AMENDMENT W912HZ24R0010 P00001.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 change the title of the solicitation to ERDC Refuse and Recycling Services and update section L and M.

Alll other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 16

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

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 W912HZ24R0010

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

31-Jan-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 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.

U0001

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

06-Feb-2024

CODE

ERDC CONTRACTING OFFICE

3909 HALLS FERRY ROAD

VICKSBURG MS 39180-6199

W912HZ 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

X 1

W912HZ24R0010

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS

1. INTRODUCTION:

a. Offerors should carefully examine the specifications and fully inform themselves as to all conditions and matters which can in any way affect the work or the cost thereof.

Should an offeror find discrepancies in or omissions from the specifications, other documents, or should he or she be in doubt as to their meaning, the offeror should notify the Contracting Officer at once and obtain clarification prior to submitting their offer.

b. Offeror's Responsibility. It is the offeror's responsibility to ensure the completeness and accuracy of his or her proposal. Corrections will not be made by the Government.

c. Offerors are required to have an active System for Award Management (SAM) registration, with no active exclusions. Representation and certifications should be completed by the proposal due date to avoid any unnecessary delays in contract award.

d. Proposals shall be submitted via email with the subject line reading ERDC Refuse Services RFP to: Zavien.T.Beal@usace.army.mil Only electronic submissions will be accepted. All questions concerning this solicitation must be submitted via email to Zavien.T.Beal@usace.army.mil. The Government will accept questions up to ten (10) calendar days of the due date.

2. PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

A. Offerors are required to submit the proposal in the format as shown below. All proposal materials shall contain a table of contents. All pages shall be numbered to correspond with a table of contents.

Factor Location Description FACTOR 1 VOLUME 1 Technical – Offerors shall describe their

Relevant Experience and Management Plan.

FACTOR 2 VOLUME 1 Past Performance – Offeror shall demonstrate past performance for the projects submitted for Relevant Experience.

FACTOR 3 VOLUME 2 Standard Form 1449, and Pricing Schedule (attachment 02)

B. Volume I - Technical Proposal shall be limited to no more than 60 pages total (20 pages Relevant Experience, Management Plan, 20 pages Past Performance, note; past performance questionnaires do not count toward the page limitation). Pages should have a one-inch margin on all sides. Text should be 12-point, Times New Roman. Pages exceeding the page limit will be removed and not evaluated. No mention of price shall be included in Volume I.

C. Volume II – The offeror shall submit a completed SF1449, and Pricing Schedule (Attachment 02).

3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT

3.1 VOLUME I - TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

A. Factor 1 – Experience Factor 1 – Subfactor 1: Relevant Experience The Offeror’s experience will be evaluated to allow the Offeror to demonstrate their ability to execute Contract requirements. Offeror shall have a minimum of five (5) years relevant experience and shall submit at least one (1) and no more than five (5) contracts that are ongoing or have been completed within five (5) years from the date of this solicitation that best represent their experience similar to the scope of work herein. If an offeror is proposing as a Joint Venture (JV) and project experiences cannot be provided as a JV, each partner shall submit experience information, with no more than five (5) contracts each.

**The Offeror shall provide past performance information for each project provided under Factor 1 – Subfactor 1: Relevant Experience.

Factor 1 – Subfactor 2: Management Plan

The Contractor shall prepare and submit a Management Plan with their proposal. The plan shall address contract requirements for supervision and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) that will be followed while conducting Refuse and Recycling services as required by the PWS.

The plan must adhere to the proposal submission instructions and address the Offeror’s approach and methodology and depth of understanding of the contract performance requirements for management, supervision, manpower and equipment associated with the contract.

Factor 2 - Past Performance

The Offeror shall provide past performance information for each project provided under Factor 1 – Subfactor 1: Relevant Experience. Past Performance shall be submitted through Copies of Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs – also commonly referred to as CCASS reports) or through Past Performance Questionnaires (Attachment 01).

(1) Copies of Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs – also commonly referred to as CCASS reports) for projects performed for the U.S. Government. If the project provided has a CPAR, it must be used by the Offeror to demonstrate past performance. If CPAR submission is used to validate past performance, it shall be the most recent evaluation in the system (i.e., for projects submitted as completed, the final 100% completed CPAR shall be provided). If the Offeror submits a CPAR, they are not required to submit a separate Past Performance Questionnaire for the specific project.

(2) If CPAR information is not available for a project provided for experience, a completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), attached at the end of this section (Form PPQ-0) must be provided per the following guidance:

a. The Past Performance Questionnaire included in the solicitation is provided for the Offeror to submit to the client for each project the Offeror includes in its proposal for Factor 1 – Subfactor 3: Experience. Ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact.

b. Completed Past Performance Questionnaires should be submitted with your proposal. If the Offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the Offeror should still submit Form PPQ-0 with their proposal, only with blocks 1-6 filled out, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s).

c. Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Zavien Beal, via email to:

Zavien.T.Beal@usace.army.mil with the subject reading “ERDC Refuse and Recycling PPQ” prior to the proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

3.2 VOLUME II, PRICE PROPOSAL

a. Tab A, Standard Form (SF) 1449 and Pricing Schedule (Attachment 02)

(Attachment 01) Past Performance Questionnaire:

NAVFAC/USACE PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE (Form PPQ-0) CONTRACT INFORMATION (Contractor to complete Blocks 1-4)

1. Contractor Information Firm Name: CAGE Code:

Address: DUNs Number:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

Point of Contact: Contact Phone Number:

2. Work Performed as: Prime Contractor Sub Contractor Joint Venture Other (Explain) Percent of project work performed:

If subcontractor, who was the prime (Name/Phone #):

3. Contract Information Contract Number:

Delivery/Task Order Number (if applicable):

Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price Cost Reimbursement Other (Please specify):

Contract Title:

Contract Location:

Award Date (mm/dd/yy):

Contract Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Actual Completion Date (mm/dd/yy):

Explain Differences:

Original Contract Price (Award Amount):

Final Contract Price (to include all modifications, if applicable):

Explain Differences:

4. Project Description:

Complexity of Work High Med Routine How is this project relevant to project of submission? (Please provide details such as similar equipment, requirements, conditions, etc.)

CLIENT INFORMATION (Client to complete Blocks 5-8)

5. Client Information Name:

Title:

Phone Number:

Email Address:

6. Describe the client’s role in the project:

7. Date Questionnaire was completed (mm/dd/yy):

8. Client’s Signature:

NOTE: USACE REQUESTS THAT THE CLIENT COMPLETES THIS

QUESTIONNAIRE AND SUBMITS DIRECTLY BACK TO THE OFFEROR.

THE OFFEROR WILL SUBMIT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO

USACE WITH THEIR PROPOSAL, AND MAY DUPLICATE THIS

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FUTURE SUBMISSION ON USACE SOLICITATIONS.

CLIENTS ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO SUBMIT QUESTIONNAIRES

DIRECTLY TO THE OFFEROR. HOWEVER, QUESTIONNAIRES MAY BE

SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO USACE. PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFEROR

FOR USACE POC INFORMATION. THE GOVERNMENT RESERVES THE

RIGHT TO VERIFY ANY AND ALL INFORMATION ON THIS FORM.

ADJECTIVE RATINGS AND DEFINITIONS TO BE USED TO BEST REFLECT

YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE

RATING DEFINITION NOTE

(E) Exceptional Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds many to the Government/Owner’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor was highly effective.

An Exceptional rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed multiple significant events that were of benefit to the Government/Owner. A singular benefit, however, could be of such magnitude that it alone constitutes an Exceptional rating. Also, there should have been NO significant weaknesses identified.

(VG) Very Good

Performance meets contractual requirements and exceeds some to the Government’s/Owner’s benefit.

The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

A Very Good rating is appropriate when the Contractor successfully performed a significant event that was a benefit to the Government/Owner. There should have been no significant weaknesses identified.

(S) Satisfactory Performance meets minimum contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

A Satisfactory rating is appropriate when there were only minor problems, or major problems that the contractor recovered from without impact to the contract. There should have been NO significant weaknesses identified. Per DOD policy, a fundamental principle of assigning ratings is that contractors will not be assessed a rating lower than Satisfactory solely for not performing beyond the requirements of the contract.

(M) Marginal Performance does not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor's proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

A Marginal is appropriate when a significant event occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming which impacted the Government/Owner.

(U) Unsatisfactory

Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor's corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

An Unsatisfactory rating is appropriate when multiple significant events occurred that the contractor had trouble overcoming and which impacted the Government/Owner. A singular problem, however, could be of such serious magnitude that it alone constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.

(N) Not Applicable

No information or did not apply to your contract

Rating will be neither positive nor negative.

TO BE COMPLETED BY CLIENT PLEASE CIRCLE THE ADJECTIVE RATING WHICH BEST

REFLECTS YOUR EVALUATION OF THE CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE.

1. QUALITY:

a) Quality of technical data/report preparation efforts E VG S M U N

b) Ability to meet quality standards specified for technical performance

E VG S M U N

c) Timeliness/effectiveness of contract problem resolution without extensive customer guidance

E VG S M U N

d) Adequacy/effectiveness of quality control program and adherence to contract quality assurance requirements (without adverse effect on performance)

E VG S M U N

2. SCHEDULE/TIMELINESS OF PERFORMANCE:

a) Compliance with contract delivery/completion schedules including any significant intermediate milestones. (If liquidated damages were assessed or the schedule was not met, please address below)

E VG S M U N

b) Rate the contractor’s use of available resources to accomplish tasks identified in the contract

E VG S M U N

3. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

a) To what extent were the end users satisfied with the project?

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor was reasonable and cooperative in dealing with your staff (including the ability to successfully resolve disagreements/disputes; responsiveness to administrative reports, businesslike and communication)

E VG S M U N

c) To what extent was the contractor cooperative, businesslike, and concerned with the interests of the customer?

E VG S M U N

d) Overall customer satisfaction E VG S M U N

4. MANAGEMENT/ PERSONNEL/LABOR

a) Effectiveness of on-site management, including management of subcontractors, suppliers, materials, and/or labor force?

E VG S M U N

b) Ability to hire, apply, and retain a qualified workforce to this effort

E VG S M U N

c) Government Property Control E VG S M U N

d) Knowledge/expertise demonstrated by contractor personnel

E VG S M U N

e) Utilization of Small Business concerns E VG S M U N

f) Ability to simultaneously manage multiple projects with multiple disciplines

E VG S M U N

g) Ability to assimilate and incorporate changes in requirements and/or priority, including planning, execution and response to Government changes

E VG S M U N

h) Effectiveness of overall management (including ability to effectively lead, manage and control the program)

E VG S M U N

5. COST/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

a) Ability to meet the terms and conditions within the contractually agreed price(s)?

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor proposed innovative alternative methods/processes that reduced cost, improved maintainability or other factors that benefited the client

E VG S M U N

c) If this is/was a Government cost type contract, please rate the Contractor’s timeliness and accuracy in submitting monthly invoices with appropriate back-up documentation, monthly status reports/budget variance reports, compliance with established budgets and avoidance of significant and/or unexplained variances (under runs or overruns)

E VG S M U N

d) Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs? If no, please explain in Remarks section.

Yes No

e) If this is/was a Government contract, has/was this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience or are there any pending terminations? Indicate if show cause or cure notices were issued, or any default action in comment section below.

Yes No

f) Have there been any indications that the contractor has had any financial problems? If yes, please explain below.

Yes No

6. SAFETY/SECURITY

a) To what extent was the contractor able to maintain an environment of safety, adhere to its approved safety plan, and respond to safety issues? (Includes: following the users rules, regulations, and requirements regarding housekeeping, safety, correction of noted deficiencies, etc.)

E VG S M U N

b) Contractor complied with all security requirements for the project and personnel security requirements.

E VG S M U N

7. GENERAL

a) Ability to successfully respond to emergency and/or surge situations (including notifying COR, PM or Contracting Officer in a timely manner regarding urgent contractual issues).

E VG S M U N

b) Compliance with contractual terms/provisions (explain if specific issues)

E VG S M U N

c) Would you hire or work with this firm again? (If no, please explain below)

Yes No

d) In summary, provide an overall rating for the work performed by this contractor.

E VG S M U N

Please provide responses to the questions above (if applicable) and/or additional remarks. Furthermore, please provide a brief narrative addressing specific strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies, or other comments which may assist our office in evaluating performance risk (please attach additional pages if necessary):

Attachment 02

PRICING SCHEDULE

REFUSE AND RECYCLING SERVICES

ERDC VICKSBURG, MS

Base year

Item Description Unit Cost Quantity Unit Total Cost

PROVIDE REFUSE

CONTAINERS AND

COLLECTION

12 month

PROVIDE REFUSE

SERVICES

REIMBURSEABLE:

40 Yard Roll-off and Hauling

24 each

PROVIDE RECYCLING

SERVICES

12 months

PROVIDE FOUR(4) 40

CUBIC YARD ROLL-OFF

CONTAINERS

12 month

Total:

Option Year 1

PROVIDE REFUSE

CONTAINERS AND

COLLECTION

12 month

PROVIDE REFUSE

SERVICES

REIMBURSEABLE:

40 Yard Roll-off and Hauling

24 each

PROVIDE RECYCLING

SERVICES 12 months

PROVIDE FOUR(4) 40

CUBIC YARD ROLL-OFF

CONTAINERS

12 month

Total:

Option Year 2

Item Description Unit Cost Quantity Unit Total Cost

PROVIDE REFUSE

CONTAINERS AND

COLLECTION

12 month

PROVIDE REFUSE

SERVICES

REIMBURSEABLE:

40 Yard Roll-off and Hauling

24 each

3 PROVIDE RECYCLING

SERVICES

12 months

PROVIDE FOUR(4) 40

CUBIC YARD ROLL-OFF

CONTAINERS

12 month

Total:

Option Year 3

Item Description Unit Cost Quantity Unit Total Cost

PROVIDE REFUSE

CONTAINERS AND

COLLECTION

12 month

PROVIDE REFUSE

SERVICES

REIMBURSEABLE:

40 Yard Roll-off and Hauling

24 each

3 PROVIDE RECYCLING

SERVICES

12 months

PROVIDE FOUR(4) 40

CUBIC YARD ROLL-OFF

CONTAINERS

Option Year 4

Item Description Unit Cost Quantity Unit Total Cost

PROVIDE REFUSE

CONTAINERS AND

COLLECTION

12 month

PROVIDE REFUSE

SERVICES

REIMBURSEABLE:

40 Yard Roll-off and Hauling

24 each

PROVIDE RECYCLING

SERVICES 12 months

PROVIDE FOUR(4) 40

CUBIC YARD ROLL-OFF

CONTAINERS

Total Base Plus Options

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVAL FACTORS

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

1.0 OVERVIEW

The Government will evaluate the proposal in accordance with the evaluation factors stated in this solicitation. The evaluation factors in this solicitation are described herein using the evaluation rating systems outlined for selection procedures.

2.0 BASIS OF AWARD

The source selection for this Competitive Procurement will be conducted utilizing FAR Part 15 Lowest Price Technically Acceptable Procedures. Award will be made to the offeror the Government determines will be able to accomplish the necessary work in the manner most advantageous to the Government and whose offer represents the lowest price technically acceptable to the Government; as determined by the Source Selection Authority (SSA) after considering all factors, including evaluated cost. Award will not be made to any contractor that receives less than an acceptable rating. Proposals will be evaluated utilizing the following evaluation procedures and factors:

EVALUATION PROCUEDURES:

Factor I – Technical, Factor II – Past Performance, and factor III – Price are of equal importance.

The Government intends to select ONE contractor for award of this effort. For the purpose of award, the government shall evaluate offers based on the evaluation factors described below:

3.0 Evaluation Factors

Factor Location Description FACTOR 1 VOLUME 1 Technical – Offerors shall describe their

Relevant Experience and Management Plan.

FACTOR 2 VOLUME 1 Past Performance – Offeror shall demonstrate past performance for the projects submitted for Relevant Experience.

FACTOR 3 VOLUME 2 Standard Form 1449 and Pricing Schedule.

The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

I. FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

The Offeror must submit evidence of its capability as specified in this solicitation.

Contractors will be evaluated on the following.

Factor 1 – Subfactor 1: Relevant Experience:

Relevant is defined as projects of a same or similar scope, size, and complexity which requires a commensurate level of activities, labor, equipment, materials, management and supervision, to complete this project. Offeror’s must submit experience with at least one project of a similar type, size, scope and complexity, performed within the last five (5) years from the date of this solicitation. The contractor shall also provide sufficient documentation of their refuse and recycling experience.

The evaluation of experience is a subjective assessment of the Offeror’s experience on contracts of a similar nature, size, scope, and complexity, utilizing a comparable number of personnel with like skills. The Government will assess the Offeror’s experience and determine whether the contractor’s experience is similar in depth and breadth of experience and demonstrates their ability to execute contract requirements.

NOTE: EVERY CONTRACT USED AS AN EXAMPLE OF RELEVANT EXPERIENCE

SHALL ALSO BE SUBMITTED AS PAST PERFORMANCE. ANY CONTRACT SUBMITTED

FOR EXPERIENCE THAT DOES NOT ALSO CONTAIN PAST PERFORMANCE WILL BE

OMITTED AND NOT EVALUATED.

Factor 2 – Subfactor 2: Management Plan:

The proposal will be evaluated to determine if it demonstrates an effective technical and management approach for accomplishing the services identified in the PWS including Providing refuse containers, providing recycling containers, and providing recycling bin emptying services. At a minimum this shall include a management plan, schedule of the services to be provided, and a description (pictures) of the Refuse and Recycling containers to be provided.

FACTOR 1 TECHNICAL CAPABILITY RATING SYSTEM AND DEFINITIONS

Table 1. Technical Evaluation Ratings Rating Description Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

II. FACTOR 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

NOTE: Every contract used as an example of Relevant Experience in Evaluation Factor 1 (Technical), shall also be submitted as Past Performance.

Past performance refers to the quality of the work performed from a client’s perspective.

Offerors past performance will be determined relevant or not relevant, and, if deemed relevant, will then be rated as acceptable or unacceptable. The criteria of what is deemed “relevant” can be found in the technical capability evaluation factor.

To demonstrate acceptable past performance, the Offeror shall provide documentation of satisfactory performance (using the attached Past Performance Questionnaire) on past or current contracts of a similar type, size, scope and complexity, performed within the last five (5) years from the date of this solicitation, including references, with names and contact information of the references who can verify such past performance.

In addition to the above, the Government may review any other sources of information for evaluating past performance. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/DUNS numbers of team members (partnership, joint venture, teaming arrangement, or parent company/subsidiary/affiliate) identified in the offeror’s proposal, inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the offeror. While the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of providing detailed, current, accurate and complete past performance information rests with the Offeror.

There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation. The first is to evaluate whether the offeror’s past performance is relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. The criteria of what is relevant can be found in the technical capability evaluation factor. The relevancy portion will be rated as follows:

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

RATING DEFINITION

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

If the proposal’s past performance is determined to be “relevant”, the second aspect of the past performance evaluation will be to determine how well the contractor performed on the submitted contracts. This portion will be rated as follows:

PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RATINGS

RATING DESCRIPTION

Acceptable

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown.

Unacceptable

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the government has no reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

III. PRICE

The contractor shall submit a completed Standard Form 1449 and Price Schedule. The provided pricing schedule in Section L includes estimated quantities for reimbursable services.

NOTE: The quantities are estimated and do not constitute the government to perform or award the estimated quantities. The unit pricing submitted on the pricing schedule are the unit costs that will be used in the contract. The price schedule will be totaled including all Optional Line items and all Optional Years. This total will be used to determine price.

It is incumbent upon the offeror to submit sufficient information for the Government to determine technical capability and price. Failure to submit sufficient information will cause rejection of the entire proposal.

By submission of an offer pursuant to this solicitation, the Offeror agrees that the capability presented in the proposal becomes a contract requirement upon award of a contract. No changes, substitutions, or deviations from the accepted proposal may be made without the approval of the

Contracting Officer. You, as the Offeror, agree that the explicit capability presented in your proposal shall be provided under this contract at the stated price.

(End of Summary of Changes)