W912PB22Q5002 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

See summary of changes.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 6

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 29-Oct-2021

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 W912PB22Q5002

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

22-Oct-2021

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

29-Oct-2021

CODE

RCO BAVARIA

AMERIKANISCHE BESCHAFFUNGSSTELLE

GEB 542

92655 GRAFENWOEHR LAGER

GERMANY

W912PB 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W912PB22Q5002

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

The purpose of this modification is to:

1. To answer all questions presented by Vendors and provide answers from the Requiring Activity. All questions and answers are presented verbatim.

2. To update Subfactor 1: Experience within FAR 52.212-2 to include the deliverable of a resume.

3. All other conditions of the contract remain unchanged.

Q1:

Paragraph 1.10 b. (page 8 of PWS) it's about minimum qualifications of the proposed engineers as follows:

(i) General Engineer Qualifications:

(ii) Electrical Engineer Qualifications:

(iii) GIS/Land Surveyor/AutoCAD Specialist Qualifications:

(iv) Property Manager Qualifications:

There is no requirement for the position of environmental engineer. I am firmly convinced that an environmental engineer is needed. If I understand correctly PWS the activity of the environmental engineer is excluded from this contract.

Question: Is the position of environmental engineer required under this contract?

A1:

Please see attached revised PWS (all changes have been highlighted in red), to include the environmental engineering services.

Q2:

The PWS does not specify exactly how many positions of LN engineers should be provided.

Can I offer as many engineers as I think are necessary to carry out the activities listed in the PWS?

A2:

This is a service type contract. The contractor shall propose the engineers required to perform the tasks as listed. If the contractor proposes 2 that would normally do the tasks of 3 engineers then those 2 engineers should have the training and experience on the resumes required to perform the extra task they will be performing.

Q3:

"Contracted personnel shall have a complete COVID vaccination" (SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/ORDER page 3) One of the candidates I intend to propose was Covid infected in early September 2021. His personal doctor did not recommend him to be vaccinated for at least 3 months after recovery. This engineer has a green certificate, according to the legislation of the Republic of Bulgaria. He cannot be vaccinated now, but he has been infected and has recovered. He will be vaccinated when his personal doctor allows it.

Should I reject this candidate or is there a possibility that the green certificate will be sufficient to be approved until it becomes eligible for vaccination ?

A3:

The contractor shall provide the medical exemption/ green certificate to the COR. If/ when the situation allows to get vaccinated, the contractor shall provide the vaccination certificate to the COR.

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer on will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

1. Technical

2. Price

3. Past Performance

Award will be made on the basis of the lowest evaluated price of proposals meeting the gateway acceptability standards for non-price factors.

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL

The Technical rating will be based on an “Acceptable” / “Unacceptable” basis. The following definitions will be used in evaluating the offeror’s proposal against the technical requirement.

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

The technical factor is met when the Offeror’s proposal clearly demonstrates evidence of the full capability for executing the PWS requirements and meeting the subfactors above.

In order to receive a rating of “Acceptable”, the offeror shall provide the following with their quote.

Subfactor 1: Experience

Vendor will provide resumes as evidence that each proposed engineer meets the minimum education and training qualifications needed to perform requirements outlined in PWS section 1.10. Applicable diplomas and certifications of each proposed engineer who will provide required services shall be provided.

Subfactor 2: Management Plan

A management plan that indicates at minimum:

1. The company organizational structure as it relates to the proposed action

2. How DPW will send work requests to company management.

3. How company management will workload the appropriate engineering staff.

4. Processes utilized for each required task.

5. Products delivered to company management by appropriate engineering staff.

6. Products company management will deliver to DPW for each task.

7. Proposed time and personnel required for each task.

FACTOR 2: PRICE

a. The total evaluated price shall be the sum of all CLIN prices listed in the schedule for the base year, all option years, and an additional six months of service possible under FAR 52.217-8. To account for the option period(s) possible under Clause 52.217-8 (maximum six months). Option to Extend Services, the Government will take the price for all CLINS of the final option period, prorate it to a six-month value, and add it to the sum of all CLINS (base plus all option periods). This amount will be the total evaluated price.

b. Currency: Offers submitted in response to this solicitation shall be in terms of local currency or U.S.

Dollars. The Government shall use the daily exchange rate of the solicitation closing date to convert local currency offers into U.S. Dollar for evaluation. Evaluation of foreign currency offers will be in accordance with FAR clause 52.225-17. All supporting documentation shall reflect the same currency established in the price proposal.

c. Each offeror’s proposed price will be evaluated to determine whether it is fair and reasonable as per

FAR 13.106-3.

a. Options: The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. To account for the option period(s) possible under Clause 52.217-8 (maximum six months). Option to Extend Services, the Government will take the price for all CLINS of the final option period, prorate it to a six-month value, and add it to the sum of all CLINS (base plus all option periods).

This amount will be the total evaluated price. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

b. A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer).

FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE

Offeror shall submit a list of recent and relevant contracts performed within the last ten (10) years with the Federal government or private industry. A contract is considered recent if it has been performed within the last ten (10) years. A contract is considered relevant if it is similar in complexity, value and services provided. See Relevancy Table below and FAR 52.212-2 for how this information will be evaluated. All past performance information for relevant contracts shall be submitted with the following minimal information.

Contract Number:

Organizational Point of Contact and Telephone:

Email Address:

Description of Service Performed:

Contract Value:

The Past Performance rating will be based on an “Acceptable” / “Unacceptable” basis. The following definitions will be used in evaluating the degree the offeror will satisfactorily provide the required services based on past and current performance records. An Acceptable or Unacceptable rating will be determined as follows:

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. (See note below.)

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. Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

1. Past Performance Information: The information presented in the Past Performance References and information obtained from other available sources other than those identified by the Offeror (such as past performance information obtained from Federal, State and local Government agencies, better business bureaus, published media, and electronic data bases available to the Government) will be the basis for evaluation of this factor.

2. Past Performance Evaluation: The Government will consider the offeror’s previous and current record of contractual performance. The Government assessment will focus on recent contracts that are relevant to the effort required by this solicitation. Recent is defined for this action to be contracts that were performed within the lastten (10) calendar years from the issuance date of the Request for Proposals (RFP). Relevant contracts include individual contracts that are similar, in whole or in part, to this solicitation, including contracts performed by a teaming partner or subcontractor.

3. The Government may reject a proposal if it is found that any information that has a negative impact on the offeror’s past performance record has been deleted, misrepresented, or withheld.

4. It is at the Government’s discretion to determine whether past performance information furnished is or is not considered similar to the size and scope of the present requirement. Should the offeror have no past performance information the Government will assign a rating of “Acceptable.”

5. Offerors are cautioned that, in conducting the past performance assessment, the Government may use data provided in the offeror's proposal and data obtained from other sources. Since the Government may not necessarily interview all of the sources provided by the offerors, it is incumbent upon the offerors to explain the relevance of the data provided. Offerors are reminded that while the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of proving an “acceptable” past performance rests with the offerors.

6. Offerors may provide information on problems encountered on the contracts identified in their past performance submissions and the offerors’ corrective actions.

RELEVANCY CRITERIA

TABLE

RATING DESCRIPTION

Relevant (R) Relevant is defined as contracts of a similar scope and magnitude to the services required in the PWS.

-Similar in scope means that the work must have been for the same type of services as those required for this requirement.

- Similar in magnitude means the work must have been for similar to the amount shown in the estimated quantities as this requirement.

Not Relevant (NR) Present/Past performance was not similar in scope and/or was not similar in magnitude to what this solicitation requires.

(End of Summary of Changes)