Part 6 - Section L - 19AQMM22R0007 FINAL.docx

Section L – Notice to Offerors 19AQMM22R0007

Section L – Instructions, Conditions, & Notices to Offerors

A. Proposal Questions

1. All solicitation questions shall be submitted Patrick Murphy at murphypj@state.gov on XXX, 2022 at 10:00 AM, Eastern Daylight Time (EDT). All Offerors shall separate technical and price questions and clearly identify each question with a reference to the solicitation.

B. Proposal Submission

1. All proposals shall be submitted electronically via email to Patrick Murphy at murphypj@state.gov in the format and per the guidelines outlined in this document. Offerors shall be responsible for ensuring the electronic submission is successfully submitted and received by the USG via email by the proposal due date and time. When submitting proposals to the USG via email, the Offeror shall request read receipts to ensure the USG receives the Offeror’s proposal.

2. An Offerors complete proposal and all attachments shall not exceed 40MB in total. If an offeror submits multiple emails containing a proposal, the offeror must clearly identify in the email subject line the following:

· Subject: Vendor Name, Title, Volume number, and Email number (i.e., 1 of 2 or 2 of 2…etc.).

3. Proposals are due no later than 10:00AM, EDT on XXXX, 2022.

4. Offerors are cautioned against “parroting” of the Technical requirements or Performance Work Statement (PWS). “Parroting” is defined as imitating the words of the technical requirements or the PWS without articulating a clear understanding of the requirements or capability to perform. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

5. Offerors, including any offeror organized as a joint venture, must have an active SAM registration at the time of proposal submission and throughout the procurement process. Any offeror whose registration is not active in SAM at the time of proposal submission will be excluded from the process and their proposals will not be evaluated.

B. Proposal Organization

1. The Offeror’s proposal shall consist of three (3) volumes. The volumes are: Volume I – Technical Proposal, Volume II – Past Performance, and Volume III – Price Proposal. Files shall not contain classified data/information. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

2. Each electronic file shall be clearly labeled with its title and volume number.

3. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

Contents shall be compatible to Microsoft Office products in order to be viewed properly.

**The cover letter, title page, table of contents, table of figures, list of tables, glossary of abbreviations & acronyms, small business subcontracting plans (if applicable), Recruitment plans, resumes, and commitment letters do not count against page count limitations. All pages shall be numbered, and single pages shall not exceed a total of 60 pages. Pages that exceed the required page limitations above will not be evaluated. Pages over the maximum pages allowed shall be marked unacceptable and not be read or evaluated by the Government.

4. Each volume in each set shall be labeled clearly displaying only the following information:

· Each volume shall have a Table of Contents with page numbers and shall include the Offeror’s Point of Contact information, which must include: Name, Individual’s Title, Mailing Address, E-Mail Address and Phone Number.

· Each page shall be numbered and have a “header” with the Company Name, Solicitation Number, Volume Number and Volume Title. Sample as follows:

Company A

19AQMM22R0007

Volume 1 – Technical 19AQMM22R0007

C. Proposal Format

1. All files, except for the /price tables shall be in MS Word. Printing should be single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscape.

2. MS Word (doc) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

3. All price breakdown information to aide in the price evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format and viewable in Microsoft Excel. All calculations and formulas shall be unprotected and accessible in electronic submission documents.

D. Content Requirements

1. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The Offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file. Proprietary information shall be marked clearly.

2. Offerors shall state, explain, and justify any deviations, exceptions, or conditional assumptions taken regarding any of the instructions or requirements of this task order in the appropriate volume of the offer. For example, technical assumptions shall be covered under the "Technical" volume, and price assumptions under "Price" volume.

3. Proposals not received in accordance with these instructions may be considered unacceptable and rejected. The penalty for making false statements is prescribed in 18 USC 1001. Failure to furnish current and complete information may cause a proposal to be rejected.

4. Assumptions:

(a) Offerors shall state, explain, and justify any deviations, exceptions, or conditional assumptions taken regarding any of the instructions or requirements of this individual order in the appropriate volume of the offer.

(b) Failure to explicitly state price assumptions may result in removal from the competition.

5. The following shall be included in the Narrative discussion for each respective volume:

a) Volume I: – Technical Proposal. This volume shall be organized into the following sections and include:

Subfactor 1 – Engineering and Technical Services INL/A seeks to understand the proposed aviation engineering and technical services and the offeror's ability to react to critical engineering requirements with accurate time sensitive solutions and delivery of critical information. Proposals will be evaluated against all relative requirements in the area of engineering and technical services, with emphasis on the elements cited below.

Describe the engineering tools, techniques, and standards you propose to utilize in project management, associated reporting. Discuss why you believe them to be the most effective and efficient to apply to the work requirements.

INL/A will evaluate the proposal to determine the extent to which the offeror demonstrates understanding of the appropriate and most effective engineering standard(s) applicable to the work. Strengths in relevant engineering disciplines will be evaluated to determine ability to implement the cited tools, techniques, and standards.

Perform a risk analysis of aviation Engineering and Technical Services. Identify the three (3) most critical areas of risk when implementing your proposed engineering management, tools, techniques, and standards. Also explain how you would successfully manage each of these risks.

INL/A will evaluate the offeror’s implementation of their approach to assess the offeror’s rationale behind their selection. INL/A will also evaluate the offeror’s implementation of their approach to manage and mitigate the identified risks through its proposed tools, techniques, and standards.

Provide four (4) recent examples of experience deemed most relevant in providing aviation Engineering and Technical services for requirements similar to those identified in the SOW. Provide project contact information (POC, phone, email).

INL/A will evaluate the offeror’s implementation of their approach for relevant experience, degree of complexity, level of expertise required to successfully perform the services.

Subfactor 2: Sustainment Operations INL/A seeks to understand the offeror's technical approach, and experience in aircraft maintenance and logistics management, and proposed processes and standards for support of continuing aviation operations at CONUS and OCONUS locations. Proposals will be evaluated against all relative requirements in the area of sustainment operations, with emphasis on the elements cited below.

Provide a detailed summary explaining the specific management methodology, business practices, standards, technologies, and processes you plan to utilize to support continuing DoS operations at both CONUS and OCONUS locations. Discuss why you believe them to be the most effective and efficient to apply to the work requirements.

Perform a risk analysis of sustainment operations. Identify and fully explain the three (3) most critical risks in implementing your business practices, proposed standards, technologies, and processes. Explain how you would successfully manage each of the identified risks.

INL/A will evaluate to determine the extent to which the proposal demonstrates an understanding of the appropriate, most effective, and balanced approach applicable to perform the assigned tasks. Experience in relevant disciplines will be evaluated to determine ability to understand and implement the cited standards, technologies, processes, and practices.

INL/A will evaluate the three areas identified as most critical to assess the offeror’s rationale behind their selection. INL/A will also evaluate the offeror’s approach to manage and mitigate the identified risks

Subfactor 3: Operations INL/A seeks to understand the approach, processes, and standards the offeror proposes to apply in conducting aviation operations at CONUS and OCONUS locations. Proposals will be evaluated against all relative requirements in the area of operations, with emphasis on the elements cited below.

Provide a detailed summary explaining the specific standards, processes, technologies, and procedures you plan to utilize when providing rotary and fixed wing aircraft operation support at both CONUS and OCONUS locations.

INL/A will evaluate the extent to which the offerors’ proposal demonstrates a safe, professional, regulated, proven model, with associated technical and administration solutions. Demonstrated experience in relevant aircraft operation disciplines will be evaluated to determine ability to implement the cited standards, processes, technologies, and procedures to meet or exceed all requirements related to operation and the accomplishment of the Statement of Work.

Subfactor 4: Quality Assurance INL/A seeks to understand the offeror's quality program(s), technical approach, management involvement and processes, and the proposed task order plan(s). Proposals will be evaluated against all relative requirements in the area of Quality Assurance, with emphasis on the elements cited below.

Describe the Quality Assurance Program, management tools, techniques, and standards you propose to utilize. Discuss why you believe them to be the most effective and efficient to apply to the work requirements.

INL/A will evaluate to the extent to which the offerors proposed solution demonstrates a reliable and proven quality model and associated tools, techniques, and standards meet or exceed all requirements related to Quality Assurance. Demonstrated experience in relevant Quality Assurance disciplines will be evaluated to determine ability to implement the cited tools, techniques, and standards.

Subfactor 5: Aircraft Procurement Sample Task Order INL/A seeks to understand the approach, processes, and standards the offeror proposes to apply in rapidly locating and acquiring commercially available aircraft to meet DoS specific needs and requirements. Proposals will be evaluated against all relative requirements in the area of aircraft procurement, with emphasis on the elements cited below.

Provide a summary explaining what specific technologies, standards, and procedures you plan to utilize in aviation procurement for CONUS and OCONUS locations.

Perform a risk analysis of the SOW and identify the three (3) most critical areas of implementing your proposed aviation procurements, including standards, and procedures. Also explain how you would successfully manage each of these risks.

Provide two (2) examples of your most recent and relevant global (CONUS and OCONUS) experience in aircraft acquisition, any required mission or systems modifications, and delivery of aircraft similar to the active and inactive DoS aircraft listed in the SOW. Provide project contact information (POC, phone, email).

INL/A will evaluate the extent to which the offerors’ proposed solution demonstrates a reliable and proven procurement model and associated technical and administration solutions to meet or exceed all requirements related to the procurement, transfer of ownership to DoS, and rapid delivery of required rotary and/or fixed wing aircraft in the configuration necessary to accomplish the requirements of the task order Statement of Work.

INL/A will evaluate the three areas identified as most critical to assess the offeror’s rationale behind their selection. INL/A will also evaluate the offeror’s approach to manage and mitigate identified risks.

INL/A will evaluate the offeror’s implementation of their approach for global experience in the successful aircraft acquisition, modification, transfer of ownership, and delivery.

Subfactor 6: DHC-8 Storage Sample Task Order

INL/A seeks to understand the approach, processes, and standards the offeror proposes to apply in securing storage IAW with SOW. Proposals will be evaluated against all relative requirements in the area of aircraft storage, with emphasis on the elements cited below.

Provide a summary explaining what specific technologies, standards, and procedures you plan to utilize in aviation storage for CONUS and OCONUS locations.

Perform a risk analysis of the PWS and identify the three (3) most critical areas of implementing your proposed aviation storage management technologies, standards, and procedures. Also explain how you would successfully manage each of these risks.

Provide two (2) examples of your most recent and relevant global (CONUS and OCONUS) experience in aircraft storage, any required mission or systems modifications, and delivery of aircraft similar to the active and inactive DoS aircraft listed in the SOW. Provide project contact information (POC, phone, email).

INL/A will evaluate the extent to which the offerors’ proposed solution demonstrates a reliable and proven procurement model and associated technical and administration solutions to meet or exceed all requirements related to the procurement, transfer of ownership to DoS, and rapid delivery of required rotary and/or fixed wing aircraft in the configuration necessary to accomplish the requirements of the task order Statement of Work.

INL/A will evaluate the three areas deemed most critical for their relevance, the logic, and reasoning behind their selection. INL/A will also evaluate the offeror’s approach to manage and mitigate identified risks.

INL/A will evaluate the offeror’s implementation of their approach for global experience in the successful aircraft acquisition, modification, transfer of ownership, and delivery.

Volume II: Past Performance

The Offeror, either as the prime contractor or as a joint venture contractor, will be evaluated to assess past performance using recent (within past 3 years) of relevant CPARS data and Offeror provided questionnaire information.

The Offeror will be evaluated based on the relevance of the prior performance as well as the level of customer satisfaction and compliance with contract requirements in the areas of:

1) quality of product/service (meeting technical requirements),

2) adherence to contract schedules, including the administrative aspects of performance,

3) controlling contract costs,

4) managing the contracted effort (history of reasonable and cooperative behavior),

5) commitment to customer satisfaction and businesslike concern for the interest of its customers.

The Government will conduct an evaluation of the past performance information obtained to determine how closely the services performed under those contracts relate to the requirements of this solicitation. Consideration will be given to similarity of services performed in hostile, austere and remote locations; complexity; magnitude of effort; and schedule. The four levels of relevancy are as shown below:

PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY RATINGS

1. The Performance Confidence Assessment chart below serves as the overall past performance rating. Offerors without a record of recent/relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be assigned reasonably will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and, as a result, will receive an "Unknown Confidence" rating for the Past Performance factor.

Assessment than less recent or relevant efforts. A strong record of relevant past performance may be considered more advantageous to the Government than an "Unknown Confidence" rating. Likewise, a more relevant past performance record may receive a higher confidence rating and be considered more favorably than a less relevant record of favorable performance.

PERFORMANCE CONFIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. It is unlikely that Government intervention will be needed in order to obtain the required product/service.

Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Little Government intervention is expected to be needed in order to obtain the required product/service.

Offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

Government has a low expectation the offeror will successfully perform the required effort. Some Government intervention is expected to be needed in order to obtain the required product/service.

In conducting the Past Performance evaluation, the Government reserves the right to use information provided in the Offeror’s Past Performance proposal volume and information obtained from other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers and other Government representatives involved in a procurement as necessary; the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), and commercial sources.

c) VOLUME III – PRICE

This volume shall consist of all information, required to support prices. There are no page limitations to this volume. Certified cost and pricing data is not currently required; however, the Government reserves the right to request such data prior to award.

The price proposals submitted for the sample task orders referenced in Technical Volume I, Subfactors 5 & 6 will be evaluated for price reasonableness along with the fixed price rates contained in Special Mission Labor Categories & Rates Table (Attachment 3). The Government will use one or more of the proposal analysis techniques stipulated in FAR 15.404 to conduct the evaluation.

1. The offeror shall submit a detailed price narrative supporting each price/cost proposed and the narrative must provide a thorough explanation and rationale for all proposed prices. Failure to explicitly state cost/price assumptions in Volume III, Cost/Price proposal may result in removal from the competition.

1. Offerors shall fill in the proposed Special Mission Labor Categories & Rates Table (Attachment 3). These proposed rates shall be used in the pricing of both sample task orders and will be utilized for the performance of any task orders issued under the resulting IDIQ contract.

SBU - CONTRACTING AND ACQUISITIONS

SBU - CONTRACTING AND ACQUISITIONS