11R0004 Am 0001 2-2-11.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

FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR DLA FACILITIES AT ROBINS AFB GA (DDWG)

The solicitation and PWS are revised as indicated on the follow ing pages. Replacement pages are provided for the offeror's convenience.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 10

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 02-Feb-2011

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 W912HP-11-R-0004

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

22-Jan-2011

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 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

02-Feb-2011

CODE

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, CHARLESTON

DISTRICT, CONTRACTING DIVISION

69-A HAGOOD AVENUE

CHARLESTON SC 29403

W912HP 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912HP-11-R-0004

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

Note: Page 1 of this amendment (Statndard Form 30) is changed to read “Page 1 of 7 pages”.

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0001

Block 14 continued—

Revisions are made to the solicitation (RFP) and Performance Work Statement (PWS) as follows. Attachment pages are provided, with the revisions highlighted.

a. RFP Section L, Paragraph L.3. The time for the site visit on Wednesday 9 Feb 2011 has been changed from 10:00 a.m. Eastern to 1:00 p.m. Eastern. Notice of this change was posted on FedBizOpps on 1 Feb 2011.

Also, an additional point of contact for registration purposes was added: Ms. Linda Knickerbocker, (478) 926-0298 or Linda.L.Knickerbocker@usace.army.mil

b. RFP Section M, Factor 1 (Corporate Relevant Specialized Experience), paragraphs 1.1, 1.2.1 and 1.2.2.

are revised to allow inclusion of projects in progress for not less than two (2) years.

c. RFP Section M, paragraph M.4. Relative importance of factors has been revised.

d. PWS 0200000 – Annex 2 Management and Administration, Spec item 2.4.1. The Government-provided space is corrected from Building 285 to Building 385.

(End of Summary of Changes)

0200000 – Annex 2 Management and Administration Spec Item

Title Description

2.3.8 DLA Mailing Address All reports submitted to DLA shall be sent to: Jim Douglas, Defense Enterprise Support DDC, S Avenue, Building 1-2, New Cumberland, PA 17070

2.3.9 US Army Corps of

Engineers Mailing Address

All reports submitted to US Army Corps of Engineers shall be sent to US Army Corps of Engineers, Charleston (Attention: Effie Meletis), 69A Hagwood Ave, Charleston, SC 29403.

2.4 Government-Furnished

Property, Materials and Services

In accordance with FAR Clause 52.245-1, GOVERNMENT PROPERTY and 52.245-9, USES AND CHARGES, and the following paragraphs, the Government will furnish or make available to the Contractor certain Government-owned facilities for use in connection with this contract

2.4.1 Government-Furnished

Facilities (GFF)

The Contractor will be provided office and storage space in DDWG Bldg 385 for the duration of the contract.

2.4.2 Government-Furnished

Utilities

All reasonable amounts of electric and water service will be made available to the Contractor by the Government from the nearest suitable and available connection.

2.4.3 Government-Furnished

Materials (GFM)

None provided.

2.4.4 Government-Furnished

Equipment (GFE)

None provided.

2.5 Contractor-Furnished

Items

Except for items identified as Government Furnished, the Contractor shall provide all equipment, materials, parts, supplies, components, and facilities to perform the requirements of this contract. The KO may inspect Contractor-furnished items for adequacy and compliance with contract requirements.

Inadequate or unsafe items shall be removed and replaced by the Contractor at no cost to the Government. Materials containing asbestos, lead, and PCB’s shall not be brought on site. The KO may at any time require samples, Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), manufacturer’s data cut sheets of materials used in this contract.

2.6 Management The Contractor shall manage the total work effort associated with the services required herein to meet the performance objectives and standards. Such management includes but is not limited to planning, scheduling, cost accounting, report preparation, establishing and maintaining records, and quality control.

The Contractor shall provide staff with the necessary management expertise to assure performance objectives and standards are met.

2.6.1 Work Control The Contractor shall implement all necessary work control procedures to ensure timely accomplishment of work requirements, as well as to permit tracking and reporting of work in progress. The Contractor shall plan and schedule work to assure material, labor, and equipment are available to complete work requirements within the specified time limits and in conformance with the quality standards established herein. Verbal scheduling and status reports shall be provided when requested by the KO. A written status report of any item of work must be provided within 24 hours.

W912HP-11-R-0004/Am 0001

11R0004/Am 0001

L.3. SITE VISIT. Offerors or quoters are urged and expected to inspect the site where services are to be performed and to satisfy themselves regarding all general and local conditions that may affect the cost of contract performance, to the extent that the information is reasonably obtainable. Failure to do so shall not relieve the Offeror from its responsibility to properly estimate the complexity and cost of successfully performing the work. In no event shall failure to inspect the site constitute grounds for a claim after contract award.

An organized site visit has been scheduled as indicated below. Offerors must contact Mr. Terry Stab (information below) to register. THERE WILL BE ONLY ONE SITE VISIT

Site Visit Date: Wednesday 9 February 2011, 1:00 p.m.

Location: Robins AFB Area Office 625 Seventh St, Bldg 702 Warner Robins, GA 31098 Contact: Mr. Terry Stab, (478) 926-6945 or Terry.L.Stab@usace.army.mil or Ms. Linda Knickerbocker, (478) 926-0298 or Linda.L.Knickerbocker@usace.army.mil

L.4. HAND-CARRIED OR MAILED PROPOSALS. All proposals must be clearly identified with the contractor’s name and address. To ensure timely and proper handling, the lower left corner of the outermost wrapper should indicate the Request For Proposal No., Due Date of Proposal, Time by which Proposals are Due, and Title of Project.

Offerors shall submit their proposals to the Charleston District Contracting Office at the address shown in Block 9 of the Standard Form 1449. Proposals shall be received no later than the time and date specified in Block 8 of Standard Form 1449.

The Government will not be responsible for proposals delivered to any location or to anyone other than those designated to receive proposals on its behalf.

L.5. TECHNICAL INQUIRIES. All questions must be submitted in writing via email to the Contract Specialist at Laurie.S.Infinger@usace.army.mil no later than 10 calendar days prior to the date established in the RFP for receipt of proposals. The Government reserves the right to decline addressing questions received less than 10 calendar days prior to receipt of proposals.

L.6. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS. In order to effectively and equitably evaluate all proposals, the Contracting Officer must receive information containing sufficient detail to allow review and evaluation by the Government. Offerors should provide sufficient detail and clearly define all items required in this section, providing a straightforward and concise description of capabilities to satisfactorily perform the requirements. Proposal clarity, organization, and cross-referencing are mandatory. Failure to submit and organize proposals as requested may adversely affect an Offeror's evaluation.

a. General Requirements.

(1) Written materials shall be prepared on 8-1/2” x 11” paper, with three holes punched in the left margin, and placed in a three-ring binder. If more than one binder is used, the complete table of contents shall be included in each.

Each page of the proposal shall have the page number on the bottom of the page starting with the first page to the last and numbered as “Page 1 of __ Pages”.

(2) Proposals shall be submitted in two parts, Volumes I and II, as described below, in separate binders.

Offerors must organize information as required below to facilitate evaluation. DO NOT INCLUDE ANY PRICING

INFORMATION IN THE TECHNICAL PROPOSAL VOLUME.

(3) Number of Copies: Volume I – original and one copy; one CD-ROM Volume II – original and four copies; one CD-ROM

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION FACTORS

M.1. BASIS FOR AWARD

a. The tradeoff process has been determined as appropriate for this acquisition. In accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), the Government may award the resulting contract to other than the lowest priced or highest technically rated offer.

b. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without conducting discussions with offerors. Therefore, Offerors are reminded to include their best technical and price terms in their initial offer and not to automatically assume there will be an opportunity to participate in discussions or submit a revised offer.

c. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer deems it necessary.

In addition, if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. Should a competitive range be established, the Government will conduct discussions in accordance with FAR 15.306.

d. Proposals must meet the criteria stated in the RFP in order to be eligible for award, to include responsiveness and technical acceptability. Therefore, proposals will first be compared to the solicitation requirements. Exception to the contractual terms and conditions of the solicitation (e.g., standard company terms and conditions) may result in rejection of a proposal.

e. In order to determine which proposal represents the best overall value, the Government will then compare proposals to one another. The Government will award a contract to the responsible Offeror whose technical submittal and price proposal contains the combination of those criteria described in this document offering the best overall value to the Government. Best value will be determined by a comparative assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in this RFP.

f. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer(s), and to reject any and all offers.

M.2. TECHNICAL EVALUATION FACTORS

FACTOR 1: CORPORATE RELEVANT SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE (TAB H)

1.1. For the evaluation of Corporate Relevant Specialized Experience, Offerors shall submit three (3) but no more than five (5) SERVICES projects successfully completed, or if not completed, in progress for not less than two

(2) years, that demonstrate the Offeror’s specialized experience in projects of similar size, scope and complexity.

The information presented in the Offeror’s submittal, together with that from other sources available to the Government, will comprise the input for evaluation of this factor. No projects completed more than 5 years ago will be considered.

1.2 Submission Requirements.

1.2.1 Offerors shall submit at least three (3), but no more than five (5), Project Information Sheets for projects completed, or if not completed, in progress for not less than two (2) years, that reflect specialized experience in the services elements referenced in paragraph above. The examples should be as similar as possible to this solicitation in type and scope. See attached Sample Project Information Sheet (Section L) for project data to be included as a minimum.

1.2.2 For the purpose of this Request for Proposal, if the Offeror represents the combining of two or more companies in a Contract Team Arrangement, as defined above, each company shall list project examples.

Example projects must have been completed, or if not completed, in progress for not less than two (2) years. The experience of individuals will not be credited under this factor.

1.2.3 Offeror proposed team arrangements, as defined above and company relationships shall be fully disclosed in the proposal. For reference and evaluation purposes the Offeror shall identify the major or critical aspects to be performed by those identified in the Contractor Team Arrangement.

1.3. Evaluation.

1.3.1 The Government will evaluate the depth and breadth of the Offeror’s corporate experience on the number of times it has performed projects that were similar in nature, size, scope, and complexity as the work required by this RFP. Completed PROJECT INFORMATION SHEETS shall be used as a basis to begin the evaluation of this factor. The Government will review the example projects provided by the Offeror to evaluate and rate the recent relevant specialized experience of the Offeror in similar projects; this will include the experience of identified parties of Contractor Team Arrangements. The example projects should closely resemble the scope, size, and complexity of the project identified in this solicitation. If the Offeror cannot provide suitable relevant experience and the evaluators consider that the information provided indicates that the Offeror has no relevant experience, a determination will be made as to the risk this lack of corporate experience presents to the Government and the proposal will be evaluated accordingly. The submission must contain a narrative that clearly explains the relevance of the submitted information concerning a company that is part of a Contract Team Arrangement. The Government will consider the adequacy of this explanation in deciding the relevance and weight of the information to this procurement.

FACTOR 2: OFFEROR PAST PERFORMANCE (TAB J)

2.1 Submission Requirements.

2.1.1 Past Performance Information Sheets. Offeror shall complete and provide a Past Performance Project Information Sheet (see attached sample) on three (3) but no more than five (5) SERVICES projects completed, or substantially completed (more than 60%) in the past five years of similar scope and complexity to this project to be used for reference and evaluation purpose. Projects need not be same as submitted in FACTOR 1.

Past Performance Information Sheets shall also be completed for those parties identified in any proposed Joint Venture or Contractor Team Arrangement.

2.1.2 Past Performance Evaluation Questionnaires. For each project submitted above, Offeror shall provide a questionnaire with transmittal letter to the Pont of Contact listed (see attached sample). When completed, these forms shall be mailed or e-mailed directly to the Charleston District Contract Specialist identified in the sample transmittal letter. Include a copy of each transmittal letter in Volume 2 – Tab J of the proposal.

2.1.3 It is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure that the reference documentation is provided as the Government may not make additional requests for past performance information from the references.

The evaluation form shall be provided to the Contract Specialist directly from the reference. The Government will not consider Questionnaires received after the proposal due date. The Government reserves the right to contact references for verification or additional information. The Government’s inability to contact any of the offeror’s references or the references’ unwillingness to provide the information requested may affect the Government’s evaluation of this factor

2.1.4 If the Offeror is made up of separate companies that have combined for this project, then Past Performance Questionnaires must be completed twice (once for each company).

2.1.5 Contractor Team Arrangements. Contractor Team Arrangements are considered an arrangement in which (1) two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor; or (2) presents low risk that it will not be successful. The Offeror possesses one or more strengths that will benefit the Government. Offeror fully meets all RFP requirements and significantly exceeds many of the RFP requirements.

Response exceeds a "Satisfactory" rating. High probability of success. Low risk to the Government.

SATISFACTORY - Information submitted demonstrates Offeror's potential to meet performance or capability standards. The Offeror's qualifications are responsive with weaknesses in several areas that are offset by strengths in other areas. The Offeror understands most aspects of the requirements and presents an acceptable solution to the extent adequate performance is anticipated. Offeror demonstrates an understanding of the RFP requirements, presents a complete and comprehensive proposal that will likely result in adequate performance which represents moderate risk to the Government.

A rating of “Satisfactory” indicates that, in terms of the specific factor, the Offeror may satisfactorily complete the proposed tasks, but there is at least a moderate risk that it will not be successful. The Offeror possesses few or no advantages or strengths. Offeror meets all RFP requirements, presents a complete and comprehensive proposal. No significant advantages or disadvantages. Offeror’s response exceeds a "Marginal" rating. Moderate risk to the Government. In the case of no past performance on the part of the Offeror, a “Satisfactory” rating will be assigned for Past Performance.

MARGINAL - Information submitted demonstrates Offeror's potential to marginally meet performance or capability standards necessary for minimal contract performance. The Offeror's qualifications are generally responsive but weaknesses exist that are not offset by strengths. The Offeror does not understand most aspects of the requirements; the submittal is not adequately responsive or does not address a specific factor to the extent adequate performance is not anticipated. Offeror does not understand the requirements of the RFP and although the submittal has a reasonable chance of becoming at least acceptable, it requires modification to likely result in adequate performance which represents high risk to the Government. The assignment of a rating of “Marginal” indicates that, in terms of a specific factor, mandatory corrective action would be required to prevent significant deficiencies from affecting the overall project with high risk it will not be successful. The Offeror possesses no advantages or strengths and some disadvantages. Offeror does not meet all the requirements of the RFP. Offeror displays low probability of success, although the submittal has a reasonable chance of becoming at least acceptable. Offeror’s response exceeds an "Unsatisfactory" rating. Significant disadvantages.

High risk to the Government.

UNSATISFACTORY - Information submitted fails to meet performance or capability standards necessary for acceptable contractor performance. The Offeror's qualifications have many deficiencies and/or gross omissions. The Offeror’s understanding of the Government’s requirements is so superficial, incomplete, vague, incompatible, incomprehensible, or incorrect as to make adequate performance very unlikely, or inconceivable. The Offeror does not demonstrate an understanding of the RFP requirements and the submittal fails to provide a reasonable, logical approach to fulfilling much of the Government's requirements. The Offeror fails to meet the minimum requirements of the RFP and the requirements could only be met with major changes to the submittal. There is no expectation of minimal performance which represents unacceptably high risk to the Government. The assignment of a rating of “Unsatisfactory” indicates that, in terms of a specific factor, the Offeror fails to meet the minimum requirements and there is unacceptably high risk that the overall project will not be successful. The Offeror possesses no advantages or strengths and many disadvantages. The Offeror's does not meet most of the requirements of the RFP and the proposal is so unacceptable that it would have to be completely revised in order to attempt to make it acceptable. Unacceptably high risk to the Government.

M.4. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS. Technical Factor 1 is more important than Technical Factors 2 and 3, which are of equal importance. All technical factors, when combined, are approximately equal in importance to price.

FACTOR 4 - PRICE

a. The Government will perform a price analysis on all proposals received. Price analysis will be performed in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, to determine fairness, reasonableness, and the Offeror's understanding of the work. The evaluation will determine the extent to which the price proposal is consistent with the requirements of the RFP. Historical price information, competitive price information, the Independent Government