SOLICITATION NOTICE
99 -- Obsolescence Analysis Database
- Notice Date
- 12/13/2011
- Notice Type
- Combined Synopsis/Solicitation
- Contracting Office
- US Army, Army Contracting Command, ACC New Jersey Contracting Center, Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey 07806-5000
- ZIP Code
- 07806-5000
- Solicitation Number
- W15QKN-12-R-C006
- Response Due
- 1/25/2012
- Archive Date
- 2/24/2012
- Point of Contact
- Patricia Kleiman, Contract Specialist, 973-724-9591
- E-Mail Address
-
Patricia Kleiman
(patricia.a.kleiman@us.army.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- Obsolescence Analysis Database This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Subpart 12.6, as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. This announcement constitutes the only solicitation; proposals are being requested and a written solicitation will not be issued. This solicitation and any resultant award will be processed in accordance with FAR 13 Simplified Acquisition Procedures. Solicitation number W15QKN-12-R-C006 is being issued as a request for quotation (RFP). The solicitation document and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-54, effective 02 November 2011. This requirement is unrestricted. The Army Contracting Command New Jersey, Joint Armament, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000 on behalf of Fire Control Branch of the Quality Engineering & Systems Assurance Directorate has a requirement to maintain weapon system readiness by being proactive in finding and solving obsolete electric components. This is accomplished by performing obsolescence analysis in accordance with the attached Statement of Objectives (SOO) (Attachment 1).Interested sources should be capable of providing the U.S. Government with potential database access to perform obsolescence analysis. The following are requirements for the analysis: This contract is only for one accountObsolescence subject matter expert consultationObsolescence management and environmental compliance (material content) toolSingle Part Look-up search and compareParametric SearchSecond Source and Alternate mappingLifecycle availability analysis and forecastBill of Material upload/risk analysis including comprehensive report in a visual presentationAutomated Proactive PCN/PDN Alert NotificationRestriction of Hazard Substance (RoHS) Compliance informationFull Material Disclosure on ComponentsMaterial Declaration Reporting CapabilitiesChina RoHS label generatorREACH SVHC identification and trackingNo Bill of Material (BOM) or part number count limitations48hr Part Look-up service Unlimited training for use of the database The anticipated period of performance is one year from date of award. INSTRUCTIONS:Offerors responding to this announcement shall submit their proposal in accordance with the attached Instructions to Offerors (Attachment 2). BASIS FOR AWARD:The Government plans to award a single firm fixed price purchase order as a result of this Request for Proposal (RFP). The evaluation of proposals will be conducted utilizing the Best Value Tradeoff Process in accordance with FAR 15.101-1. In using the Best Value Tradeoff approach, the Government seeks to award to an offeror who gives the Best Value to the Government, meets and/or exceeds the requirements. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced proposal or other than the highest technically rated proposal to achieve a best-value contract award. The Government intends to award one (1) purchase order as a result of this RFP. EVALUATION FACTORS AND EVALUATION APPROACH AREAS TO BE EVALUATED: Appropriate consideration will be given to the three (3) evaluation factors: Technical, Price and Past Performance. The Technical factor is more important than Price factor which is more important than Past Performance. TECHNICAL EVALUATION: Technical Objectives: The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the Offeror considered, defined and satisfied the requirements listed in the Statement of Objectives (SOO). Offeror must receive a minimum of Acceptable to be considered for award. The following rating definitions will be utilized in the evaluation of the overall Technical Factor rating. Color Blue; Rating - Outstanding; Definition: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal contains multiple strengths and no deficiencies.Color Purple; Rating Good; Definition: Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains at least one (1) strength and no deficiencies.Color Green; Rating Acceptable; Definition: Proposal meets requirements and indicates and adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal has no strengths or deficiencies.Color Yellow; Rating Marginal; Definition: Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.Color Red; Rating Unacceptable; Definition: Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies and will not be awarded. PRICE EVALUATION:The total evaluated price will be used in the Best Value Determination. The Government will evaluate the overall total price to determine Fair and Reasonableness. Price Reasonableness will be based on competition when possible. PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION:Past performance will be evaluated based on relevance of recent effort. It shall consider similarity and complexity of a performance effort that was executed within the last 3 years. The ratings are as follows: Substantial Confidence Definition Based on the Offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.Satisfactory Confidence Definition Based on the Offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.Limited Confidence Definition Based on the Offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.No Confidence Definition Based on the Offerors recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.Unknown Confidence (Neutral) Definition No recent/relevant performance record is available of the Offerors performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. DEFINITIONS:Strength is an aspect of an offerors proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contact performance. Weakness A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.Significant Weakness A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.Deficiency A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. PROVISIONS AND CLAUSES:The following clauses apply to this acquisition:Far Clauses 52.212-1: Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Items; 52.212-2: Evaluation-Commercial items; 52.212-3: Offeror Representative and Certifications-Commercial Items; 52.212-4; Contract Terms and Conditions-Commercial Items; 52.212-5: Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders-Commercial Items. Within clause 52.212-5, the following FAR clauses apply 52.204-10, 52.222-3, 52.222-19, 52.222-36, 52.223-18,52.225-3, 52.225-13, 52.232-33, 52.239-1, 52.222-42 and 52.222-44.The applicable Local clauses are as follows: ARDEC 30, ARDEC 31, ARDEC 106, ARDEC 163, JM&L 182, JM&L 191 and JM&L 196.ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS PROPOSAL: SUBMISSION:Offerors shall carefully review the attached Statement of Objectives (Attachment 1), as well as the above listed Evaluation Factors and Evaluation Approach. Note: this solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions/clauses by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Offerors are required to provide their Contractors DUNS number and Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code with their quote. The CAGE code entered shall be for that name and address provided by the Contractor. Offerors shall have a valid registration in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR). Offerors shall also have a valid registration in the Online Representations and Certification Application (ORCA) and shall include with their quote a completed copy of the provision at 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items. The website for the CCR is www.ccr.gov. The website for ORCA is http://orca.bpn.gov. The website for FAR is http://farsite.hill.af.mil/. THE WRITTEN PROPOSAL SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS NO LATER THAN3:00 P.M. EASTERN DAY LIGHT TIME, DECEMBER 29, 2011 U.S. ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND NJEmerging Technologies CenterAttn: Patricia KleimanPhipps Road, Bldg 10BPicatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000 PROPOSALS RECEIVED AFTER 3:00 P.M. DECEMBER 29th, 2011 WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. The points of contact for this action is: Patricia Kleiman, Contract Specialist, ACC-NJEmail address: patricia.a.kleiman@us.army.mil PHONE REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/notices/128a15a0cb985996a9e90fee6ac6b64b)
- Record
- SN02638220-W 20111215/111213234418-128a15a0cb985996a9e90fee6ac6b64b (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |