ATC Turf Field Maintenance
Closed Solicitation Posted
- Solicitation number
- W9124C26QA024
- Agency
-
MICC Fort Hood
Mission and Installation Contracting Command, Department of Defense
- Responses due
- Set-aside
- Total Small Business
Opportunity facts
- NAICS code
- 561730 Landscaping Services
- Place of performance
- Columbia, South Carolina 29207, United States
Notice details come from SAM.gov. Updated .
About this opportunity
The Department of the Army Materiel Command Mission and Installation Contracting Command Fort Jackson seeks comprehensive maintenance services for artificial turf fields at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, with proposals due September 14 at 12:00 PM. The procurement is a Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) set-aside, foreclosing competition outside that pool.
Place of performance is Fort Jackson, Columbia, South Carolina. The contract covers maintenance of fourteen artificial turf fields across multiple battalion locations including Jackson Boulevard, Lightning Street, Jenkins Road, Golden Arrow Road, Pickens Street, Hurtgen Forest Road, Hilton Field, and Lightning Village. The NAICS code is 561730, Landscaping Services; PSC is S208, Housekeeping—Landscaping/Groundskeeping.
The contractor must furnish all personnel, equipment, supplies, tools, materials, and supervision to perform bi-annual scheduled maintenance (twice yearly during the second week of each six-month cycle) and unscheduled emergency maintenance on demand. Scheduled maintenance includes multi-level field vacuuming, debris removal and disposal, turf grooming, foreign object removal, professional surface cleaning, manual weed removal with Fort Jackson-approved post-emergent herbicide application, and comprehensive field inspection assessing turf condition and infill levels. All repairs carry a one-year warranty on workmanship and labor. The contractor must respond telephonically to urgent repair calls within 24 hours and dispatch a qualified technician on-site within seven business days. Initial maintenance on all fields must be completed within 30 days of award.
The Contract Manager and Alternate Contract Manager require minimum 3–5 years' direct experience in similar work. Security clearances are not required; personnel need only standard Fort Jackson installation access badges (valid REAL ID-compliant driver's license, background screening through Gate 4). No IAT Level I certification is mandated. The contractor must obtain the current wage determination from SAM.gov and comply with Service Contract Act prevailing wage obligations. Medical Liability Insurance of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $3,000,000 aggregate is required per FAR 52.237-7. Additional insurance includes Comprehensive General Liability ($500,000 per occurrence, bodily injury; $50,000 property damage), Employer's Liability ($100,000), and Comprehensive Automobile Liability ($200,000 per person, $500,000 per occurrence, bodily injury; $20,000 property damage).
The contract structure spans a base period plus four option years (September 30, 2026 through September 29, 2031) with firm-fixed-price line items for scheduled maintenance (two per period) and unscheduled maintenance and repairs with not-to-exceed ceilings ranging from $50,000 (base) to $50,160.18 (Option Year 4). Award uses a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) evaluation method without discussions unless necessary. Proposals are evaluated on three factors: Technical Approach and Understanding (including Quality Control Plan addressing lines of authority, deficiency prevention, and inspection logging), Past Performance (within three years, rated Acceptable, Unacceptable, or Neutral), and Cost/Price (total for base plus all options, plus one-half of Option Year 4). Amendment 0002 (effective September 10) incorporated an updated Performance Work Statement (PWS Change 2) and government responses to vendor questions. A mandatory site visit was conducted September 8 at 0800 EST; written questions were due September 9 by 1200 EST.
Notice text
3 versions
Update #3 · Latest ·
***
The purpose of Amendment 0002 is to incorporate the updated Performance Work Statement (PWS) for Solicitation W9124C-26-Q-A024, ATC Turf Field Maintenance, and to provide the Government’s responses to all vendor-submitted questions.
***
The objective of this contract is to provide comprehensive maintenance for fifteen (15) artificial turf fields located throughout Fort Jackson. The Contractor shall furnish all personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, tools, materials, supervision, and all other items and non-personal services necessary to perform turf field grooming, preventive maintenance, minor repair services, and unscheduled/emergency maintenance. Scheduled maintenance shall be performed bi-annually to ensure proper turf condition, safety, and performance.
PLACE OF PERFORMANCE:
Fort Jackson, South Carolina 29207
BASIS FOR AWARD:
The Government will utilize a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) evaluation method for this requirement. The Government will award one (1) Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) C-Type contract to the offeror whose proposal is technically acceptable, has the lowest evaluated price, and is deemed responsible.
The Government will evaluate the contractor's Technical Approach, Past Performance, and Price Proposal to ensure that it reflects a sound understanding of this requirement and complies with the requirements in the solicitation. A determination of a fair and reasonable price will be conducted. See attached ADDENDUM TO RFO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-2 Evaluations.
PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS:
Offerors shall submit a signed and dated proposal electronically in accordance with the attached ADDENDUM TO RFO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-1 Instructions. Failure to provide all required documents or information may exclude the offeror from further consideration.
Proposal Preparation Instructions. The solicitation instructions identify the following proposal volumes:
a. Volume 1 – General
b. Volume 2 – Technical Approach (to include Capabilities Statement)
c. Volume 3 – Past Performance Information
d. Volume 4 – Cost/Price
EVALUATION:
The proposal will be evaluated under three (3) evaluation factors:
Factor 1: Technical
Factor 2: Past Performance
Factor 3: Cost/Price
The Technical factor will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. An “Unacceptable” rating in any single Technical element will result in an overall rating of “Unacceptable” for Factor 1. Past Performance will be evaluated as described below. Price will be evaluated for reasonableness. See attached ADDENDUM TO RFO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-2 Evaluations.
Factor 1 – Technical:
The Technical factor evaluation provides an assessment of the offeror's capability to satisfy the Government's minimum requirements. The Technical factor has three elements. The Government will evaluate the technical approach, quality controls, and key personnel qualifications related to providing preventive and unscheduled maintenance for fifteen (15) artificial turf fields located throughout Fort Jackson, SC.
Element 1: Technical Approach and Understanding
The proposal must demonstrate a clear understanding of and a sound approach to performing all services outlined in the PWS, including the specific basic services and tasks described in PWS Part 5.
To be rated Acceptable, the proposal must prove:
1. PWS Compliance: A compliant, clear operational methodology to perform multi-leveling field vacuuming, extensive fiber brush grooming, use of magnetic metal sweepers, and specialized synthetic turf cleaning/sanitization across the fifteen (15) synthetic fields.
2. Operational Responsiveness: A solid approach to executing scheduled semi-annual services and mobilizing personnel/equipment for unscheduled emergency repairs/maintenance in accordance with the response timelines set forth in the PWS.
Element 2: Deliverables and Quality Control
The proposal must address the deliverables listed in Technical Exhibit B and include the development of a Quality Control Plan (QCP) in accordance with PWS Paragraph 1.5.1.
To be rated Acceptable, the proposal must prove:
3. Reporting & Deliverables Compliance: A compliant administrative framework to compile, track, and electronically deliver all semi-annual reporting, worksheets, and documentation specified in PWS Technical Exhibit B.
4. QCP Framework: A draft Quality Control Plan (QCP) that completely addresses all requirements and criteria outlined in PWS Paragraph 1.5.1, such as lines of authority, deficiency prevention, inspection logging, key controls, and records preservation.
Element 3: Key Personnel
The proposal must confirm that all Key Personnel meet the minimum qualifications specified in the PWS.
To be rated Acceptable, the proposal must confirm:
5. PWS Qualifications & Experience: All proposed key personnel meet the minimum standards specified in PWS Paragraph 1.10. This includes confirming that the Contract Manager/Alternate has full authority to act on daily operations, and the Quality Control Manager and Systems Administrator each possess a minimum of five (5) years of direct experience.
6. Special Qualifications: Proof that proposed staff possess and maintain active Information Assurance Technician (IAT) Level I professional certifications as required by PWS Paragraph 1.10.d.
Technical Factor Ratings:
ACCEPTABLE – Technical Proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.
UNACCEPTABLE – Technical Proposal does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.
Note: An "Unacceptable" rating in any single element will result in an overall rating of "Unacceptable" for Factor 1.
Factor 2 – Past Performance:
The past performance evaluation will assess the offeror's probability of meeting the solicitation's requirements as indicated by that offeror's record of past performance. Past Performance is assessed at the factor level after evaluating aspects of the offeror's recent (within the last 3 years) and relevant past performance, focusing on services similar to the Turf Field Maintenance requirements. The Government will evaluate past performance based on information submitted per the solicitation instructions and other available sources.
Past Performance Evaluation Ratings:
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.
NEUTRAL – In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a "Neutral" rating shall be considered "Acceptable."
Factor 3 – Cost/Price:
The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total proposed price for all performance periods (Base Period plus Option Years 1 through 4). The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the base period and option period prices are significantly unbalanced.
As part of price evaluation, the Government will evaluate its option to extend services under RFO FAR Clause 52.217-8 by adding one-half (1/2) of the Offeror's final option year price (Option Year 4) to the Offeror's total evaluated price.
Base Period Price (CLIN 0001)
Option Year 1 Price (CLIN 1001)
Option Year 2 Price (CLIN 2001)
Option Year 3 Price (CLIN 3001)
Option Year 4 Price (CLIN 4001)
Evaluation of 52.217-8 Option Price (equivalent to 1/2 of Option Year 4 price)
Offerors are not required to enter a separate price for the six-month extension period. Award will be made to the responsible offeror found to be technically acceptable with the lowest total evaluated price.
The purpose of this amendment (1) is to revise the solicitation schedule, incorporate updated solicitation PWS, and provide site visit information for Solicitation W9124C-26-Q-A024, ATC Turf Field Maintenance.
SITE VISIT: A site visit for all fifteen (15) turf fields will be conducted on Tuesday, 08 September 2026. Vendors shall meet Government representatives at the MICC Fort Jackson office at 0800 EST Located at 4340 Century Division AvenueFort Jackson, SC 29207. Following the initial meeting, attendees will proceed to the first turf field location and continue to the remaining turf field locations.
QUESTIONS DUE: 09 September 2026, NLT 1200 EST. Written questions shall reference Solicitation W9124C-26-Q-A024 and include “Questions and/or Comments – ATC Turf Field Maintenance.” Responses to timely submitted questions will be provided after the question submission deadline.
PROPOSAL DUE: 14 September 2026, NLT 1200 EST.
All offers shall be submitted electronically to:
Contract Specialist: Jonathan Chatman – jonathan.f.chatman.civ@army.mil
Contracting Officer: Antoinette Daniels – antoinette.m.daniels.civ@army.mil
Offerors are advised to review Amendment 0001 and all updated solicitation information in its entirety prior to submitting a quote.
Update #2 ·
The objective of this contract is to provide comprehensive maintenance for fifteen (15) artificial turf fields located throughout Fort Jackson. The Contractor shall furnish all personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, tools, materials, supervision, and all other items and non-personal services necessary to perform turf field grooming, preventive maintenance, minor repair services, and unscheduled/emergency maintenance. Scheduled maintenance shall be performed bi-annually to ensure proper turf condition, safety, and performance.
PLACE OF PERFORMANCE:
Fort Jackson, South Carolina 29207
BASIS FOR AWARD:
The Government will utilize a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) evaluation method for this requirement. The Government will award one (1) Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) C-Type contract to the offeror whose proposal is technically acceptable, has the lowest evaluated price, and is deemed responsible.
The Government will evaluate the contractor's Technical Approach, Past Performance, and Price Proposal to ensure that it reflects a sound understanding of this requirement and complies with the requirements in the solicitation. A determination of a fair and reasonable price will be conducted. See attached ADDENDUM TO RFO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-2 Evaluations.
PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS:
Offerors shall submit a signed and dated proposal electronically in accordance with the attached ADDENDUM TO RFO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-1 Instructions. Failure to provide all required documents or information may exclude the offeror from further consideration.
Proposal Preparation Instructions. The solicitation instructions identify the following proposal volumes:
a. Volume 1 – General
b. Volume 2 – Technical Approach (to include Capabilities Statement)
c. Volume 3 – Past Performance Information
d. Volume 4 – Cost/Price
EVALUATION:
The proposal will be evaluated under three (3) evaluation factors:
Factor 1: Technical
Factor 2: Past Performance
Factor 3: Cost/Price
The Technical factor will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. An “Unacceptable” rating in any single Technical element will result in an overall rating of “Unacceptable” for Factor 1. Past Performance will be evaluated as described below. Price will be evaluated for reasonableness. See attached ADDENDUM TO RFO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-2 Evaluations.
Factor 1 – Technical:
The Technical factor evaluation provides an assessment of the offeror's capability to satisfy the Government's minimum requirements. The Technical factor has three elements. The Government will evaluate the technical approach, quality controls, and key personnel qualifications related to providing preventive and unscheduled maintenance for fifteen (15) artificial turf fields located throughout Fort Jackson, SC.
Element 1: Technical Approach and Understanding
The proposal must demonstrate a clear understanding of and a sound approach to performing all services outlined in the PWS, including the specific basic services and tasks described in PWS Part 5.
To be rated Acceptable, the proposal must prove:
1. PWS Compliance: A compliant, clear operational methodology to perform multi-leveling field vacuuming, extensive fiber brush grooming, use of magnetic metal sweepers, and specialized synthetic turf cleaning/sanitization across the fifteen (15) synthetic fields.
2. Operational Responsiveness: A solid approach to executing scheduled semi-annual services and mobilizing personnel/equipment for unscheduled emergency repairs/maintenance in accordance with the response timelines set forth in the PWS.
Element 2: Deliverables and Quality Control
The proposal must address the deliverables listed in Technical Exhibit B and include the development of a Quality Control Plan (QCP) in accordance with PWS Paragraph 1.5.1.
To be rated Acceptable, the proposal must prove:
3. Reporting & Deliverables Compliance: A compliant administrative framework to compile, track, and electronically deliver all semi-annual reporting, worksheets, and documentation specified in PWS Technical Exhibit B.
4. QCP Framework: A draft Quality Control Plan (QCP) that completely addresses all requirements and criteria outlined in PWS Paragraph 1.5.1, such as lines of authority, deficiency prevention, inspection logging, key controls, and records preservation.
Element 3: Key Personnel
The proposal must confirm that all Key Personnel meet the minimum qualifications specified in the PWS.
To be rated Acceptable, the proposal must confirm:
5. PWS Qualifications & Experience: All proposed key personnel meet the minimum standards specified in PWS Paragraph 1.10. This includes confirming that the Contract Manager/Alternate has full authority to act on daily operations, and the Quality Control Manager and Systems Administrator each possess a minimum of five (5) years of direct experience.
6. Special Qualifications: Proof that proposed staff possess and maintain active Information Assurance Technician (IAT) Level I professional certifications as required by PWS Paragraph 1.10.d.
Technical Factor Ratings:
ACCEPTABLE – Technical Proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.
UNACCEPTABLE – Technical Proposal does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.
Note: An "Unacceptable" rating in any single element will result in an overall rating of "Unacceptable" for Factor 1.
Factor 2 – Past Performance:
The past performance evaluation will assess the offeror's probability of meeting the solicitation's requirements as indicated by that offeror's record of past performance. Past Performance is assessed at the factor level after evaluating aspects of the offeror's recent (within the last 3 years) and relevant past performance, focusing on services similar to the Turf Field Maintenance requirements. The Government will evaluate past performance based on information submitted per the solicitation instructions and other available sources.
Past Performance Evaluation Ratings:
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.
NEUTRAL – In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a "Neutral" rating shall be considered "Acceptable."
Factor 3 – Cost/Price:
The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total proposed price for all performance periods (Base Period plus Option Years 1 through 4). The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the base period and option period prices are significantly unbalanced.
As part of price evaluation, the Government will evaluate its option to extend services under RFO FAR Clause 52.217-8 by adding one-half (1/2) of the Offeror's final option year price (Option Year 4) to the Offeror's total evaluated price.
Base Period Price (CLIN 0001)
Option Year 1 Price (CLIN 1001)
Option Year 2 Price (CLIN 2001)
Option Year 3 Price (CLIN 3001)
Option Year 4 Price (CLIN 4001)
Evaluation of 52.217-8 Option Price (equivalent to 1/2 of Option Year 4 price)
Offerors are not required to enter a separate price for the six-month extension period. Award will be made to the responsible offeror found to be technically acceptable with the lowest total evaluated price.
The purpose of this amendment is to revise the solicitation schedule, incorporate updated solicitation PWS, and provide site visit information for Solicitation W9124C-26-Q-A024, ATC Turf Field Maintenance.
SITE VISIT: A site visit for all fifteen (15) turf fields will be conducted on Tuesday, 08 September 2026. Vendors shall meet Government representatives at the MICC Fort Jackson office at 0800 EST Located at 4340 Century Division AvenueFort Jackson, SC 29207. Following the initial meeting, attendees will proceed to the first turf field location and continue to the remaining turf field locations.
QUESTIONS DUE: 09 September 2026, NLT 1200 EST. Written questions shall reference Solicitation W9124C-26-Q-A024 and include “Questions and/or Comments – ATC Turf Field Maintenance.” Responses to timely submitted questions will be provided after the question submission deadline.
PROPOSAL DUE: 14 September 2026, NLT 1200 EST.
All offers shall be submitted electronically to:
Contract Specialist: Jonathan Chatman – jonathan.f.chatman.civ@army.mil
Contracting Officer: Antoinette Daniels – antoinette.m.daniels.civ@army.mil
Offerors are advised to review Amendment 0001 and all updated solicitation information in its entirety prior to submitting a quote.
Update #1 ·
The objective of this contract is to provide comprehensive maintenance for fifteen (15) artificial turf fields located throughout Fort Jackson. The Contractor shall furnish all personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, tools, materials, supervision, and all other items and non-personal services necessary to perform turf field grooming, preventive maintenance, minor repair services, and unscheduled/emergency maintenance. Scheduled maintenance shall be performed bi-annually to ensure proper turf condition, safety, and performance.
PLACE OF PERFORMANCE:
Fort Jackson, South Carolina 29207
BASIS FOR AWARD:
The Government will utilize a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) evaluation method for this requirement. The Government will award one (1) Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) C-Type contract to the offeror whose proposal is technically acceptable, has the lowest evaluated price, and is deemed responsible.
The Government will evaluate the contractor's Technical Approach, Past Performance, and Price Proposal to ensure that it reflects a sound understanding of this requirement and complies with the requirements in the solicitation. A determination of a fair and reasonable price will be conducted. See attached ADDENDUM TO RFO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-2 Evaluations.
PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS:
Offerors shall submit a signed and dated proposal electronically in accordance with the attached ADDENDUM TO RFO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-1 Instructions. Failure to provide all required documents or information may exclude the offeror from further consideration.
Proposal Preparation Instructions. The solicitation instructions identify the following proposal volumes:
a. Volume 1 – General
b. Volume 2 – Technical Approach (to include Capabilities Statement)
c. Volume 3 – Past Performance Information
d. Volume 4 – Cost/Price
EVALUATION:
The proposal will be evaluated under three (3) evaluation factors:
Factor 1: Technical
Factor 2: Past Performance
Factor 3: Cost/Price
The Technical factor will be evaluated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. An “Unacceptable” rating in any single Technical element will result in an overall rating of “Unacceptable” for Factor 1. Past Performance will be evaluated as described below. Price will be evaluated for reasonableness. See attached ADDENDUM TO RFO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-2 Evaluations.
Factor 1 – Technical:
The Technical factor evaluation provides an assessment of the offeror's capability to satisfy the Government's minimum requirements. The Technical factor has three elements. The Government will evaluate the technical approach, quality controls, and key personnel qualifications related to providing preventive and unscheduled maintenance for fifteen (15) artificial turf fields located throughout Fort Jackson, SC.
Element 1: Technical Approach and Understanding
The proposal must demonstrate a clear understanding of and a sound approach to performing all services outlined in the PWS, including the specific basic services and tasks described in PWS Part 5.
To be rated Acceptable, the proposal must prove:
1. PWS Compliance: A compliant, clear operational methodology to perform multi-leveling field vacuuming, extensive fiber brush grooming, use of magnetic metal sweepers, and specialized synthetic turf cleaning/sanitization across the fifteen (15) synthetic fields.
2. Operational Responsiveness: A solid approach to executing scheduled semi-annual services and mobilizing personnel/equipment for unscheduled emergency repairs/maintenance in accordance with the response timelines set forth in the PWS.
Element 2: Deliverables and Quality Control
The proposal must address the deliverables listed in Technical Exhibit B and include the development of a Quality Control Plan (QCP) in accordance with PWS Paragraph 1.5.1.
To be rated Acceptable, the proposal must prove:
3. Reporting & Deliverables Compliance: A compliant administrative framework to compile, track, and electronically deliver all semi-annual reporting, worksheets, and documentation specified in PWS Technical Exhibit B.
4. QCP Framework: A draft Quality Control Plan (QCP) that completely addresses all requirements and criteria outlined in PWS Paragraph 1.5.1, such as lines of authority, deficiency prevention, inspection logging, key controls, and records preservation.
Element 3: Key Personnel
The proposal must confirm that all Key Personnel meet the minimum qualifications specified in the PWS.
To be rated Acceptable, the proposal must confirm:
5. PWS Qualifications & Experience: All proposed key personnel meet the minimum standards specified in PWS Paragraph 1.10. This includes confirming that the Contract Manager/Alternate has full authority to act on daily operations, and the Quality Control Manager and Systems Administrator each possess a minimum of five (5) years of direct experience.
6. Special Qualifications: Proof that proposed staff possess and maintain active Information Assurance Technician (IAT) Level I professional certifications as required by PWS Paragraph 1.10.d.
Technical Factor Ratings:
ACCEPTABLE – Technical Proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.
UNACCEPTABLE – Technical Proposal does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.
Note: An "Unacceptable" rating in any single element will result in an overall rating of "Unacceptable" for Factor 1.
Factor 2 – Past Performance:
The past performance evaluation will assess the offeror's probability of meeting the solicitation's requirements as indicated by that offeror's record of past performance. Past Performance is assessed at the factor level after evaluating aspects of the offeror's recent (within the last 3 years) and relevant past performance, focusing on services similar to the Turf Field Maintenance requirements. The Government will evaluate past performance based on information submitted per the solicitation instructions and other available sources.
Past Performance Evaluation Ratings:
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.
NEUTRAL – In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a "Neutral" rating shall be considered "Acceptable."
Factor 3 – Cost/Price:
The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total proposed price for all performance periods (Base Period plus Option Years 1 through 4). The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the base period and option period prices are significantly unbalanced.
As part of price evaluation, the Government will evaluate its option to extend services under RFO FAR Clause 52.217-8 by adding one-half (1/2) of the Offeror's final option year price (Option Year 4) to the Offeror's total evaluated price.
Base Period Price (CLIN 0001)
Option Year 1 Price (CLIN 1001)
Option Year 2 Price (CLIN 2001)
Option Year 3 Price (CLIN 3001)
Option Year 4 Price (CLIN 4001)
Evaluation of 52.217-8 Option Price (equivalent to 1/2 of Option Year 4 price)
Offerors are not required to enter a separate price for the six-month extension period. Award will be made to the responsible offeror found to be technically acceptable with the lowest total evaluated price.
QUESTIONS DUE:
08SEPT2026 NLT 1200 EST. The current 52.212-1 addendum requires written questions no later than five (5) days after the solicitation announcement release date. Questions shall reference Solicitation Number W9124C26QA024, Questions and/or Comments ATC Turf Field Maintenance.
PROPOSAL DUE:
11SEPT2026 NLT 1600 EST
OFFER SUBMISSION:
All offers shall be submitted electronically to:
Contract Specialist: Jonathan Chatman – jonathan.f.chatman.civ@army.mil
Contracting Officer: Antoinette Daniels – antoinette.m.daniels.civ@army.mil
Interested parties should access SAM.gov for the solicitation, associated documents, and solicitation amendments. Contractors will not be directly notified of postings by contracting office personnel. All potential sources must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) as required for award.
Files
Show all 14
Similar open opportunities
| Opportunity | Agency | Set-aside | Responses due |
|---|---|---|---|
| JBMHH Stormwater Management Facility Maintenance and Repair Services | MICC Fort Sam Houston | No set-aside |
On GovTribe
Work this opportunity
- Track it in your pipeline
- Find teaming partners
- Similar opportunities
- Ask GovTribe AI about this opportunity