is to determine which proposal(s) offer the best value to the Government IAW the requirements of the Request for Proposal (RFP). This is a small buisness set-aside acquisition. The Government intends to award a Firm-Fixed Priced (FFP) contract to the offeror with the lowest priced, technically acceptable proposal. The government does reserve the right to award no contracts as a result of this solicitation if the Contracting Officer determines it is in the government’s best interest to do so.

Evaluation methodology for the procurement consists of three factors:

Factor 1: Technical Sub-factor 1: Product Demonstration Models (PDMs) Sub-factor 2: Delivery Sub-factor 3: Quality

Factor 2: Past Performance Factor 3: Price

M.1.2. To receive consideration for award, proposals must achieve acceptable evaluations in all non-cost factors and the Cost/Price factor must be judged to be fair and reasonable. An evaluation of unacceptable at the sub-factor level will cause the entire factor to be rated as unacceptable. An evaluation rating of unacceptable at the factor level will cause the entire proposal to be evaluated as unacceptable.

M.1.3 The Government reserves the right to award a contract without discussions. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The Government may reject any or all offers if such action is in the public interest and waive informalities and minor irregularities in offers received.

M.1.4. After evaluating all proposals in accordance with FAR 15.305(a), the Contracting Officer (KO) may also determine that the number of most highly rated proposals that might otherwise be included in the competitive range exceeds the number at which efficient competition can be conducted. Offeror(s) are advised the KO, for purposes of efficiency, may also limit the number of competitive range offeror(s).

M.2. EVALUATION FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

M.2.1. FACTOR I: TECHNICAL – The Technical factor shall be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable and is comprised of three sub-factors:

Sub-factor 1: Product Demonstration Models (PDMs) Sub-factor 2: Delivery Sub-factor 3: Quality

Any sub-factor rating of unacceptable will result in an unacceptable Technical Factor rating.

M.2.1.1 The ratings for the Technical Sub-factor 1: Product Demonstration Model (PDM) will be expressed as an adjectival assessment as defined below.

ACCEPTABLE: The PDM meets the requirements including visual, dimensional, and material/shade of the specification (GL-PD-05-03 and applicable drawings) and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The offeror shall produce the PDM and the production quantities at the same facility where production will occur. Offerors will list the place of manufacture for the PDM sample and the manufacture place of the production quantities in Section G in responding to the solicitation. The PDM must contain zero major defects as defined in Tables IV and V of GL-PD-05-03. Two or less minor defects are acceptable.

UNACCEPTABLE: The PDM does not meet the requirements and contains one or more major defects, or three or more minor defects as defined in Tables IV and V of GL-PD-05-03 or failing shade or non-specified materials. The offeror failed to identify the facility or facilities (e.g., different place of performances) where the PDM was manufactured. Proposal is un-awardable.

M.2.1.2 The ratings for the Technical Sub-factor 2: Delivery will be expressed as an adjectival assessment as defined below.

ACCEPTABLE: The offeror demonstrated it could meet the minimum 45-day mandatory delivery schedule of CLIN 0001. Validation is supported by adequate material supply (material on hand and/or supplier commitment letters), details of workforce availability, a description of available production equipment and facilities with available square footage.

UNACCEPTABLE: Proposal does not meet the minimum delivery requirements of CLIN 0001. Proposal is un-awardable.

M.2.1.3 The ratings for the Technical Sub-factor 3: Quality will be expressed as an adjectival assessment as defined below.

ACCEPTABLE: The offeror provided a copy of the Quality Assurance plan/manual that will be used for this contract. The offeror demonstrated it is ISO 9001:2015 equivalent or greater. The quality manual shall demonstrate that it monitors, assesses, and audits quality and reliability at their own facility as well as all their supplier facilities. The offeror provided traceability evidence processes for all material lots used. The offerors quality plan showed how certificates of conformance (COCs) are required, verified, and maintained.

UNACCEPTABLE: Proposal does not meet requirements. Quality plan is not ISO 9001:2015 equivalent or a production quality plan was not provided. Supporting documentation for traceability and COCs were not provided. Proposal is un-awardable.

M.2.2 FACTOR 2: Past Performance – The Past Performance factor shall be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable.

ACCEPTABLE: Offerors shall list all MOLLE-related Department of Defense contracts within the last three years. For government contracts, the evaluation board will review CPARS forms. An Acceptable rating will be given to offerors with all “satisfactory” or better CPARS ratings. MOLLE Contract Experience refers to any items made in accordance with any of the following purchase descriptions; PD 02- 02 (MOLLE), PD 02-05 (Improved MOLLE Medic Set, PD 05-03 (MOLLE Accessories). IAW FAR 15.305(2)(iv), Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom past performance is not available; the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably.

UNACCEPTABLE: Offerors with less than satisfactory CPARS ratings on MOLLE-related Department of

Defense contracts within the last three years will be evaluated as unacceptable. Proposal is un-awardable.

M.2.3 FACTOR 3: Price - The Total Evaluated Price proposed in Attachment 0004 shall be evaluated as fair and reasonable or unacceptable. Price/Cost Analysis will be conducted as necessary per FAR 15.404-1 (a) and (b).

M.3 DISCUSSIONS

M.3.1. The Government reserves the right to award a contract without discussions. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The Government may reject any or all offers if such action is in the public interest and waive informalities and minor irregularities in offers received.

(End of Summary of Changes)