Accessibility Information

Users of assistive technologies such as screen readers should use the following link to activate Accessibility Mode before continuing: Learn more and Activate accessibility mode.

Updating the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs), North American Standard (NAS) Inspection Procedures and Out-Of-Service (OOS) Criteria to address All-Electric and Hybrid-Electric Commercial Vehicles

Solicitation Number: DTMC7513R00021
Agency: Department of Transportation
Office: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)
Location: Headquarters FMCSA
  • Print
:
DTMC7513R00021
:
Combined Synopsis/Solicitation
:
Added: Jul 16, 2013 10:26 am

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 12.6 (Streamlined Procedures for Evaluation and Solicitation for Commercial Items) and FAR Part 13 (Simplified Acquisition Procedures), 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. Synopsis/Solicitation No. DTMC75-13-R-00021 is issued as a Request for Proposal (RFP) and incorporates provisions and clauses in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-66. This is a 100% small business set-aside. The associated North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 541620. The small business size standard is $14.0M.
 
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Office of Analysis, Research and Technology is seeking a qualified small business to perform a comprehensive assessment of changes needed to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs), North American Standard (NAS) inspection procedures, and Out-Of-Service (OOS) Criteria to address all-electric and hybrid-electric commercial vehicles. The period of performance is twelve (12) months from the effective date of award with no option periods. The place of delivery and Government acceptance shall be the U.S. Department of Transportation Headquarters, Washington, DC 20590. Site visits and consultations are required in the performance of the requirements outlined in the Statement of Work (SOW). The resultant contract shall be Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP).

FMCSA invites your company to submit a proposal in accordance with FAR Part 12-Acquisition of Commercial Items and FAR Part 13-Simplified Acquisition Procedures as it relates to the attached SOW provided as Attachment (1). Your proposal will be evaluated for the purpose of establishing a contract for these services.

Firms must submit a complete proposal. Proposal shall remain valid for 90 days. One copy of the proposal signed by an authorized representative of the firm shall be submitted as an electronic version in MS Word or Adobe Acrobat and one hard copy signed by an authorized representative of the firm shall be provided to the Contract Specialist by Express Mail. The electronic version shall be submitted by e-mail. The proposal shall contain all content and shall be sized to permit electronic submission. Each proposal submission shall be on 8-1/2 x 11-inch paper, in a commercially standard font. Each page in the proposal shall be separately numbered.

Any additional clauses required by public law, executive order, or acquisition
regulations in effect at the time of execution of the contract will be included. The Government reserves the right to make zero or one single contract award and will not be liable for any costs incurred in response to this synopsis/solicitation. The Government will evaluate proposals in accordance with the evaluation factors set forth in this RFP. The proposal shall demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the services outlined in the SOW, those offered, and the prices proposed for those services. The proposal submitted in response to this synopsis/solicitation shall be based on all requirements as set forth in the SOW.

The provision at FAR 52.212-1-Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Items, FAR 52.212-2-Evaluation-Commercial Items, FAR 52.212-3-Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items, FAR 52.212-4-Contract Terms and Conditions-Commercial Items, and FAR 52.212-5-Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders-Commercial Items shall apply to this acquisition as set forth in this RFP. The following Federal Acquisition Regulation clause shall also be applicable to this acquisition: FAR 52.227-14 Rights in Data-General (DEC 2007). The following U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Clauses shall be applicable to this acquisition: TAR 1252.223-73 Seat Belt Use Policies and Programs (APR 2005); TAR 1252.237-73 Key Personnel (APR 2005). The full text of the FAR and TAR clauses and provisions may be accessed electronically at:

http://acquisition.gov/far/index.html

http://www.dot.gov/administrations/assistant-secretary-administration/transportation-acquisition-regulation-tar

All offers submitted in response to this RFP shall include four (4) Sections, i.e., Section I-Technical Approach, Section II- Management Approach, Section III-Past Performance, and Section IV-Pricing. Section IV shall include a completed copy of the provision at 52.212-3 Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items, and complete pricing for the attached CLIN structure provided as Attachment (2). NOTE: FAR 52.212-3 shall not count toward the page limitation. Each section (submitted electronically and in hard copy) shall be submitted in separate files.

Section I

Technical Approach - Evaluation Factor

Subfactor 1
: Corporate Expertise - The Offeror shall provide sufficient information to demonstrate corporate expertise on the subject matter of the safety of electric and hybrid-electric commercial vehicles (i.e., heavy-duty trucks or buses). Adequate documentation shall be provided to clearly demonstrate a thorough understanding of the SOW requirements. The Offeror's proposal shall include a detailed discussion of its technical skills and capabilities to perform the services outlined in the SOW. The Government will evaluate the degree to which the information provided by the Offeror demonstrates technical expertise and capability. This section shall not exceed 15 pages. Any pages in excess of 15 will be disregarded and will not be considered in the proposal evaluation.

Subfactor 2: Project Work Plan - The Offeror shall provide a draft project work plan showing how the tasks and subtasks in Section 3 of the SOW will be implemented, including a schedule of milestones to meet the Schedule of Deliverable in Section 4 of the SOW. There is no page limitation associated with the Project Work Plan.

Section II

Management
Approach - Evaluation Factor: This section shall not exceed 12 pages. Any pages in excess of 12 will be disregarded and will not be included in the proposal evaluation. The Offeror's proposed management approach shall include adequate documentation to clearly demonstrate a thorough understanding of the SOW requirements. The Offeror shall describe in sufficient detail its management capability. The Offeror shall provide a proposed contract management plan that demonstrates that it possesses the capability to manage and staff the project in order to perform the requirements outlined in the SOW. Offerors shall provide a list of skills for all proposed personnel, including relative experience and expertise which is critical to the success of the requirements set forth in the SOW. NOTE: It is understood that Offerors may use different titles that describe their staffing personnel and that those titles may be synonymous with the labor categories specified within the Pricing Format provided as Attachment (2) to this RFP. If this is applicable, Offerors shall address this in their proposal.

The Offeror shall provide resumes of proposed key personnel (e.g., Principal Investigator) who have expertise and experience with the safety of electric and hybrid-electric commercial vehicles (i.e., heavy-duty trucks or buses. Key personnel with background experience/expertise in the transportation industry, inclusive of bus/truck operations, are preferred but not required. Resumes shall not exceed 3 pages. Resumes will be evaluated but are not included in the total page count.

Section III

Relevant Past Performance - Evaluation Factor
- Past Performance data shall not exceed 3 pages for each contract referenced. A list of at least 3 contracts or task orders (Government or Commercial) for work the same or similar to the requirements specified in the SOW completed in or in process, within the last 3 years, each valued over $100,000.00, for past performance evaluation purposes. The Offeror shall provide references of having worked (as an employee, instructor, grantee, or contractor) on electric and hybrid-electric commercial vehicles. The Offeror shall provide demonstrated work experience in a similar size, scope, magnitude, complexity, and cost of the requirements outlined in the SOW.

Include the contract number/type/value/description/Contracting Officer and Technical points of contact (POC). The POCs names, telephone numbers, agencies and e-mail addresses must also be included. At least wear something dece

For evaluation purposes, the Government reserves the right to utilize past performance information other than what was submitted in the Vendors quotations

Offerors with no relevant past performance history or for whom information on past performance is not available, e.g., a new firm, this rating factor will be considered neutral and will neither increase or decrease an Offeror's overall rating.

NOTE: In order that the Technical Proposal may be evaluated strictly on the merit of the material submitted, no price information is to be included. Price data (or the price proposal) shall be segregated from the rest of the proposal and submitted as a separate volume.

Section IV

Price
: The Offeror's price proposal shall also include the overall value/total estimated cost of performing the requirements outlined in the SOW for the twelve month period of performance. The price data (or price proposal) shall be segregated from the rest of the proposal. Price data shall be submitted in a separate document. The price proposal shall contain only the information requested in this section and shall not be used as an extension of the technical proposal. The price shall be realistic, complete and reasonable in relation to the RFP SOW requirement. The Offeror's price quote shall include clearly stated costs and costs elements that are anticipated based on the SOW provided as Attachment (1). The Offeror's price proposal shall clearly identify labor categories with the number of personnel by skill level in parenthesis, number of labor hours applicable for the work efforts, labor rates (rates are to be composite, i.e., include applicable indirect burden costs, e.g., overhead, general and administrative expense, and profit), and if applicable subcontract cost and other direct costs (ODC). Proposed labor rates shall be fully burdened. Offerors shall also provide a description of each labor category proposed.

In performance of the requirements outlined in the SOW, travel is anticipated. Travel is estimated in the not-to-exceed (NTE) amount of $15,000.00 and this amount shall be utilized in preparation of the overall value of your price proposal. In the Pricing Format (Attachment (2), travel is indicated as a Cost Reimbursable Contract Line Item No. (CLIN). All travel cost shall be in accordance with the Federal Travel Regulations and invoiced based on actual costs plus any applicable General and Administrative (G&A) fee. Offerors shall reflect in their price proposal the G&A factor (if applicable) applied to travel. Other Direct Costs (ODCs) associated with this RFP include travel, Honoraria for 3 Subject Matter Experts for Peer Review, and Copyrighted Materials. A NTE amount has been specified for each ODC CLIN in the Pricing Format and those NTE amounts shall be utilized in the preparation of the overall value of your price proposal. The price proposal shall be on a Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) basis and based on the requirements outlined in the SOW. Attachment (2) outlines the proposed pricing CLIN structure. NOTE: A copy of the provision at FAR 52.212-3-Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items shall be included with the Price Proposal. There is no page limitation associated with the price proposal.

The Government will make an award to the responsible Vendor whose offer conforms to the RFP and represents the best value to the Government, price and other factors considered. The Government will evaluate the total overall price to determine price reasonableness.


Offerors must address each of the criteria listed above. Additionally, the RFP should include information regarding (1) your Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN); Dun and Bradstreet Number, and Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) information; and (2) a statement whether your company is registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) database. Lastly, the RFP should set forth any other relevant information to include exceptions/assumptions taken with regard to the SOW or any other aspect of the RFP or any other information that you find necessary and pertinent to your RFP


Page Limitations (In Summary)


Technical Approach - Subfactor 1 (15 Pages) Subfactor 2 (no page limitation)

Management Approach - (12 Pages); Resumes (3 Pages per Individual - see note directly below in reference to Resumes).

Past Performance - 3 Pages for each reference provided.

Price - No page limit.


NOTE: Resumes will be evaluated but are not included in the total page count.


All evaluation factors will be adjectivally rated. Technical Approach is the most important factor followed by Management Approach and Past Performance. When combined, all non-priced factors are significantly more important than Price. However, when all of the most highly rated proposals are equal technically, price will be the controlling factor.


BASIS FOR AWARD:


A single award will be made to the responsible Offeror whose proposal conform to the RFP and presents the best value to the Government. Best value will be based on an integrated assessment by the government on the evaluation of all areas and factors set forth herein. Accordingly, the Government may award any resulting contract to other than the Offeror proposing the lowest price or the offeror achieving the highest adjectival rating. The Government does reserve the right of such flexibility in evaluation to ensure award of a contract in its best interest. It is the Government's intent to award without discussion; therefore it is incumbent upon all Offerors to submit their best proposal.

The following adjectival ratings will be used to determine overall ratings other than price. Offerors proposals will not be ranked except for total proposed price ranked from lowest to highest.


Technical and Management Approach

1. Excellent
. Proposed offer was excellent in all respects and demonstrates excellent understanding of the RFP requirements. Offeror has a very good probability of success in completing the contract. In order to receive an overall rating of excellent, the factor designated as the most important must be rated as "excellent" and the remaining non-priced factors must receive a rating of at least "good" with low risk, as applicable.

2. Good. Proposed offer represents high quality in most areas and demonstrates good understanding of the RFP requirements. Offeror has a good probability of success in completing the contract. In order to receive an overall rating of "good", the factor designated as the most important must be rated at least "good" and the remaining non-priced factors must receive a rating of at least "good" with low to moderate risk", as applicable.

3. Satisfactory. Proposed offer presents adequate quality and demonstrates acceptable understanding of the Government's requirement. Offeror has a moderate probability of success in completing the contract. In order to receive an overall rating of "satisfactory" the factor designated as the most important must be rated at least "satisfactory" and the remaining non-priced factors receive a rating of at least "satisfactory" with moderate risk, as applicable.

4. Unsatisfactory. Proposed offer contains major errors or omissions and deficiencies and does not demonstrate an acceptable understanding of the Government's requirement. The proposal cannot meet requirements of the solicitation without major rewrite or revisions. The Offeror received an unsatisfactory on one or more non-priced factors.

Past Performance

1. Excellent
- One or more examples where past performance significantly exceeded requirements.

2. Good - Past performance met requirements.

3. Marginal - One or more examples where past performance failed to meet requirements due to fault of contractor.

4. Unsatisfactory - One or more examples where past performance significantly failed to meet requirements due to fault of contractor.

5. Neutral. The Offeror has not relevant or identifiable past performance for itself, subcontractor or key personnel. The Offeror will not be rated favorable or unfavorable.

ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS:

1. 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. Examples of deficiencies include a statement by the Offeror that it cannot or will not meet a requirement, an approach that clearly does not meet a requirement, or omission of data required to assess compliance with the requirement.

2. Weakness/Signification Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. A "significant weakness" in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

3. Advantage/Strength. An advantage describes some element of a response that notably enhances an aspect of the Offeror's ability to perform the effort or that represents a significant benefit to the Government.

4. Clarifications. Limited exchanges, between the Government and Offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. These limited exchanges may be used to clarify certain aspects of proposals (e.g., the relevance of an Offeror's past performance information and adverse past performance information to which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond) or to resolve minor or clerical errors.

5. Risk. The evaluator's confidence in an Offeror's ability to successfully perform the technical effort described in its proposal.

RISK RATING

1. High (H) - The proposed approach is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increase in cost, of degradation of performance even with special contractor emphasis and close government monitoring.

2. Moderate (M). The proposed approach can potentially cause some disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance. However, special contract emphasis and close government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.

3. Low. The proposed approach has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal government monitoring will probably be able to overcome difficulties.

QUESTIONS

Any questions or concerns regarding any aspect of this RFP shall be forwarded to the Contract Specialist, Constance Duncan via e-mail at Constance.Duncan@dot.gov by July 22, 2013, so that they can be addressed prior to submission of your RFP package.

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION OR NO BID

Please submit your proposal to the attention of the Contract Specialist, Constance Duncan, via e-mail at Constance.Duncan@dot.gov on or before 3:00 PM, local time, on August 2, 2013. The proposal submitted shall form the basis for award.

In the event that your company declines to submit a proposal, please indicate via-email to the Contract Specialist that you will not be submitting a proposal and the reason(s) why, within one business day after receipt/publication of this combined synosis/RFP.

This RFP shall not be considered direction to proceed with the subject effort, nor a promise of future direction to proceed. The Offeror is solely responsible for this RFP's submission costs.

Attachment: (I) Statement of Work
Attachment: (2) Pricing Format
Attachment: (3) Additional Terms and Conditions


 

Added: Aug 02, 2013 9:57 am
 

Amendment No. 0001 to Solicitation No.: DTMC75-13-R-00021 for Updating the Federal Motorl Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs), North American Standard (NAS) Inspection Procedures and Out-Of-Service (OOS) Criteria to address All-Electric and Hybrid-Electric Commercial Vehicles  

Please consult the list of document viewers if you cannot open a file.

Combined Synopsis/Solicitation DTMC75-13-R-00021

Type:
Other (Draft RFPs/RFIs, Responses to Questions, etc..)
Label:
Combined Synopsis/Solicitation DTMC75-13-R-00021
Posted Date:
July 16, 2013
Description: Attachment (1): Statement of Work (SOW)
Description: Attachment (2) Pricing Format
Description: Attachment (3): Additional Terms and Conditions

Amendment 1

Type:
Mod/Amendment
Posted Date:
August 2, 2013
Description: AMENDMENT NO. 0001 TO SOLICITATION NO. DTMC75-13-R-00021
:
Contractor's Facility (actual location to be determined)

United States
:
Constance E. Duncan,
Contract Specialist
Phone: 2023852311
Fax: 2023852333
:
Diane Bethea,
Contracting Officer
Phone: 2023852303
Fax: 2023852333