Solicitation_Amendment_2.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 for this amendment is to

1. Extend the due date to 0900 on 14 May 2019

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 4

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 09-May-2019

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 W91CRB19R0025

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11-Apr-2019

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 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

09-May-2019

CODE

ACC - APG - W91CRB

BLDG 4310

6515 INTEGRITY COURT

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND MD 21005-3013

W91CRB 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W91CRB19R0025

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 10-May-2019 09:00 AM to 14-May-2019 09:00 AM.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION FACTORS

SOLICITATION PROVISIONS

A. BASIS FOR AWARD (Section M)

The award will be made to the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal. Proposals will be evaluated for technical acceptability (including past performance), but will not be ranked using the non-price Factors (and Subfactors). In order for an Offeror to be considered for award, the proposal must receive an “Acceptable” rating in every non-price Factor. A proposal receiving a rating of “Unacceptable” in any non-price Factor will not be eligible for award.

The evaluation criteria detailing the Factors and Subfactors are contained in Section M (or equivalent) of the Request for Proposal (RFP).

B. FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

Factor I: Technical Subfactor I - Technical Approach (Acceptable or Unacceptable) Subfactor II - Corporate Experience (Acceptable or Unacceptable) Subfactor III – Key Personnel (Acceptable or Unacceptable) Subfactor IV – Phase In (Acceptable or Unacceptable) Factor II: Past Performance (Acceptable or Unacceptable) Factor III: Cost/Price

C. EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by a team of Government personnel. In this context, “Offeror” refers to the proposed prime contractor and all proposed subcontractors or partners in teaming arrangements who will be providing support in this effort. The prime contractor and proposed subcontractor/partners will be assessed individually and the results will then be evaluated to derive the Offeror’s overall rating. All proposal submission requirements must be met, clear, concise, and comprehensive and meet the requirements of the PWS in order to be found technically acceptable. Ambiguities may result in an unacceptable rating.

Factor I: Technical

Sub factor I - Technical Approach. The offeror’s technical approach submitted in response to Factor I of Section L of the solicitation will be evaluated on an acceptable or unacceptable basis using the following rating criteria:

a. Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the Offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the

RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the RFP.

b. Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

c. Understanding of Requirements. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposal demonstrates a clear understanding of all technical features involved in solving the problems and meeting the requirements; and the extent to which uncertainties are identified and resolutions are proposed.

Rating Description Acceptable The offeror’s proposal meets all proposal submission requirements, and provides a clear understanding to meeting all requirements of this factor. The proposal has no deficiencies.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements, and contains one or more deficiencies.

Subfactor II – Corporate Experience. The Corporate Experience Factor will evaluate the Offeror’s corporate experience as it applies to fulfilling existing requirements with a similar size, scope and degree of complexity for the requirements set forth in the PWS. The Government will utilize information pertaining to Offeror performance on recent, relevant contracts as identified in the offeror’s proposal. The objective of the evaluation is to: 1) Determine the degree to which the offeror has previously encountered requirements of like breadth, detail, and challenges that it may encounter under the prospective contract; 2) Develop insight into the offeror’s demonstrated capabilities and its ability to meet the Government’s stated requirement. The Offeror’s Corporate Experience proposal submitted in response to Section L of the solicitation and will be evaluated to assess following:

Acceptable Proposal demonstrates corporate experience relevant to the performance of the PWS and their proposed approach.

Unacceptable Proposal does not demonstrate corporate experience relevant to the performance of the PWS and their proposed approach.

Subfactor III – Key Personnel.

This factor evaluates the Offeror’s personnel credentials, experience and qualifications in response to Section L of the Request for Proposal. This factor will be evaluated in accordance with the following:

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation

Subfactor IV- Phase In.

This factor evaluates the Offeror’s transition plan in response to Section L of the Request for Proposal. This factor will be evaluated in accordance with the following:

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation

Factor II - Past Performance. The offeror’s past performance submitted in response to Factor II of Section L of the solicitation will be evaluated on an acceptable or unacceptable basis using the following rating criteria:

The Past Performance item evaluates the Offeror’s past performance as it applies to fulfilling existing requirements with a similar degree of complexity to those stated in the PWS. The Past Performance item will be in accordance with the below to determine the Government’s confidence that the Offeror can successfully execute the requirements of the contract. The Government will utilize information pertaining to Offeror performance on recent, relevant contracts as identified in the offeror’s proposal. The Government may independently obtain information from other relevant contracts and sources for the purpose of evaluating past performance.

Acceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record (including relevance and scope), 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 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. Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

Factor III - Cost/Price. The solicitation is commercial FFP. Therefore, proposals will be evaluated for price fairness/reasonableness in accordance with FAR 15.404-1. The analytical techniques and procedures used to evaluate price fairness/reasonableness will be determined by the Contracting Officer based on competition and any other applicable factors. Each offeror is to provide a price proposal in response to the solicitation, and a completed and a totaled Section B in electronic formats. FAR 15.403-5(b) allows the contracting officer to specify the format of cost or pricing data or data other than certified cost or pricing data. Therefore each offeror, and any subcontractors, shall complete the Cost Model.xlsx Excel workbook attached with this solicitation, and submit the completed workbook in both protected and unprotected electronic file formats with the price proposal. The completed model shall be the basis of the proposed Section B labor and ODC prices. This is a required flow down requirement to subcontractors, and therefore shall be submitted for the prime offeror AND for any and all divisions and subcontractors proposed to perform effort in response to this solicitation. Since the requirement is commercial FFP, FAR 52.222-46 will not be evaluated. However employee compensation for recruitment and retention purposes shall be adequate to meet the PWS requirements.

(End of Summary of Changes)