Loren Data's SAM Daily™

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF APRIL 21, 2012 FBO #3801
MODIFICATION

B -- Development of Risk Assessment Model

Notice Date

4/19/2012
 

Notice Type

Modification/Amendment
 

NAICS

541990 — All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
 

Contracting Office

Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration, Acquisition Management Branch (WV), 1301 Airport Road, Beaver, West Virginia, 25813-9426
 

ZIP Code

25813-9426
 

Solicitation Number

DOL124RP20078
 

Archive Date

5/26/2012
 

Point of Contact

DEBORAH W WORRELLS, Phone: 304-256-3389
 

E-Mail Address

worrells.deborah@dol.gov
(worrells.deborah@dol.gov)
 

Small Business Set-Aside

N/A
 

Description

THIS MODIFICATION IS ISSUED TO REMOVE THAT THIS IS A TOTAL SMALL BUSINESS SET ASIDE. This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in FAR 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. The solicitation number is DOL124RP20078 and is issued as a request for proposals. The solicitation document and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular FAC 2005-56. This is associated North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code of 541990, All Other Professional, Scientific and Technical Services with a small business size standard of $7.0 million. PRICE/COST SCHEDULE CLIN DESCRIPTION UNIT OF ISSUE UNIT PRICE TOTAL PRICE 0001 Task 1.1 - Development of a Risk Assessment Model and Methodology for Mines - JA - $ 0002 Task 1.2 - Development of a Preparedness Assessment Model and Methodology for Mine Emergency Response - JA - $ 0003 Task 1.3 - Development of a Readiness Assessment Model and Methodology for Mine Rescue Teams - JA - $ 0004 Task 1.4 - Development of a Readiness Assessment Model and Methodology for Responsible Persons - JA - $ 0005 Task 1.5 - Development of a Readiness Assessment Model and Methodology for Government and Industry for Response to Mine Emergencies -- JA - $ 0006 TRAVEL IN CONJUNCTION WITH FEDERAL TRAVEL REGULATIONS - JA - $ 10,000.00 NTE TOTAL OF ALL CLINS/TASKS $ JA indicates JOB. Cost should be developed for the full task. STATEMENT OF WORK PART 1 GENERAL INFORMATION 1.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION The mission of the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is to administer the provisions of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act), the Miner Act of 2006 and to enforce compliance with mandatory safety and health standards as a means to eliminate fatal accidents; to reduce the frequency and severity of nonfatal accidents; to minimize health hazards; and to promote improved safety and health conditions in the Nation's mines. Technical Support, a program area within MSHA, provides engineering and scientific expertise to assist MSHA, the states, and mining industry in the resolution of safety and health issues. It conducts field investigations, laboratory studies, and analyses to resolve specific problems. Equipment and materials used in mines are also evaluated and approved by the Directorate. Mine emergency response capability, including on-site analysis and decision-making assistance for crisis management are also maintained. Technical Support‘s engineers provide expertise in critical training disciplines for MSHA enforcement. Technical Support manages DOL's Dam Safety Program and is responsible for planning, coordinating, directing activities at the national and field levels to assist enforcement in carrying out mandates of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977. The Development of Risk and Readiness Assessment Models for MSHA and Industry is required based on a need identified by a Holistic Gap Analysis performed by MSHA and agency experience relative to mine emergency preparedness and response. There are currently no parallel efforts or prior contracts in process at MSHA along this line of work. To the best of our knowledge, there is no similar work currently being performed in other agencies dealing with these topics. A Risk Assessment model for Industry, formerly funded by NIOSH, has been found to be too cumbersome to apply. A simpler model is required in order to be useful by MSHA and industry on a daily basis. Assessment models of mine rescue teams, responsible persons, and government/industry do not exist at this time. 1.1 OBJECTIVES The objectives of this effort are to: 1. Develop a risk assessment model and methodology for mine operators to use to prevent major mine emergencies; 2. Develop a model and methodology for assessment of preparedness of mines for emergency response; 3. Develop a model and methodology to assess the readiness of mine rescue teams; 4. Develop a model to assess the readiness of responsible persons at active mining operations to respond to mine emergencies; 5. Develop a model and methodology to assess the readiness of government and industry to respond to mine emergencies. 1.2 SCOPE Broadly, this work will evolve theoretical concepts for risk and readiness assessment into simplified models and tools that can applied by MSHA and industry for use at operational levels. 1.3 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: The period of performance is not to exceed one year from the date of award for a period of 12months. 1.4 QUALITY CONTROL: The contractor will complete a thorough literature review (a literature review is a comprehensive review of the existing literature (books, articles, procedures, policies, etc.) relative to a specific topic/topics), covering information pertinent to all tasks involved in this contract. Published papers, periodicals, other publications, and all pertinent data sources shall be utilized. 1.3.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE: Not applicable 1.3.3 RECOGNIZED HOLIDAYS: The contractor is not required to perform services on the following holidays: New Year's Day Labor Day Martin Luther King Jr.'s Birthday Columbus Day President's Day Veteran's Day Memorial Day Thanksgiving Day Independence Day Christmas Day 1.3.4 HOURS OF OPERATION The contractor is responsible for conducting business, except on Federal holidays or when the facility is closed due to local or national emergencies, administrative closings, or similar facility closings. For other than firm fixed price contracts, the contractor will not be reimbursed when the facility is closed for the above reasons. The Contractor must at all times maintain an adequate workforce for the uninterrupted performance of all tasks defined within this SOW when the facility is not closed for the above reasons. When hiring personnel, the Contractor shall keep in mind that the stability and continuity of the workforce are essential. Work hours will be from 9:00 am-5:00 pm at MSHA sites, unless otherwise authorized by Contracting Officer Representative. The Contractor is not under any circumstance authorized to work overtime hours nor are they allowed to make-up work hours missed under this contract. The Contractor will in the performance of this contract immediately notify the COR or the MSHA Point of Contact if the time and/or service obligations of this contract cannot be met due to inclement weather, civil disturbances, equipment failure, illness, etc. MSHA recognizes the obligation of the Contractor to provide for the safety and well being of personnel engaged in providing services under this contract. The Contractor shall notify the MSHA COR or other Point of Contact no later than 9:00 a.m. on the day the services were scheduled to be provided if any circumstances prevent timely performance. The contract employee will be required to track his or her daily work hours and submit a report via email to the COR. 1.3.5 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE: The work to be performed under this contract will be performed at the contractor's place of business, at operating coal mines, government facilities, and other locations in the United States that are approved by the COR. 1.3.6 TYPE OF CONTRACT: The Government contemplates award of a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract. 1.3.7 SECURITY REQUIREMENTS: 1.3.7.3 Background Investigations MSHA's data and work environment is considered sensitive but unclassified. MSHA is required under the Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) 12 "Policy for a Common Identification Standard for Federal Employees and Contractors" to perform a National Agency Check with Inquiries (NACI) for Contractors. The NACI is a brief form of background investigation that is conducted through the Office of Personnel Management. This investigation will be conducted for Contractor staff assigned to this Contract. Contractor staff will be required to provide two forms of acceptable identification, provide a current photograph, and be finger-printed. Successful clearance is required for an employee to continue working under this Contract. Per the PERSONAL IDENTITY VERIFICATION OF CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL clause of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR 52.204-9): 1.3.7.3.1 The Contractor shall comply with agency personal identity verification procedures identified in the contract that implement Homeland Security Presidential Directive-12 (HSPD-12), Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance M-05-24, and Federal Information Processing Standards Publication (FIPS PUB) Number 201. 1.3.7.3.2 The Contractor shall insert this clause in all subcontracts when the subcontractor is required to have physical access to a federally-controlled facility or access to a Federal information system. 1.3.7.4 Privacy Portions of information disclosed during the performance of this task are protected by the provisions of the Privacy Act of 1974; therefore, all personnel assigned to this Contract are required to take proper precautions to protect the information from disclosure. 1.3.7.5 Ownership All products and deliverables developed under this SOW are the property of the U.S. Government and MSHA. 1.3.7.6 Commitment to Protect Sensitive Information The Contractor shall not release, publish, or disclose sensitive information to unauthorized personnel, and shall protect such information in accordance with provisions of the following laws and any other pertinent laws and regulations governing the confidentiality of sensitive information: 18 U.S.C. 641 (Criminal Code: Public Money, Property or Records) 1.3.7.7 Required Security Training All MSHA employees and contractors must receive security awareness training prior to being given access to MSHA systems and periodically thereafter as required by MSHA security policies. 1.3.8 SPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS: The contractor will have education and/or work experience including mining engineering, risk assessment and mitigation, risk modeling, mine rescue and mine rescue teams, responsible persons, MSHA and NIOSH government agencies, and other related stakeholders, and have a vast knowledge relative to all government mining regulatory and research agencies. Ideally, the contractor will have 10 years of underground mining experience, either from direct mining or research at mine; have the ability to think conceptually, and the ability to develop practical assessment tools that can be utilized by both government and the mining industry. The Contractor must, to the fullest extent possible, have all vacation or other time coordinated in advance with the Mine Emergency Operations Scientific Development Manager or COR. 1.3.9 CONTRACTING OFFICER REPRESENTATIVE: The (COR) will be identified by separate letter. The COR monitors all technical aspects of the contract and assists in contract administration The COR is authorized to perform the following functions: assure that the Contractor performs the technical requirements of the contract: perform inspections necessary in connection with contract performance: maintain written and oral communications with the Contractor concerning technical aspects of the contract: issue written interpretations of technical requirements, including Government drawings, designs, specifications: monitor Contractor's performance and notifies both the Contracting Officer and Contractor of any deficiencies; coordinate availability of government furnished property, and provide site entry of Contractor personnel. A letter of designation issued to the COR, a copy of which is sent to the Contractor, states the responsibilities and limitations of the COR, especially with regard to changes in cost or price, estimates or changes in delivery dates. The COR is not authorized to change any of the terms and conditions of the resulting contract. 1.3.10 KEY PERSONNEL: The following personnel are considered key personnel by the government: Senior Developer. Contractor employees designated as "Key Personnel" shall not be removed or replaced without the written consent of the Government. Any replacement candidate must have the same or better qualifications as the employee being released. Resumes of proposed replacement Key Personnel must be provided for review. The Government must approve the replacement candidate in writing before he/she can start work. Qualifications for all key personnel are listed in 1.3.8 SPECIAL QUALIFICATIONS. 1.3.11.1.5 Employee Conduct. Contractor employees shall present a professional appearance at all times and their conduct shall not reflect discredit upon the United States and or the Department of Labor. 1.3.11.1.6 Removing Employees for Misconduct or Security Reasons. The Government may, at its sole discretion, direct the contractor to remove any contractor employee from U.S. Department of Labor facilities for misconduct or security reasons. Removal does not relieve the Contractor of the responsibility to continue providing the services required under any Contract awarded. The Contracting Officer will provide the contractor with a written explanation to support any request to remove an employee. 1.3.11.1.7 Conflict of Interest: The contractor shall not employ any person who is an employee of the United States Government if that employment would appear to cause a conflict of interest. 1.3.12 CONTRACTOR TRAVEL: Travel is anticipated for this contract to MSHA offices, operational coal mines, libraries, and other sites authorized by the COR and will be allowed. Any such approved travel and per diem shall be reimbursed in accordance with the Federal Travel Regulations and FAR 31.205-46. PART 2 DEFINITIONS & ACRONYMS CO - Contracting Officer COR - Contracting Officer's Representative: A representative from the requiring activity assigned by the Contracting Officer to perform surveillance and to act as liaison to the contractor Defective Service. A service output that does not meet the standard of performance associated with it in the Statement of Work. DOL - Department of Labor FAR - Federal Acquisition Regulation IDIQ -Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity IT - Information Technology OASAM - Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management OMB - Office of Management and Budget PIV - Personal Identity Verification POP - Period of Performance Quality Control - Those actions taken by a contractor to control the performance of services so that they meet the requirements of the SOW. Quality Assurance - Those actions taken by the government to assure services meet the requirements of the Statement of Work. SF - Standard Form SOW - Statement of Work PART 3 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY, EQUIPMENT, AND SERVICES 3.0 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED ITEMS AND SERVICES: 3.1 The Government shall provide the following resources to the Contractor staff performing under this SOW: government reports, papers, publications, and other available data, including the Job Task Analysis for Mine Rescue Teams developed by MSHA. 3.2 Facilities, Supplies, and Services- NOT APPLICABLE 3.3 Information Sources- The Contractor will use www.msha.gov, and other websites as part of the literature review. PART 4 CONTRACTOR FURNISHED ITEMS AND SERVICES NOT APPLICABLE PART 5 SPECIFIC TASKS I. TASKS The following is the set of tasks required under this Contract. All tools developed under this contract should be validated for accuracy. The method(s) used for this determination shall be specified in the contract proposal. PHASE 1 (Task 1.1 through Task 1.5) Task 1.1 Development of a Risk Assessment Model and Methodology for Mines The application of risk assessment and management is critical for U.S. underground coal mines, aimed at preventing major hazardous conditions from coming together and causing emergency events. During this task, the contractor will develop a Mine Risk Assessment Model which can be implemented by coal mine operators to identify risks at their operations and methods for them to eliminate or control such risks in a systematic manner. The resulting model and associated tools should be relatively easy to apply at diverse mining operations and produce quantitatively measurable improvements relative to mine safety. Deliverables Task 1.1: 1. Monthly Status Reports 2. Risk Assessment Model, Methodology, and Tools Final Report Task 1.2 Development of a Preparedness Assessment Model and Methodology for Mine Emergency Response The ability to assess the preparedness of an underground coal mine operation to respond to mine emergencies is critical for emergency response. Without knowing what capabilities exist, and which critical capabilities may be missing, leaves an operation vulnerable and unable to respond appropriately when required. During this task, the contractor will develop a model to assess the preparedness of individual mines for emergency response. The resulting model and associated tools should be relatively easy to train personnel to use and implement. Deliverables Task 1.2: 1. Monthly Status Reports 2. Preparedness Assessment Model, Methodology, and Tools Final Report Task 1.3 Development of a Readiness Assessment Model and Methodology for Mine Rescue Teams The ability to assess the readiness and competency of mine rescue teams is critical to the success of any mine emergency/recovery operation. Mine rescue teams must have the proper equipment, training, knowledge, and abilities to perform competently. During this task, the contractor will develop a model to assess the readiness of mine rescue teams for use during mine emergency operations. The resulting model and associated tools should be relatively easy to train personnel to use and implement. Deliverables Task 1.3: 1. Monthly Status Reports 2. Readiness Assessment Model, Methodology, and Tools Final Report Task 1.4 Development of a Readiness Assessment Model and Methodology for Responsible Persons The ability to assess the readiness and competency of responsible persons is critical to the success of any evacuation and mine emergency/recovery operation. Responsible persons must have the proper equipment, training, knowledge, and abilities to perform competently. During this task, the contractor will develop a model to assess the readiness of responsible persons for responding to mine emergency operations. The resulting model and associated tools should be relatively easy to train personnel to use and implement. Deliverables Task 1.4: 1. Monthly Status Reports 2. Readiness Assessment Model, Methodology, and Tools Final Report Task 1.5 Development of a Readiness Assessment Model and Methodology for Government and Industry for Response to Mine Emergencies The ability to assess the overall readiness of both government and industry to respond to underground coal mine emergencies is essential to successful mine emergency operations. Both sectors need a better understanding of response gaps that exist in order to identify areas where improvements can be made, and where performance can be enhanced. During this task, the contractor will develop a model to assess the overall readiness of government and industry for responding to mine emergencies. The resulting model and associated tools should be relatively easy to train personnel to use and implement. Deliverables Task 1.5: 1. Monthly Status Reports 2. Readiness Assessment Model, Methodology, and Tools Final Report Deliverable: Consolidated Final Report All Deliverables: All written material will be in both hard copy and in electronic formats. Electronic files shall be in Microsoft Office 2003 format. Deliverables: Literature review: Quantity - 12 each (bound) with an additional unbound copy, 6 complete literature reviews on CD Monthly Reports: Quantity - 12 each (bound) with an additional unbound copy, 6 reports on CD Task Final Reports: Quantity - 12 each (bound) with an additional unbound copy, 6 reports on CD Consolidated Final Report containing all models, methodologies, and tools developed under this contract: Quantity - 12 each (bound) with an additional unbound copy, 6 reports on CD All Deliverables: All written material will be in both hard copy and in electronic formats. Electronic files shall be in Microsoft Office 2003 format. DELIVERABLE SCHEDULE Deliverable Frequency # of Copies Medium/Format Submit To PHASE 1 Task 1.1: Development of a Risk Assessment Model and Methodology for Mines Monthly Status Reports Monthly 12 (bound, hard copy) 1 (unbound, hard copy) 6 (CD) MS Word and/or Excel COR Model, Methodology, and Tools Final Report One Submittal within 6 months of beginning of contract 12 (bound, hard copy) 1 (unbound, hard copy) 6 (CD) MS Word and/or Excel COR Task 1.2: Development of a Preparedness Assessment Model and Methodology for Mine Emergency Response Monthly Status Reports Monthly 12 (bound, hard copy) 1 (unbound, hard copy) 6 (CD) MS Word and/or Excel COR Model, Methodology, and Tools Final Report One Submittal within 7 months of beginning of contract 12 (bound, hard copy) 1 (unbound, hard copy) 6 (CD) MS Word and/or Excel COR Task 1.3: Development of a Readiness Assessment Model and Methodology for Mine Rescue Teams Monthly Status Reports Monthly 12 (bound, hard copy) 1 (unbound, hard copy) 6 (CD) MS Word and/or Excel COR Model, Methodology, and Tools Final Report One Submittal within 8 months of beginning of contract 12 (bound, hard copy) 1 (unbound, hard copy) 6 (CD) MS Word and/or Excel COR Task 1.4: Development of a Readiness Assessment Model and Methodology for Responsible Persons Monthly Status Reports Monthly 12 (bound, hard copy) 1 (unbound, hard copy) 6 (CD) MS Word and/or Excel COR Model, Methodology, and Tools Final Report One Submittal within 9 months of beginning of contract 12 (bound, hard copy) 1 (unbound, hard copy) 6 (CD) MS Word and/or Excel COR Task 1.5: Development of a Readiness Assessment Model and Methodology for Government and Industry for Response to Mine Emergencies Monthly Status Reports Monthly 12 (bound, hard copy) 1 (unbound, hard copy) 6 (CD) MS Word and/or Excel COR Model, Methodology, and Tools Final Report One Submittal within 10 months of beginning of contract 12 (bound, hard copy) 1 (unbound, hard copy) 6 (CD) MS Word and/or Excel COR Phase 1 Overall: Literature Review One Submittal within 3 months of beginning of contract 12 (bound, hard copy) 1 (unbound, hard copy) 6 (CD) MS Word and/or Excel COR Consolidated Final Report One Submittal Two weeks prior to end of contract 12 (bound, hard copy) 1 (unbound, hard copy) 6 (CD) MS Word and/or Excel COR PART 6 APPLICABLE PUBLICATIONS REFERENCES, LAWS, REGULATIONS AND POLICIES At a minimum, Contractor performance in accordance with the requirements herein shall fully comply with the following laws, regulations, policies and guidelines: • Title III of the E-Government Act of 2002 - Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) • The Privacy Act of 1974, PL 93-579, as amended • OMB Circular A-123 Revised, Management's Responsibility for Internal Control, December 2004 • OMB Circular A-127, Financial Management Systems, July 23, 1993 • OMB Circular A-130, Appendix III, Security of Federal Automated Information Resources • Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12, Policies for a Common Identification Standard for Federal Employees and Contractors • Department of Labor, Computer Security Handbook (CSH) The following provisions and clauses apply to this procurement: - 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors-Commercial (FEB 2012) - 52.212-2, Evaluation-Commercial Items (JAN 1999) applies to this acquisition, with the following addendum to paragraph a: (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: A. Technical Capability 1. Experience 2. Understanding of the Requirement B. Past Performance C. Price The non-Price factors combined are significantly more important than Factor C, Price. However, price will become significantly more important as non-price factors approach equality. Offerors are cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offered. The Government is more concerned with obtaining superior technical features than with making an award at the lowest overall price to the Government. However, the Government will not make an award at a significantly higher overall price to the Government to achieve slightly superior technical features. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than "Acceptable" must be achieved for Factor A, and its associated sub-factors. The Government intends to evaluate offers and award a contract without discussions with offerors. Therefore, the offeror's initial offer should contain the offeror's best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if later determined by the Contracting Officer to be necessary. The Government may reject any or all offers if such action is in the public interest; accept other than the lowest offer; and waive informalities and minor irregularities in offers received. 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 solicitation and whether the offeror's methods and approach to meeting the solicitation requirements provide the Government with a high level of confidence of successful completion within the required schedule. Sub-factor 1: EXPERIENCE - The Government will evaluate the offeror's experience in relation to current or previous work performed in similar size and scope to this requirement. Sub-factor 2: UNDERSTANDING OF THE REQUIREMENT - The Government will evaluate the offeror's understanding of the work to be performed in accordance with the SOW. The offeror shall submit a proposal that demonstrates its understanding of the work described in the SOW and the extent to which potential risks are identified and mitigated. PAST PERFORMANCE: The Government will evaluate past performance of three (3) previous contracts for current relevancy (within 3 years), with at least one (1) previous or current contract with relevancy within the past 12 months based on how well the contractor performed on projects of similar dollar value, scope, and complexity. Offerors are advised that the Government may use past performance information obtained from centralized past performance databases and sources other than those identified by the offeror and the information obtained may be used for both the responsibility determination and the best value decision. The absence of past performance data will be rated neither favorably nor unfavorably. Contracts listed may include those entered into with Government agencies or private sectors. For contractors with no relevant corporate past performance, the Government may take into account information regarding the past performance of predecessor companies, key personnel with relevant past performance. The Government will evaluate the Past Performance Elements specified in the Past Performance Questionnaire, Attachment 1. Offeror's shall distribute the questionnaire included in the solicitation as an attachment to their references so the form can be completed and submitted directly to the Government. Performance. Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed in Section 1 describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirements of this solicitation. (a) For any contracts that did not/do not meet original schedule or technical performance requirements, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence. The offerors shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary. All Requests for Deviation and Requests for Waiver shall be addressed with respect to causes and corrective actions. The offerors shall also provide a copy of any Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action implemented by the offeror or proposed subcontractor. The offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination. New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its officers and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information should be included in the files described in the sections above. Past Performance Questionnaire. The offeror shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire and e-mail the questionnaire to the Government and private sector technical representative responsible for the past/current contract. The POC's shall be instructed to electronically complete Part II of the questionnaire and e-mail the entire questionnaire to the Contract Specialist, Worrells.deborah@dol.gov no later than May 9, 2012 at 4:00 p.m. EST. The offeror shall also e-mail to the Contract Specialist a list of all the POC's who were sent a questionnaire. The Government must receive this list no later than May 4, 2012 at 4:00 p.m. EST. The POC List shall be submitted in Word for Windows Table Format to include the following fields: Solicitation Number; Company Name; Contract Number; Government Agency; POC Last Name, First Name; POC Title; POC Telephone Number; POC E-Mail Address; Date E-Mailed to POC (month/day). Please note, that the Past Performance Questionnaire will not be a part of the resultant contract. PRICE. The offeror shall complete Cost/Price Schedule, with pricing for the base and each option period. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total of all CLIN prices, including all options to ensure that pricing is not unbalanced. Price will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness using the techniques in FAR 15.404-1(b) (2). Price will become significantly more important as technical ratings approach equality. No adjectival ratings will be used to evaluate Price. Adjectival Ratings. Proposals will be adjectivally rated against each of the evaluation factors set forth in this plan and in the solicitation. Adjectival ratings for Factors I, Technical (See Table 1), Adjectival ratings for Factor II (See Table 2), Past Performance will be Low Risk, High Risk, and Unknown Risk. No adjectival ratings will be used to evaluate Factor III, Price. Adjectival Ratings. The following adjectival ratings will be used: Factor A- Technical, will be rated using the following Adjectival Scale ADJECTIVAL DEFINITION Outstanding: A proposal that satisfies all of the Government's requirements with extensive detail to indicate feasibility of the approach and shows a thorough understanding of the problems and offers numerous significant strengths, which are not offset by weaknesses, with an overall low degree of risk in meeting the Government's requirements. Good: A proposal that satisfies all of the Government's requirements with adequate detail to indicate feasibility of the approach and shows an understanding of the problems and offers some significant strengths or numerous minor strengths, which are not offset by weaknesses, with an overall low to moderate degree of risk in meeting the Government's requirements. Acceptable: A proposal that satisfies all of the Government's requirements with minimal detail to indicate feasibility of the approach and shows a minimal understanding of the problems, with an overall moderate to high degree of risk in meeting the Government's requirements. Unacceptable: A proposal that contains a major error(s), omission(s) or deficiency(ies) that indicates a lack of understanding of the problems or an approach that cannot be expected to meet requirements or involves a very high risk; and none of these conditions can be corrected without a major rewrite or revision of the proposal. Factor B-, Past Performance, will be rated using the following Adjectival Scale ADJECTIVAL DESCRIPTION Low Risk: Little doubt exists, based on the Offeror's performance record, that the Offeror can perform the proposed effort. Moderate: Some doubt exists, based on the Offeror's performance record, that the Offeror can perform the proposed effort. High Risk: Significant doubt exists, based on the Offeror's performance record, that the Offeror can perform the proposed effort. Unknown Risk: Little or no relevant performance record identifiable; equates to an unknown risk rating having no favorable or unfavorable evaluation significance. - 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items (FEB 2012) Offerors must include a completed copy of the provision at 52.212-3 with its offer. - 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions-Commercial Items (FEB 2012) - 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders-Commercial Items (MAR 2012). in paragraph (b) the following clauses apply; 52.204-10, 52.219-6, 52.219-28, 52.222-3, 52.223-18, 52.222-21, 52.222-26, 52.222-36, 52.225-1, 52.225-13, 52.232-33. 52.217-8 OPTION TO EXTEND SERVICES (NOV 1999) The Government may require continued performance of any services within the limits and at the rates specified in the contract. These rates may be adjusted only as a result of revisions to prevailing labor rates provided by the Secretary of Labor. The option provision may be exercised more than once, but the total extension of performance hereunder shall not exceed 6 months. The Contracting Officer may exercise the option by written notice to the Contractor within 30 days from contract expiration. The FAR may be obtained via the Internet at http://www.acquisition.gov/far/ Offeror must be registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database and ORCA database before an award can be made to them. If the offeror is not registered in the CCR, it may do so through the CCR website at http://www.ccr.gov. If the offeror is not registered in ORCA, it may do so through the ORCA website at https://orca.bpn.gov/. Registration in both CCR and ORCA is free. The Government contemplates award of a Firm Fixed Price contract resulting from this solicitation. Questions regarding this requirement are to be sent to Worrells.deborah@dol.gov no later than April 30, 2012 at 4:00 p.m. EST. No phone calls will be accepted. Answers to all questions received by this deadline will be posted on FedBizOpps in sufficient time for proposals to be submitted. Any questions received after this deadline will only be answered if time permits. Technical proposals shall not exceed 50 pages. Price must be sent as a separate file. All attachments must be in a PDF format or a format compatible with Microsoft Office 2003. All CLINS must be quoted for the proposal to be considered. Proposals are due to Contracting Officer Deborah Worrells by May 11, 2012 at 4:00 pm EST. Proposals shall be sent to Deborah Worrells, Contracting Officer, US Department of Labor, Mine Safety & Health Administration, 1301 Airport Road, Beaver, WV, 25813. The preferred method of submission is via e-mail to worells.deborah@dol.gov. ATTACHMENT 1 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE Please provide your candid responses. The information that you provide will be used in the awarding of a federal contract. Therefore, it is important that your information be as factual, accurate and complete as possible to preclude the need for follow-up by the evaluators. If you do not have knowledge of or experience with the company in question, please forward this Questionnaire to the person who does. Thank you. PART I. (To be completed by the Offeror) A. CONTRACT IDENTIFICATION Name of Contractor/Company being evaluated: Name of Contractor/Company Name/Division providing the evaluation: Address: Program/Account Identification/Title: Contract Number: Contract Type: Contract Amount: Prime Contractor Name (if different from the contractor name cited above): Period of Performance: Contract Award Date: Forecasted or Actual Contract Completion Date: Detailed description of purchases or services provided: Was this work with a: Commercial_____ Fed Gov't_____ Local/State Gov't_____ entity. Relevance of the referenced contract to the current requirement: B. IDENTIFICATION OF OFFEROR'S REPRESENTATIVE Name: Title: Date: Telephone Number: FAX Number: Address: E-mail Address: PART II. EVALUATION (TO BE COMPLETED BY POINT OF CONTACT - RESPONDENT) For each performance element identified below, references should evaluate performance of the firm or individual identified in Part 1 of this form. Where the reference lacks sufficient information to provide an evaluation for a particular performance element, this should be noted. Where any deficiency or unfavorable information is identified, the reference should identify any mitigating factors that may weigh in favor for the person/firm on whose behalf the reference is provided (i.e., problems due to causes outside the contractor's control). An individual within your organization that is knowledgeable of the contractor's day-to-day operations and overall performance should complete this questionnaire. However, that individual is encouraged to supplement their own knowledge of the contractor's performance with the judgment of others within their organization, as applicable. The following chart depicts the ratings that are to be used to evaluate the contractor's performance: LOW RISK (L) MODERATE RISK (M) HIGH RISK (H) UNKNOWN RISK (U) LOW RISK (L) - Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded many. Problems, if any, were negligible, and were resolved in a timely and highly effective manner. MODERATE RISK (M) - Performance met all contract requirements and exceeded some. There were few minor problems, which the contractor resolved in a timely, effective manner. HIGH RISK (H) - Performance met contract requirements. There were some minor problems; corrective actions taken by the contractor were satisfactory. UNKNOWN RISK (U) - Little or no relevant performance record identifiable; equates to an unknown risk rating having no favorable or unfavorable evaluation significance. NOTE: UNKNOWN RISK WOULD BE THE EQUIVALENT TO THE CUSTOMER PROVIDING A NOT APPLICABLE (N/A) TO ANY OF THE QUESTIONS. When responding to the questions listed, circle the letter that most accurately describes the contractor's performance or situation. For any exceptional, neutral, marginal, or unsatisfactory rating, please provide explanatory narratives in the remarks block. These narratives need not be lengthy, just detailed. If a question is not applicable, circle N/A. If you circle a Yes/No answer that is marked with an asterisk (*), please provide a corresponding explanation in the remarks block. If more space is required, use the back of the questionnaire or attach additional pages. Handwritten responses to this questionnaire are acceptable. However, if responses are handwritten, please print legibly. Your time and effort in providing this vitally important information are greatly appreciated. PERFORMANCE ELEMENTS: QUALITY OF SERVICE 1. Contractor's ability to meet minimum quality standards specified for performance. L M H U 2. Contractor's ability to effectively control the quality of services provided. L M H U 3. Contractor's compliance with contractual terms and conditions. L M H U 4. Quality of products furnished. L M H U 5. Overall rating of contractor's standard of workmanship. L M H U 6. Overall rating of contractor's quality of service. L M H U TIMELINESS OF SERVICE 1. Contractor's ability to meet specific response times and scheduled time frames for completion of specific tasks. L M H U 2. Contractor's responsiveness/timeliness for providing administrative reports/documents required by the contract. L M H U 3. Contractor's adherence to delivery schedules? L M H U 4. Contractor's timeliness in responding to emergency service requirements. L M H U 5. Overall rating of contractor's responsiveness/timeliness. L M H U BUSINESS RELATIONS 1. Contractor's ability to identify problems and potential problems, and promptly notify the Contracting Officer. L M H U 2. Contractor's ability to correct problems and prevent or mitigate potential problems in a timely manner. L M H U 3. Contractor's willingness to improve and correct noncompliance issues or concerns. L M H U 4. Contractor's ability to use effective approaches and provide technical expertise and resources to solve contract problems. L M H U 5. Extent to which the contractor has demonstrated reasonable and cooperative behavior. L M H U 6. Contractor's effectiveness in interfacing with the Contracting Officer, quality assurance personnel, and customers. L M H U 7. Contractor's flexibility in satisfying the requirements of its customers. L M H U 8. Extent to which the contractor provided prompt and courteous service when responding to customer complaints. L M H U 9. Contractor's ability to coordinate, integrate, and provide for effective subcontractor management L M H U 10. Overall rating of customer satisfaction. L M H U 11. Overall rating of business relations. L M H U MANAGEMENT OF KEY PERSONNEL 1. Contractor's ability to select and retain cooperative and effective key personnel, such as the contract manager and quality control personnel. L M H U 2. Extent key personnel were knowledgeable about contractual requirements. L M H U 3. Contractor's ability to meet appropriate staffing levels with qualified personnel in order to provide required services. L M H U 4. Rate the contractor's ability to provide continuity of key personnel on the contract. L M H U 5. Rate the contractor's ability to replace key personnel in a timely fashion L M H U 6. Contractor's ability to effectively manage subcontractors. L M H U 7. Rate the level of the functional expertise of the contractor's staff. L M H U 8. Overall rating of contractor's management of key personnel. L M H U COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL, SAFETY, HEALTH, AND SECURITY REQUIREMENTS 1. Has the contractor ever received any Notices of Violations for noncompliance with environmental laws or regulations? YES* NO 2. Contractor's compliance with environmental requirements. L M H U 3. Contractor's compliance with safety requirements. L M H U 4. Contractor's compliance with health requirements. L M H U 5. Contractor's compliance with security requirements. L M H U COST MANAGEMENT (COST CONTRACTS) 1. Extent to which the contractor provided reliable, supportable cost estimates or proposals L M H U 2. Extent to which the contractor met the proposed cost estimates? L M H U CONTRACTUAL CONSIDERATIONS 1. If a subcontracting plan was required, extent to which contractor met applicable goals for small business participation. L M H U 2. Has an election ever been made not to exercise an option or continue relations due to contractor's poor performance? YES* NO 3. Has a Contract Discrepancy Report ever been issued? YES* NO 4. Has a cure notice or show cause notice ever been issued? YES* NO 5. Has this contract been partially or completely terminated for default or convenience? YES* NO Partially ________ Completely _________ 6. Are there any pending terminations? YES* NO 7. Overall rating of contractor's performance under this contract. L M H U 8. Would you hire this contractor again? YES NO* *REMARKS _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Are you aware of other relevant past efforts by this company? If yes, please provide the name and telephone number of a point of contact: PART III. RETURN INFORMATION Please return this completed Questionnaire via e-mail to Contract Specialist Deborah Worrells at worrells.deborah@dol.gov. Thank you for your assistance.
 

Web Link

FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DOL/MSHA/BeacerWV/DOL124RP20078/listing.html)
 

Place of Performance

Address: 1100 WILSON BOULEVARD, ARLINGTON, Virginia, 22202, United States

Zip Code: 22202
 

Record

SN02726833-W 20120421/120420000631-cddacdea65443b6c36534fa686dfef1b (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 |