A12 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 remove Section G - Contract Administration Data from the solicitation. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 8

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 11-Jun-2020

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 W912P920R0010

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

21-May-2020

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

11-Jun-2020

CODE

CONTRACTING DIVISION

US ARMY ENGR DIST ST LOUIS

1222 SPRUCE STREET, RM 4.207

ST LOUIS MO 63103-2833

W912P9 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912P920R0010

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

SECTION M EVALUATION FACTORS

PART II – PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND CONTRACT AWARD

(SECTION M)

A. BASIS FOR AWARD

1) Awards will be made in accordance with Class Deviation 2018-O0006, Evaluation Factors for Certain Multiple Award Task or Delivery Order Contracts, dated December 13, 2017. The Government intends to award a contract to each and all qualifying offerors. A qualifying offeror is an offeror who is determined to be a responsible source; who submits a technically acceptable proposal that conforms to the requirements of the solicitation; and whom the Contracting Officer has no reason to believe would likely offer other than fair and reasonable pricing.

a. Technical Acceptance: The Contracting Officer will review the technical submissions of each offeror to make a determination as to the technical acceptability of each offeror.

b. Fair and Reasonable Pricing: Pricing shall not be included as an evaluation factor for the contract awards, but shall be one of the factors in the selection decision for each task order under the contract, in accordance with FAR 16.505. The source selection processes and techniques at the task order level will be either Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) or Trade-off evaluation depending on the task order in accordance with FAR 15. The Contracting Officer may utilize historical and/or past performance information to make a determination that there is no reason to believe that an offeror will offer other than fair and reasonable pricing

2) The Government intends to make award without holding discussions with offerors. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Sources Selection Authority (SSA) determines them to be necessary. Therefore, offerors are encouraged to include their best terms and conditions in the initial offer.

3) The source selection process will be conducted in accordance with FAR Subpart 15, Source Selection procedures and Class Deviation 2018-O0006. Offers will be evaluated using the evaluation criteria listed below in paragraph B.

Noncompliance with the solicitation submission requirements will raise serious questions regarding an offeror’s technical ability or past performance and will grounds to eliminate the proposal from consideration for contract awards. Failure to include all information requested will adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the solicitation will be considered unacceptable.

4) The Contracting Officer will begin the evaluation process by conducting a proposal compliance review for all timely-received proposals to determine basic proposal adequacy prior to providing the proposals to the evaluators (the Source Selection Team). Failure to provide a complete proposal will result in the proposal being removed from further consideration for award. Failure to address any factor shall be grounds for elimination from evaluation and consideration for award.

B. EVALUATION FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS

1) The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each technical proposal:

Volume I - Factor 1 – Laboratory Technical Approach (includes subfactors a and b) Volume I - Factor 2 – Field Technical Approach (includes subfactors a and b) Volume I - Factor 3 – Staffing approach (includes subfactors a–c)

Volume II - Factor 4 – Past Performance

Volume III – Solicitations, offer and award documents and certifications and representations.

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

VOLUME I, FACTOR 1 – LABORATORY TECHNICAL APPROACHES

(10 pages maximum)

There are two (2) subfactors associated with this technical approach factor for work completed in the laboratory.

Subfactor (a) –Technical approach for the operation and management an archaeological lab to rehabilitate pre-existing archaeological collections, including artifacts and associated documentation, for permanent curation at a specified repository (i.e., the work expected at the full-service Veterans Curation Program Laboratories). The government will evaluate the above approach to ensure that the minimum qualifications were included.

Subfactor (b) – Technical approach for archival processing. The government will evaluate the above approach to ensure that the minimum qualifications were included.

VOLUME I, FACTOR 2 – FIELD TECHNICAL APPROACHES (10 pages maximum)

There are two (2) subfactors associated with this technical approach factor to complete field investigations.

Subfactor (a) – Technical approach for the assessment and evaluation of a historic building that would be used to determine a mitigation plan, rehabilitation plan, and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) nomination paperwork. The government will evaluate the above approach to ensure that the minimum qualifications were included.

Subfactor (b) –The government will evaluate the minimum approach to include research information, state guidelines for execution of fieldwork (assuming shovel testing is required and sites are located), and artifact disposition. The government will evaluate the above approach to ensure that the minimum qualifications were included.

VOLUME I, FACTOR 3 – STAFFING APPROACH (15 pages maximum)

There are three (3) subfactors associated with this staffing approach factor. The Government will evaluate an offeror's Staffing Approach, subfactors (a) – (c) to determine if the offeror clearly communicates an understanding of the work to be performed. If resumes are received they will not be part of the evaluation.

Subfactor (a) – Staffing approach to manage and supervise work throughout CONUS and OCONUS (U.S. territories).

Subfactor (b) – Staffing approach for Phase II archaeology testing of one multi-component (historic and prehistoric) site.

Subfactor (c) – Staffing approach for the operation and management of an archaeology and archival processing lab.

Factors 1, 2, and 3 will use the rating table below:

Adjectival Rating

Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

VOLUME 2, FACTOR 4—PAST PERFORMANCE (10 pages maximum)

Past Performance Evaluation Factors

1) The recency and relevancy of the information (as determined by the Government), the source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the contractor’s performance may be considered.

i. Recency: The government will first evaluate the recency of past performance information submitted. Past performance will be deemed recent if it has been completed, or ongoing within the past five (5) years, and is more than 75% complete at the time of proposal. The Government will consider recent past performance information identified by each Offeror, as well as any additional recent past performance information obtained by the Government.

2) The government will evaluate Relevant Past Performance by the offeror’s demonstration of work covering all types listed below within the page limit and appropriate time span and demonstrating projects nationwide. The offeror’s proposal must include a minimum of five (5) projects which demonstrate specific performance history over the course of the past five (5) years. Please submit a chart with the following information and provide a narrative to further explain each project.

The chart will have the following headings:

1. Name of Project

2. Client Name

3. Point of Contact (Including email and phone)

4. Value of Work

5. Duration of Work

6. Location of Work

7. Category of Work: (using letter designations from PWS section 1.3.1)

8. Teaming Relationship

9. Percentage of work self-performed

3) In general, example projects that the Government did not consider recent for the purposes of evaluating experience will not be considered relevant for the purposes of evaluating past performance.

i. Relevancy: The first aspect of the Past Performance evaluation is to assess the offeror’s past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. Relevancy is not separately rated for the offeror as a whole. Instead, the following criteria will be used to establish the extent to which each evaluated past performance effort is relevant, which shall include similarity of service and support, complexity, and dollar value.

Each past performance effort will be assigned one of the levels of relevancy ratings shown in the following table:

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Adjectival Rating Definition

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

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

Somewhat Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved some of the 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.

4) In the case of an offeror without a record of recent, relevant past performance (and for which there is also no recent, relevant past performance information for its predecessor companies or key subcontractors), or for whom information on past performance is not available or cannot be verified, the offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (FAR 15.305(a) (2) (iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable”.

5) The Performance Assessment Reporting System will be utilized to validate past performance ratings on Department of Defense contracts, as well as any other past performance information the Government has available to evaluate a contractor’s past performance. The Government may contact references provided as part of this factor for the purposes of assessing and verifying the scope of the work performed.

Offerors shall provide accurate, current, and complete contact information for references provided in the project descriptions.

Offerors must demonstrate the following minimum acceptability standards to receive an “ACCEPTABLE” rating:

1. Demonstrates timely completion on previously delivered similar project(s).

2. All past or current references have overall ratings of satisfactory or above.

3. All past or current references indicate that the contractor would be recommended to perform work in the future.

Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method Adjectival 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 past performance record is determined to be unknown.

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a 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 past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

VOLUME III– SOLICITATIONS, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS,

AND CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS

Certifications and Representations – Each offeror shall complete (fill-in and signatures the solicitation sections indicated below using the file (without modification to the file) provided with the RFP. An authorized official of the firm shall sign the SF 1449 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signature for submission.

Section A – Standard A – Standard Form 1149 (SF 1449), Solicitation, Offer and

Award Section K – Representations, Certification and Other Statements of Offerors

Solicitations, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations shall not be addressed separately from that submitted in VOLUME III-

SOLICITATIONS, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND

CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS

If the offeror is a JV, each JV partner or entity must complete and attach the Online Representations and Certifications for its own organization, in addition to the “Reps and Certs” completed and submitted on behalf of the JV offeror.

(End of Summary of Changes)