Revised_Copper_Crusher_Gauge_Eval_Criteria.pdf
PDF 81 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Precision Mechanical Gauges Manufacturing Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- W91CRB-19-R-0050
About this file
This solicitation requests quotes for the manufacture of precision mechanical gauges to be delivered to Aberdeen Test Center in Maryland and Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona. The Army Contracting Command at Aberdeen Proving Ground will award a firm-fixed price contract for first article testing and full production of three types of gauges. Offerors must quote fixed prices for nine contract line items, including first article tests and production quantities of high, low, and medium pressure gauges to be delivered by 180 days after award. Quotes are due by October 4, 2019 and will be evaluated using lowest price technically acceptable criteria. Offerors must have experience machining steel parts to similar tolerances and be registered in the System for Award Management.
Revised eval criteria
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Revised_Purchase_Description_6_Sep_19.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
L-4 Volume Content Requirements
L.4.1 Factor 1 - Technical
The Technical Proposal shall contain adequate information so that the Government can determine whether the Offeror is capable of meeting the requirements of the Purchase Description. Specifically, the technical proposal shall consist of the following two (2) SubFactors:
Subfactor 1. List of Equipment:
This sub factor shall contain a list of the equipment that will be used by the offeror to manufacture the various parts of each gauge. It will also include a basic overview of the steps that will be required to make each part as demonstrated on a maximum of one (1) page.
Subfactor 2. Inspection Methodology:
This sub factor shall contain the offeror’s basic methodology for inspecting critical dimensions listed in the purchase description. The offeror’s methodology shall include a description of the tools and equipment that will be used to perform inspections, as demonstrated on a maximum of one (1) page.
L.4.2 Factor 2 – Past Performance:
The offeror shall demonstrate that that they have a minimum of three (3) years of experience, from the date of this solicitation, in machining steel parts the same or similar to the tolerances found in the pressure gauge drawings, as demonstrated on a maximum of one (1) page.
Offerors shall submit no more than three (3) total recent and relevant past performance information. Recent information is described as contractual efforts undertaken from 2014 to present. Relevant information is described as experience in machining steel parts the same or similar to tolerances found in the pressure gauge drawings. Offerors with no past performance shall state as much. The offerors submission of past performance must contain the following:
(1) Contractor/Subcontractor place of performance, CAGE Code and DUNS number
(2) Government contracting activity, address, telephone and email (if applicable)
(3) POCs name, telephone and e-mail
(4) Government's technical representative/COR telephone and e-mail (if applicable)
(5) Government contract administration activity and the ACO’s name, telephone and e-mail (if applicable)
(6) Contract Number
(7) Contract Type
(8) Awarded price/cost
(9) Delivery schedule
(10) Narrative - Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed describing the objectives achieved and detailing the experience in machining steel parts the same or similar to the tolerances found in the pressure gauge drawings in this solicitation.
The offeror shall also specify to what extent subcontractors were involved with respect to the scope of work, objectives achieved, and personnel resources utilized, and how previous contracts relate to this effort.
L.4.3 Factor 3 – Price
Pricing shall be provided for all CLINs on a Firm-Fixed Price basis. The Government intends to make award to the Offeror whose proposal is technically acceptable with the lowest evaluated price (LPTA). Assumptions used in determining the proposed Firm-Fixed Prices must be clearly stated in the Offeror’s proposal. The unit prices and total price shall be provided in the same format as the Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) in Section B of the solicitation. The Total Evaluated Price will be the sum of all total prices provided in Section B. l. All submissions shall be made in U.S. dollars. Each Offeror’s price proposal shall contain sufficient quantitative and narrative documentation necessary to adequately support and explain the reasonableness of the proposed price proposed in proposal Section B.
Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award
CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT
52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 1999)
(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:
Award will be made on the basis of lowest priced technically acceptable (LPTA).
FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED:
Factor 1 - Technical
Subfactor 1. List of Equipment
Subfactor 2. Inspection Methodology
Factor 2 – Past Performance
Factor 3 – Price
(b) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, e-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), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.
EVALUATION & BASIS OF AWARD
M.1 Basis for Award The Government intends to award one Firm-Fixed Price contract to the lowest priced, technically acceptable proposal, in accordance with FAR Part 15.101-2. To receive consideration for award, a rating of “Acceptable” must be achieved for both Factors 1 and 2, Technical and Price. A rating of acceptable must be achieved for all technical subfactors in order to achieve an acceptable rating for technical.
M.2 Determination of Responsibility In accordance with FAR 9.103, contracts will be placed only with Contractors that the Contracting Officer determines to be responsible. Prospective Offerors, in order to qualify as sources for this acquisition, must be able to demonstrate that they meet standards of responsibility set forth in FAR 9.104. The Government reserves the right to conduct a Pre-Award Survey on any or all Offerors to aid in the evaluation of each Offeror’s proposal and ensure that a selected Contractor is responsible. No award can be made to an Offeror who has been determined non-responsible by the Contracting Officer.
M-3 Evaluation Factors
M-3.1 FACTOR 1 Technical The Technical volume of the proposal will be evaluated against the requirements described in Section L of this solicitation. To be considered for award, an offeror must be determined to be acceptable in accordance with the ratings in section M-4.1.1.
The Government is not responsible for locating or securing any information which is not identified in the Proposal.
M-3.1.1 Technical The ratings and descriptions that will be used for the evaluation of Factor 1 – Technical and Factor 2 – Past Performance are provided below:
Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.
Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.
The offerors shall address each of the following subfactors within its technical proposal.
Offerors must receive a rating of Acceptable in each subfactor to receive an Acceptable rating for this factor.
Subfactor 1- List of Equipment: The Government will determine if the list of equipment meets the requirements of the Purchase Description.
Acceptable: Offeror meets requirements of the Purchase Description for the list of equipment as described in Section L.
Unacceptable: Offeror does not meets the requirements of the Purchase Description for the list of equipment as described in Section L.
Subfactor 2- Inspection Methodology: The Government will determine if the inspection methodology meets the requirements of the Purchase Description.
Acceptable: Offeror meets the minimum requirement for the inspection methodology as described in Section L.
Unacceptable: Offeror does not meets the minimum requirement for the inspection methodology as described in Section L.
M-3.2 FACTOR 2 – Past Performance: The Government will determine if the offeror as an entity (Prime contractor and all proposed major subcontractors) clearly meets minimum requirements of the solicitation for experience.
Acceptable: Offeror meets the minimum requirement of 3 years of experience (occurring within the past 5 years) in machining steel parts the same or similar to the tolerances found in the pressure gauge drawings areas as described in Section L.
Unacceptable: Offeror does not meet the minimum requirement of 3 years of experience (occurring within the past 5 years) in machining steel parts the same or similar to the tolerances found in the pressure gauge drawings areas as described in Section L.
M-3.3 FACTOR 3 - Price
Offerors shall provide a completed Section B, as part of the price proposal. The Government will evaluate the summed total of all Contact Line Item Numbers (CLINs) in Section B.
Adequate price schedules and narrative shall be provided supporting the proposed CLIN price elements in Section B. Offeror price proposals will be evaluated based on the applicable criteria in FAR 15.404-1 based on competition and other factors. Accordingly, the analytical techniques and procedures described in FAR 15.404-1 may be used singly or in combination with others, as determined necessary by the Contracting Officer, to ensure the prices are fair, reasonable.
As this will be a Firm Fixed Price -type contract, no cost-realism analysis is required per FAR 15.404-1(d). A proposal is presumed to represent the Offeror's best effort to respond to the solicitation. Any inconsistency with other sections of the Offeror's proposal (i.e. technical), whether real or apparent, between promised performance and price shall be explained in the proposal. Any significant inconsistency, if unexplained, may raise a fundamental issue of the Offeror's understanding of the nature and scope of the work required and may be grounds for rejection of the proposal as inadequate.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .