10R0039 Am02.pdf

W62N6MSBMATOC

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

Multiple Aw ard Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts supporting the Corps of Engineers South Pacific Division mission for use primarily for Kitchen and Latrine renovations to support the CA Army National Guard and 63rd Regional Support Command in California

The purpose of this amendment is to enter Phase 2 of the proposal process. The changes are:

1. Provide the Task Order package (Pricing Schedule, Statement of Work, Draw ings, Wage Determination, and Supplemental Contract Requirements).

2. Add clause 52.204-10, and

3. Revise Section 00110 (Task Order w ill be use as a sample pricing project)

The Date for Receipt of Phase 2 Proposals is 1:00 pm PDT, 20 October 2010.

The Bidders Inquiry w ill be re-opened for questions until 12 October 2010.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 10

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 21-Sep-2010

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 W91238-10-R-0039

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11-Jul-2010

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

21-Sep-2010

CODE

USACE SACRAMENTO DISTRICT

ATTN: CONTRACTING DIVISION

1325 J STREET-ROOM 878

SACRAMENTO CA 95814-2922

W91238 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W91238-10-R-0039

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION 00100 - BIDDING SCHEDULE/INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

SEC 00110 INSTRUCTION N BASIS

SECTION 00110

PROPOSAL BASIS OF AWARD,

GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS,

PHASE I INSTRUCTIONS AND EVALUATIONS,

AND CONTRACT AWARD

1. OVERVIEW.

a. This is a "Best Value" construction solicitation primarily for kitchen and latrine renovations (including new work, additions, alterations, maintenance and repairs) involving various industry (electrical, mechanical, etc.) efforts supporting the Corps of Engineers South Pacific Division mission primarily in the State of California for units in California, e.g. California Army National Guard and 63rd Regional Support Command. The Contracting Officer will award a firm fixed-price Multiply Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to that responsible Offeror whom the Source Selection Authority determined conforms to the solicitation, is fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government, considering all non-price factors described herein, and price. The task order utilized in the pricing proposal and task order technical approach will not be awarded to the “Best Value” contractor, but used as a sample project in order to determine the awardees. The Multiple Award Task Order contract will consist of three contractors in the pool.

b. This is a two-phase design-build selection process acquisition requiring two separate proposal submittals, a phase-one (non-price technical volume) proposal and a phase-two (price and technical volumes) proposal. Phase-one will consist of an evaluation of only non-price factors which include Experience and Capability, and Past Performance of the offeror. Then no more than five (5) of the most highly qualified offerors in phase-one will be offered the opportunity to submit a proposal under phase-two. The names of these contractors selected to advance to Phase-Two will be posted on the Federal Business Opportunity website, www.fbo.gov. Phase-two will consist of an evaluation of price and non-price factors which include Technical Approach.

c. The Government does not intend to conduct discussions during phase-one, nor request revised phase-one proposal. The Government reserves the right to conduct phase-one discussions, if it deems such to be in its best interest. The Government may communicate with an offeror to afford it the opportunity to respond to adverse past performance evaluations obtained from references on which it has not previously had an opportunity to comment, if that information makes a difference in the Government’s decision whether or not to include the offeror in the shortlist for phase-two.

2. BASIS OF AWARD.

2.1. ELIGIBILITY FOR CONTRACT AWARD

In accordance with the requirements of Part 9 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), no contract shall be entered into unless the Contracting Officer ensures that all requirements of law, executive orders, regulations, and all other applicable procedures, including clearances and approvals, have been met. This includes the FAR requirement that no award shall be made unless the Contracting Officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must meet the general standards in FAR Part 9 and any special standards set forth in the solicitation.

2.2. SOURCE SELECTION USING THE TRADE-OFF PROCESS

The Government will select the offer that represents the best value to the Government by using the trade-off process described in FAR Part 15. This process permits tradeoffs between price and technical (“non-cost”) factors and allows the Government to accept other than the lowest priced offer. The award decision will be based on a comparative analysis and an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation.

2.3. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF PRICE TO THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price.

The Government is concerned with striking the most advantageous balance between technical merit (“quality”) and cost to the Government (i.e., the price). The degree of importance of price could become greater depending upon the equality of the technical proposals. If competing technical proposals are determined to be essentially equal, price could become the controlling factor.

2.4. EVALUATION OF THE PRICE PROPOSAL

a. Price or cost to the Government will be evaluated and considered but will not be scored or combined with other aspects of the proposal evaluation. The price proposal used for evaluation will consist of the proposed basic IDIQ CLIN 0001 G&A rate and the proposed Task Order price. The proposed price will be analyzed for reasonableness.

It may also be analyzed to determine whether it is realistic for the work to be performed; reflects a clear understanding of the requirements; and is consistent with the offeror’s Technical Proposal. Additionally, all offers will be analyzed for unbalanced pricing.

b. Information required to be submitted in the Price Proposal volume in addition to the executed SF 1442 with acknowledgement of amendments and the completed pricing schedule will be used to determine the offeror’s eligibility for contract award in accordance with paragraph 2.1 above (for example, the offeror’s representations and certifications; the bid guarantee; and the offeror’s pre-award survey information. The Government may enter into exchanges with offerors about such information without it constituting discussions, subject to applicable FAR limitations, including FAR 15.306, Exchanges with offerors after receipt of proposals; FAR 28.101-4, and Noncompliance with bid guarantee requirements.

2.5. THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS:

a. The Government will evaluate each offeror’s technical proposal based on how well the proposal addresses each of the evaluation factors, listed below and further described in the submission requirements in Sections 00110 and 00120, and on how well the offeror has performed on related projects through the evaluation of the past performance information provided from references or obtained from other sources. Each of the evaluation factors will be evaluated by the Government and an adjectival rating and risk rating will be determined by consensus of the Government evaluation board.

b. The evaluation factors correlate directly to the main organizational tabs identified in the proposal submission instructions in the submission requirements in Sections 00110 and 00120. However, any information contained in the technical proposal can nonetheless be considered by the Government in its evaluation under any factor.

Phase-One Proposal. (Section 00110) Factor 1: Experience and Capability Factor 2: Past Performance

Phase-Two Proposal. (Section 00120) Factor 3: Technical Approach

2.6. RELATIVE WEIGHTING OF THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

The Technical Evaluation Factors are listed below in descending order of importance, as follows:

Factor 1 – Experience and Capability is the most heavily weighted factor.

Factor 2 – Past Performance is weighted less than Factor 1, and Factor 3 – Technical Approach is the least heavily weighted factor it is weighted significantly less than any other evaluation factor.

2.7. GENERAL TECHNICAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

a. The offeror’s conformance with the specified format and submission requirements will be considered during the technical evaluation. Failure to comply with the formatting and/or submission requirements may be seen as indicative of the type of problems that could be expected during contract performance. Lack of conformance could therefore result in a higher risk assessment, in addition to any other impacts on the evaluation. Material omission(s) may cause the technical proposal to be rejected as unacceptable. However, in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, the Government may waive informalities and minor irregularities in proposals. For example, a failure by a proposed design contractor to submit a properly executed letter of commitment may be considered as increasing risk, but will not be considered a proposal deficiency.

b. Technical proposals which do not provide the specified information in the specified location in accordance with the submission instructions may be downgraded. The Government is under no obligation to search for information that is not in the specified location.

c. Proposals which are generic, vague, or lacking in detail may be downgraded. The proposal submission instructions are written to give prospective contractors, where feasible, an indication of the level of detail desired by the Government. The offeror’s failure to include information that the Government has indicated should be included may result in the proposal being downgraded and/or being found deficient if inadequate detail is provided.

d. Any prescribed page and formatting limitations will be strictly adhered to and enforced by the Government. The Government will not evaluate any excess information resulting from the offeror’s failure to comply with the submission instructions. Examples: If an offeror were to submit three pages in response to an item with a two page limitation, the information on the first two pages would be evaluated but the information on the third page would not be evaluated. If an offeror were to submit a fold-out sheet (e.g. 11”x17”) in response to a one-page limitation where fold-out sheets were not authorized, only the information that could reasonably have been submitted on one 8-1/2 x 11 inch sheet would be evaluated. If an offeror were to submit three 8-1/2 x 11 inch pages in response to a one not-to-exceed 11 x 17 inch page limitation, only the information that could reasonably have been submitted on one 11 x 17 inch sheet would be evaluated. If an offeror submitted alternates that were not requested, the information will not be evaluated.

e. The degree of risk to the Government inherent in the offeror’s technical proposal will be a consideration under every evaluation factor.

f. A “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. “Weakness” means a flaw in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. A “significant weakness” is a proposal flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

The Government cannot accept an offer with a deficiency in its technical proposal. The term “acceptable” is therefore used in this context to describe a technical proposal that does not contain a deficiency and thus could be accepted by the Government, notwithstanding any weaknesses or significant weaknesses in the proposal.

g. The Government cannot make award based on a deficient offer. Therefore, a rating of “Unacceptable” under any factor will render the offer ineligible for award, unless the Government elects to enter into discussions with that offeror and all deficiencies are remedied in a revised proposal or as stated in paragraph 2.7.a. above.

h. Failure of a proposed design contractor to furnish authorization for the Government to discuss its past performance with the offeror will not be considered a proposal deficiency. However, the Government will not be able to disclose to the offeror any details pertaining to their performance problems.

i. Past Performance Adjectival ratings and Performance Risk - Performance risks are those risks associated with an offeror's likelihood of success in performing the solicitation's requirements as indicated by that offeror's record of current or past performance.

Excellent Essentially no doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record.

Risk Level: Very Low

Good Little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Risk Level: Low

Adequate Some doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Risk Level: Moderate

Marginal Significant doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Risk Level: High

Poor It is extremely doubtful that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort based on their performance record. Risk Level: Very High

Unknown The offeror has no relevant past performance upon which to base a meaningful performance risk prediction. By law, contractors with no relevant past performance history cannot be evaluated favorably or unfavorably. Risk Level: Unknown

j. Adjectival ratings and proposal risk for other than past performance.

ADJECTIVE

DEFINITION AND CRITERIA

Excellent

The proposal has exceptional merit and reflects an excellent approach which will clearly result in the superior attainment of all requirements and objectives. This clearly achievable approach includes numerous advantageous characteristics of substance, and essentially no disadvantages, which can be expected to result in outstanding performance.

The risk of unsuccessful performance is very low as the proposal provides solutions which are unquestionably feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered very low risk in that they are exceptionally clear and precise, fully supported, and demonstrate a clear understanding of the requirements. Risk Level: Very Low

Good

The proposal demonstrates a sound approach which is expected to meet all requirements and objectives. This sound approach includes advantageous characteristics of substance, and few relatively minor disadvantages, which collectively can be expected to result in satisfactory performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is low as the proposal contains solutions which are considered feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered to reflect low risk in that they are clear and precise, supported, and demonstrate an understanding of the requirements. Risk Level: Low

Acceptable

The proposal demonstrates an approach which is capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. The approach includes both advantageous and disadvantageous characteristics of substance, where the advantages are not outweighed by the disadvantages.

Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages are likely to result in acceptable performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is moderate, as the proposal solutions are generally feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered to reflect moderate risk in that they are somewhat clear and precise, partially supported, and demonstrate a general understanding of the requirements. Risk Level: Moderate

Marginal

The proposal demonstrates an approach which may not be capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. The approach has disadvantages of substance and advantages, which if they exist, are outweighed by the disadvantages. Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages are not likely to result in satisfactory performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is high as the proposal contains solutions which may not be feasible and practical. These solutions are further considered to reflect high risk in that they lack clarity and precision, are generally unsupported, and do not demonstrate a complete understanding of the requirements. Risk Level: High

Susceptible to Being Made Acceptable

The proposal demonstrates an approach which, as initially proposed, cannot be rated Marginal because of error(s), omission(s) or deficiency(ies) which are capable of being corrected without a major rewrite or revision of the proposal. These solutions are further considered to reflect high to very high risk in that they lack clarity and precision, are generally unsupported, and do not demonstrate a complete understanding of the requirements. Risk Level: High to Very High

NOTE: A Susceptible rating cannot be a final rating. The final rating will either increase to a rating of Marginal or better or decrease to Unacceptable

Unacceptable

The proposal demonstrates an approach which, based on a very high risk, will very likely not be capable of meeting all requirements and objectives. This approach has numerous disadvantages of substance, and advantages which, if they exist, are far outweighed by disadvantages. Collectively, the advantages and disadvantages will not result in satisfactory performance. The risk of unsuccessful performance is very high as the proposal contains solutions which are not feasible and practical. The solutions are further considered to reflect very high risk in that they lack any clarity or precision, are unsupported, and do not demonstrate an understanding of the requirement.

Risk Level: Very High

3 GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR A TWO-PHASE DESIGN-

BUILD PROPOSAL.

3.1 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS.

3.1.1 Media, Page Size, Margins, Fonts, and Page Limitations.

Submit only the hard-copy paper documents and electronic files specifically authorized elsewhere in this section.

Facsimile bids/offers, modifications thereto, or cancellations of bids/offers will not be accepted. Do not submit excess information, to include audio-visual materials, electronic media, etc. Do not include links to information on websites in lieu of incorporating the information physically into the proposal. Except where another size is specifically authorized for a specific submission, use only 8 1/2” x 11” paper. Use at least 1 inch margins, which may include headers and footers. Do not justify the right margin. Ensure that all text and graphics are clearly legible. Do not use a font size smaller than 10, unusual font styles such as script, or condensed fonts. For submissions with page limitations, the pages will be counted as follows: One side of the paper is one page;

information on both the back and front of one sheet of paper will be counted as two pages. Where authorized, a foldout sheet will count as one page. Pages furnished for organizational purposes only, such as a “Table of Contents” or divider tabs, are excluded from page limitations.

3.1.2 Proposal Binding.

The preferred method for assembling proposals is a method that enables the rapid insertion or deletion of pages such as three ring binders. Ensure recommended capacity is not exceeded and that pages turn freely. Do not use spring clamps, spiral binding systems, or heat binding systems.

3.1.3 Conditioning of Offer.

Do not include exceptions to the terms and conditions of the solicitation in either the technical or price proposal volumes. Inclusion of any standard company terms and conditions that conflict with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in a determination that the offer is unacceptable and thus ineligible for award. Resolve questions about the terms and conditions or technical requirements of the solicitation prior to submission of the offer; see “Inquiries”, located in Section 00010, for points of contact. Notwithstanding the above, the offeror must clearly describe in the proposal cover sheet submitted with the price volume any exceptions, within the offer, to the contractual and/or technical terms and conditions of the solicitation.

3.1.4 Restrictions on Offeror-Provided Information.

“Confidential” projects cannot be submitted to demonstrate capability unless all of the information required for evaluation as specified herein can nonetheless be provided to the Government as part of the offeror’s technical proposal. Offerors that include in their proposals information that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by the Government except for evaluation purposes, must clearly mark the information in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, “Instructions to Offeror – Competitive Acquisition”, paragraph (e), “Restriction on disclosure and use of data”. Files shall not contain classified data.

3.2 REQUIREMENT FOR SEPARATE PRICE AND TECHNICAL PROPOSAL VOLUMES.

The proposal shall be submitted as summarized below and as required by the specifications.

a. Phase-One Proposal.

(1) Factor 1: Experience and Capability

(2) Factor 2: Past Performance

b. Phase-Two Proposal.

(1) Volume I – Cost/Price Volume

(a) Proposal Cover Sheet

(b) Standard Form 1442, Acknowledgement of Amendments, Joint Venture Agreement

(c) Pricing Schedule

(d) Work Breakdown Structure

(e) Representation, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors

(f) Bid Guarantee

(g) Pre-Award Survey Information

(2) Volume II – Technical Volume Factor 3: Technical Approach

Each offeror must submit a phase-one proposal consisting of only a “technical” volume and each selected phase-two offeror must submit a phase-two proposal consisting of both a “price” volume and a “technical” volume. The price volume includes the signed offer and the offeror’s proposed prices, as well as other “pro forma” requirements. The technical volume includes all required information relating to the “non-price” evaluation factors, which may include both technical and management evaluation criteria. The two volumes must be submitted as separate, physically distinct volumes. Both volumes must be received at the location shown in Block 8 of Standard Form 1442, not later than the date and time specified in Block 13 of Standard Form 1442. The information in the two volumes is evaluated separately and independently. Therefore, all information intended by the offeror to be evaluated as part of the price volume must be submitted as part of the price volume. All information intended by the offeror to be evaluated as part of the technical volume must be submitted as part of the technical volume. Do not merely cross-reference similar material between the technical and price volumes. Information in the price volume will not be considered in the technical evaluation, and vice versa.

3.2.1 Marking of Proposal Volumes.

Mark each volume as either the “Price Proposal” or the “Technical Proposal”. Additionally, mark the outside front cover of each volume with the project title and location, solicitation number, name and address of the offeror, and volume copy number. (Markings which identify the offeror are not desired on either the back cover or on the spline/binding.)

3.2.2 Tabbing of Proposal Volumes.

Offers are to be formatted and tabbed in accordance with the instructions that follow for each proposal volume.

3.2.3 Table of Contents.

Include a table of contents for each proposal volume.

SECTION 00700 - CONTRACT CLAUSES

The following have been added by full text:

52.204-10 REPORTING EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION AND FIRST-TIER SUBCONTRACT AWARDS

(JUL 2010)

(a) Definitions. As used in this clause:

Executive means officers, managing partners, or any other employees in management positions.

First-tier subcontract means a subcontract awarded directly by a Contractor to furnish supplies or services (including construction) for performance of a prime contract, but excludes supplier agreements with vendors, such as long-term arrangements for materials or supplies that would normally be applied to a Contractor's general and administrative expenses or indirect cost.

Total compensation means the cash and noncash dollar value earned by the executive during the Contractor's preceding fiscal year and includes the following (for more information see 17 CFR 229.402(c)(2)):

(1) Salary and bonus.

(2) Awards of stock, stock options, and stock appreciation rights. Use the dollar amount recognized for financial statement reporting purposes with respect to the fiscal year in accordance with the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (Revised 2004) (FAS 123R), Shared Based Payments.

(3) Earnings for services under non-equity incentive plans. This does not include group life, health, hospitalization or medical reimbursement plans that do not discriminate in favor of executives, and are available generally to all salaried employees.

(4) Change in pension value. This is the change in present value of defined benefit and actuarial pension plans.

(5) Above-market earnings on deferred compensation which is not tax-qualified.

(6) Other compensation, if the aggregate value of all such other compensation (e.g., severance, termination payments, value of life insurance paid on behalf of the employee, perquisites or property) for the executive exceeds $10,000.

(b) Section 2(d)(2) of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-282), as amended by section 6202 of the Government Funding Transparency Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-252), requires the Contractor to report information on subcontract awards. The law requires all reported information be made public, therefore, the Contractor is responsible for notifying its subcontractors that the required information will be made public.

(c)(1) Unless otherwise directed by the contracting officer, by the end of the month following the month of award of a first-tier subcontract with a value of $25,000 or more, (and any modifications to these subcontracts that change previously reported data), the Contractor shall report the following information at http://www.fsrs.gov for each first-tier subcontract. (The Contractor shall follow the instructions at http://www.fsrs.gov to report the data.)

(i) Unique identifier (DUNS Number) for the subcontractor receiving the award and for the subcontractor's parent company, if the subcontractor has a parent company.

(ii) Name of the subcontractor.

(iii) Amount of the subcontract award.

(iv) Date of the subcontract award.

(v) A description of the products or services (including construction) being provided under the subcontract, including the overall purpose and expected outcomes or results of the subcontract.

(vi) Subcontract number (the subcontract number assigned by the Contractor).

(vii) Subcontractor's physical address including street address, city, state, and country. Also include the nine-digit zip code and congressional district.

(viii) Subcontractor's primary performance location including street address, city, state, and country. Also include the nine-digit zip code and congressional district.

(ix) The prime contract number, and order number if applicable.

(x) Awarding agency name and code.

(xi) Funding agency name and code.

(xii) Government contracting office code.

(xiii) Treasury account symbol (TAS) as reported in FPDS.

(xiv) The applicable North American Industry Classification System code (NAICS).

(2) By the end of the month following the month of a contract award, and annually thereafter, the Contractor shall report the names and total compensation of each of the five most highly compensated executives for the Contractor's preceding completed fiscal year at http://www.ccr.gov, if--

(i) In the Contractor's preceding fiscal year, the Contractor received--

(A) 80 percent or more of its annual gross revenues from Federal contracts (and subcontracts), loans, grants (and subgrants) and cooperative agreements; and

(B) $25,000,000 or more in annual gross revenues from Federal contracts (and subcontracts), loans, grants (and subgrants) and cooperative agreements; and

(ii) The public does not have access to information about the compensation of the executives through periodic reports filed under section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a), 78o(d)) or section 6104 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. (To determine if the public has access to the compensation information, see the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission total compensation filings at http://www.sec.gov/answers/execomp.htm.)

(3) Unless otherwise directed by the contracting officer, by the end of the month following the month of a first-tier subcontract with a value of $25,000 or more, and annually thereafter, the Contractor shall report the names and total compensation of each of the five most highly compensated executives for each first-tier subcontractor for the subcontractor's preceding completed fiscal year at http://www.fsrs.gov, if--

(i) In the subcontractor's preceding fiscal year, the subcontractor received--

(A) 80 percent or more of its annual gross revenues from Federal contracts (and subcontracts), loans, grants (and subgrants) and cooperative agreements; and

(B) $25,000,000 or more in annual gross revenues from Federal contracts (and subcontracts), loans, grants (and subgrants) and cooperative agreements; and

(ii) The public does not have access to information about the compensation of the executives through periodic reports filed under section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a), 78o(d)) or section 6104 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. (To determine if the public has access to the compensation information, see the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission total compensation filings at http://www.sec.gov/answers/execomp.htm.)

(d)(1) If the Contractor in the previous tax year had gross income, from all sources, under $300,000, the Contractor is exempt from the requirement to report subcontractor awards.

(2) If a subcontractor in the previous tax year had gross income from all sources under $300,000, the Contractor does not need to report awards to that subcontractor.

(e) Phase-in of reporting of subcontracts of $25,000 or more.

(1) Until September 30, 2010, any newly awarded subcontract must be reported if the prime contract award amount was $20,000,000 or more.

(2) From October 1, 2010, until February 28, 2011, any newly awarded subcontract must be reported if the prime contract award amount was $550,000 or more.

(3) Starting March 1, 2011, any newly awarded subcontract must be reported if the prime contract award amount was $25,000 or more.

(End of clause)

(End of Summary of Changes)