SOLICITATION NOTICE
58 -- 55 Night Vision Goggles
- Notice Date
- 6/13/2012
- Notice Type
- Combined Synopsis/Solicitation
- NAICS
- 334511
— Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing
- Contracting Office
- N00174 NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER, MARYLAND 4072 North Jackson Road Suite 132 Indian Head, MD
- ZIP Code
- 00000
- Solicitation Number
- N0017412C0018
- Response Due
- 7/13/2012
- Archive Date
- 8/13/2012
- Point of Contact
- Georgia Warder 301-744-6677
- E-Mail Address
-
Contract Specialist
(georgia.warder@navy.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- FSC 5855 RFQ N00174-12-C-0018 This is a combined synopsis solicitation for a commercial product 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 acquisition is full and open as it is not anticipated that at least two small businesses providing the product of a small business can provide this product. This request for proposal N00174-12-C-0018 is the only written solicitation, which will be issued, unless amended. The North American Industry Classification System code is 334511 size standard 750 Employees. The Offeror shall provide a firm fixed price offer. The Naval Explosive Ordnance Technology Division i.e. NAVEODTECHDIV requires Contractor to provide twelve 3 meter low profile night vision goggles with twelve mounting along with twelve Midcut Gunfighter Ballistic Helmet with VAS Shroud and 1-2 days of training for 12 students. Travel to Czech Republic required in accordance with the attached statement of work. UNLESS AVAILABLE VIA Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA) THE OFFERORS ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE AND INCLUDE A COPY OF THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS WITH THEIR PROPOSALS REFERENCING APPLICABLE NAICS AND SIZE STANDARD STATED ABOVE: FAR 52.212-3, Offeror Representation and Certifications “ Commercial Items, FAR 52.222-22 Previous Contracts and Compliance Reports, FAR 52.222-25 Affirmative Action Compliance. The following clauses are also applicable to this requirement: FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation “ Commercial Items, applies with paragraph (a) completed as follows: Award will be made to the offeror that meets the solicitations minimum criteria at the lowest price. The following provisions are also applicable to this requirement: FAR 52.212-4 Contract Terms and Conditions “ Commercial Items, FAR 52.212-5 Contract Terms and Conditions Required Implementing Statutes or Executive Orders “ Commercial Items, with reference to, 52.219-28, 52.222-3, 52.222-19, 52.222-21, 52.222-26, 52.222-35, 52.222-36, 52.222-37, 52.222-39, 52.222-50, 52.223-9, 52.225-1, 52.225-13 and 52.232-33. Addendum to 52.212-4 includes DFARS 252.211-7003 Item Identification and Valuation. 52.212-2, Evaluation-Commercial Items: the evaluation factors are as follows, listed in descending order of importance, unless otherwise stated. Offerors are required to follow the specific instructions in submitting their information. Failure to do so may result in the Offeror ™s submission determined unacceptable and ineligible for award. The Contracting Officer or a designee upon receipt to ensure compliance with the instructions contained in this combined synopsis, shall screen each Offeror ™s submission. Elimination of an Offeror for failure to follow the specific instructions in the combined synopsis is at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers: Factor 1 - Technical The Offeror shall demonstrate an understanding of the requirements that are specified in the Statement of Work (SOW). The Offeror must provide documentation that proves they meet or exceed the salient characteristics listed in the attachment. The Offeror ™s technical approach must demonstrate the necessary skills, knowledge, and capabilities to successfully perform all tasks in the SOW. Equipment “ Specification for Low Profile Night Vision Goggles (attachment (1) of SOW) Training “ 3.2.1 of SOW The Offeror ™s proposal will be evaluated based on its technical approach for accomplishing the requirements as defined in the SOW. NO PRICING IS TO BE PROVIDED IN THE TECHNICAL APPROACH. Factor 2 - Past Performance: The past performance evaluation will be performed by the Procurement Division personnel. The Government will evaluate past performance for current relevancy within the last two years based on how well the Contractor performed on projects of similar dollar value, size, scope, and complexity. The Contractor shall have a past performance that demonstrates successful execution and delivery of services in scope and type cited in the SOW. The Government will evaluate the Offeror ™s demonstrated past or current effort. When assessing performance risk, the Government will focus its inquiry on the past performance of the Offeror and its proposed major subcontractors as it relates to all solicitation requirements. Basis of Evaluation: Evaluation will assess the relative risks associated with an Offeror ™s likelihood of success in performing this requirement as indicated by the Offeror ™s record of past performance. The Government will also evaluate promptness and effectiveness of any necessary corrective action. The Government may also evaluate information gathered independently of the Offeror ™s submission to assess past performance (i.e., Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs)). Quality of performance is defined as the level of past performance provided which will be used as an indicator of the Offeror ™s probable performance as it relates to this acquisition. Offerors that would be eliminated from the competitive range solely based on negative findings in past performance will be given an opportunity to address such findings. A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of past performance can become an important consideration in the source selection process. Adverse Past Performance may result in an overall High-Risk rating. The Offeror is reminded to include all relevant past efforts, including demonstrated correction actions, in its proposal. Any Offeror lacking relevant past performance history may be evaluated on past performance information from predecessor companies, and key personnel with experience relevant to the instant acquisition. In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance, or where past performance information is not available, the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. An œUnknown Risk rating will be given. Past performance evaluation adjectival ratings are described in the table below: ADJECTIVAL RATINGDESCRIPTION ExceptionalThe Offeror ™s performance met contractual requirements and exceeded many to the Government ™s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective action(s) taken by the Contractor were highly effective. Very GoodThe Offeror ™s performance met contractual requirements and exceeded some to the Government ™s benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective action taken by the Contractor were effective. SatisfactoryThe Offeror ™s performance met contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the Contractor appeared or were satisfactory. MarginalThe Offeror ™s performance did not meet some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflected a serious problem for which the Contractor had not identified corrective actions. The Contractor ™s proposed actions appeared only marginally effective or were not fully implemented. UnsatisfactoryThe Offeror ™s performance did not meet most contractual requirements and recovery was not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed contained a serious problem(s) for which the Contractor ™s corrective actions appeared or were ineffective. The Government will give greater consideration to contracts requiring the same or similar type and complexity of work required by the RFP. However, other types of contracts may be considered as part of the past performance evaluation as well, if aspects of the past performance are deemed to have some bearing on the expected performance of the subject solicitation. Trends showing improving or deteriorating performance will also be considered. The contractor shall provide three past performance references that reflect recent relevant experience performed within the past two years. Provide the following information for each: a)Contracting activity and address b)Technical representative/Contracting Officer ™s Representative (COR) name and telephone number c)Contract number d)Type of contract e)Contract price f)Period of performance g)Brief description of the program and discussion of the relevance of the contract to this SOW In addition, the Government intends to review the Government ™s Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) rating of an Offeror ™s past performance of relevant contracts. In the event the Government cannot obtain adequate PPIRS rating information regarding a particular Offeror, the Government shall review relevant past performance information obtained from other sources. In addition, when subcontractors/teaming partners are proposed to perform significant parts of the effort, their past performance/ corporate experience shall also be evaluated. Factor 3 - Price: Price will be evaluated by Procurement Division personnel. In determining the overall value of the proposal, price is less important than the personnel resources, technical approach, corporate relevant experience, and past performance. Price will not receive an adjectival rating. The Offeror ™s proposed payment schedule will be evaluated. When evaluating the price proposal, a determination will be made as to the Offerors ™ price reasonableness and completeness. Any and all questions must be submitted 5 days before close of solicitation. No questions will be accepted after that time. Responses must be received no later than 1:00 p.m. EST on July 13, 2012. Provide responses to Georgia Warder, Code A23A, Naval Sea Systems Command, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head Division (NSWC IHD), Procurement Division, 4072 North Jackson Road Suite 118, Code A23A Indian Head, MD 20640-5115. Electronic mail address: Georgia.warder@navy.mil or FAX: 301-744-6670
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/NAVSEA/N00174/N0017412C0018/listing.html)
- Record
- SN02774547-W 20120615/120613235433-1ac21cc37e4f6ae2a54be997a3b86e4d (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 |