Particle Size Analysis Testing

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in Federal Acquisition Regulation (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 465-12MR-1815-1 and is issued as a Request for Proposal (RFP). The solicitation document and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect through Federal Acquisition Circular FAC 05-56. The associated North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code for this procurement is 541380, Testing Laboratories. This requirement is unrestricted and only qualified Offerors will be considered. The following items are being sought: CLIN DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT 0001 Air jet sieving of rock dust- Quantity of 40 (EA) 0002 Sample prep (drying and riffling)- Quantity of 40 (EA) All Contract Line Items (CLINS) are to be priced in accordance with the attached Statement of Work. Mine Safety and Health Administration Statement of Work Particle Size Analysis Testing (Air Jet Sieving) 1.0 Description of Services MSHA is seeking the services of an independent lab to perform air jet sieving particle size analysis of limestone dust in accordance with ASTM Standard C110-11, Section 18. 2.0 Background Testing is required for samples taken from manufactured material at various underground coal mining operations across the country. The limestone material (rock dust) is applied to underground mine surfaces to safeguard against coal-dust explosions. Federal regulations mandate that 100 percent of the manufactured rock dust material will pass through a sieve having 20 meshes per linear inch and 70 percent or more of which will pass through a sieve having 200 meshes per linear inch. 3.0 Testing and Analysis 3.1 Sampling will include approximately 40 samples of limestone material (rock dust). For this set of samples, we are interested in the determination of the amount of material that passes through a 200 mesh sieve. The analysis of these samples has become a high priority so turnaround time is important. 3.1.1 Samples delivered will range in weight from approximately 100 grams to 1 pound. 3.2 The contractor shall maintain appropriate chain-of-custody, including associated paperwork at all times. 3.3 An ISO/CEN 17025 certified contractor is preferred. If possible, sieve testing should be among the fields of testing covered by the scope of the accreditation. 3.4 Quality assurance analysis such as duplicate sample determinations, balance calibration verification, and sieve performance (most importantly the minus 200 mesh) are to be included in the quotation. 3.4.1 A duplicate analysis is to be completed on every tenth sample and reported. 3.4.2 The analytical balances used to weigh the samples must be routinely checked and verified using ASTM certified check weights. 3.4.3 The performance of the 200 mesh sieve(s) must be verified using a NIST traceable standard material (RM 8010, D) after every twenty samples. 3.5 Analysis is to be performed using ASTM's C110 air jet sieving through 200 mesh sieves. 4.0 Testing Methods 4.1 Testing is to be done according to ISO/IEC 17025 standards and ASTM Standard C110-11, Section 18, Dry Screening of Hydrated Lime, Pulverized Quicklime, and Limestone by Air Jet Sieving. 4.2 It may be necessary to dry samples after prolonged periods of storage. 5.0 Contractor Provided Items and Services The contractor shall provide the following items and services to the government, to the parties/locations indicated: 5.1 Sample analyses reports to be provided within 30 calendar days of sample receipt. Electronic reports shall be in Adobe Acrobat format, digitally signed and e-mailed to: contact@example.gov. 6.0 Government Provided Items and Services 6.1 The government shall provide the labor and equipment needed to obtain and document the samples, including delivery of the samples to the contractor or shipping company drop off point. 6.2 Samples to be returned to Mark Wesolowski upon completion of testing via United Parcel Service (UPS) using the Government provided UPS account number for shipping charges. Period of performance: 30 days from receipt of samples. Place of performance: Work will be performed at the selected vendor's location. The following provisions and clauses apply to this acquisition: FAR 52.204-6, Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number; 52.204-7, Central Contractor Registration; 52.204-9, Personal Identity Verification of Contractor Personnel; 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors-Commercial; 52.212-2, Evaluation-Commercial Items (See Addenda below); 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items; 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions-Commercial Items; 52.217-6, Option for Increased Quantity; 52.222-36, Affirmative Action for Workers with Disabilities; 52.222-37, Employment Reports for Veterans; 52.222-41, Service Contract Act of 1965; 52.225-13, Restrictions on Certain Foreign Purchases; 52.233-1, Disputes, Alternate I; 52.233-4, Applicable Law for Breach of Contract Claim; 52.237-3, Continuity of Services. FAR Clause 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes Or Executive Orders-Commercial Items also applies to this acquisition to include 52.219-28, Post Award Small Business Program Representation; 52.222-3, Convict Labor; 52.222-19, Child Labor--Cooperation with Authorities and Remedies; 52.222-21, Prohibition of Segregated Facilities; 52.222-26, Equal Opportunity; 52.222-35, Equal Opportunity for Veterans; 52.223-18, Contractor Policy to Ban Text Messaging While Driving; 52.225-13, Restrictions on Certain Foreign Purchases; 52.232-33, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer-Central Contractor Registration. Addenda to 52.212-2, Evaluation-Commercial Items (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: i) Technical Capabilities a. Experience b. Understanding of the Requirement ii) Price Technical Capabilities and its sub factors, are significantly more important than price. However, as Offeror's ratings for the non-price factors approach equality, price becomes significantly more important in the award decision. (b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). (c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful Offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award. The Government will award a single Firm Fixed Price contract from this combined synopsis/solicitation. Offerors are cautioned that an award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price offered. The Government is more concerned with obtaining superior services 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 services. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than "Acceptable" must be achieved for Factor I, (Technical Capabilities). 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. TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES- 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. No pricing information is to be provided in the Technical Proposal. 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 Parts 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 of the SOW. Each proposal must contain information adequate to allow the Government to make a determination that the vendor can perform the work identified in the SOW. PRICE- The Offeror shall provide a separate document outlining their pricing using the contract line items listed above. Pricing must be provided separately from your technical proposal. EVALUATION SUMMARY FACTOR I. TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES-The Offeror shall submit a proposal that acknowledges the tasks identified in the Statement of Work to allow the Government to make a sufficient determination that the Offeror is capable of performing the work. Sub factor a. EXPERIENCE-The Offeror shall provide a synopsis of their experience in performing the tasks listed in the Statement of Work. Sub factor b. 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 acknowledging that they are capable of completing the tasks identified in the Statement of Work, outlining their method and approach to completing the requirements. FACTOR II. - PRICE - 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 Factor I, Technical Capabilities follows. No adjectival ratings will be used to evaluate Factor III, Price. Adjectival Ratings. The following adjectival ratings will be used: Factor I- Technical Capabilities, will be rated using the following Adjectival Scale 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. Non-Price Factors: The importance of the Non-Price Evaluation Factors is in the following descending order with the most important factor listed first: Factor I, Technical Capabilities and its sub factors combined are significantly more important than Factor II "Price". However, as Offeror's ratings for the non-price factors approach equality, Factor II "Price" becomes significantly more important in the award decision. Quotes must be received by Mindy Smith, Contract Specialist, no later than 9:00 AM (EST) on April 16, 2012. Quotes will be accepted by e-mail at contact@example.gov. Electronic quotes must be submitted in a format compatible with Microsoft Office 2003 or Adobe. No specific format is required, however your proposal pricing must be sent as a separate file and include the contract line items listed above. All questions on this requirement must be submitted in writing by e-mail to the Contract Specialist by April 12, 2012 at 9:00 AM (EST). Phone calls will not be accepted.