AMD M67854-23-R-8003-5.docx

M6785423R8003

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 30-105-04

EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

This amendment implements the following solicitation changes:

(1) Updates contact information in Item G.1 of Section G.

(2) Rescinds Attachment L-2 while updating Attachments L-3 and L-6 (adding question and answer number 86 and beyond for this latter attachment) in Item L.1 of Section L.

(3) Corrects a misspelled word in subparagraph e).2 under paragraph 1.2 in Part B of Section M’s Item M.1.

All other aspects of this Solicitation remain unchanged by this amendment. See the following page(s) for further details of the change(s) this amendment executes.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

PAGE OF PAGES

S 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

01-Nov-2023

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

15C. DATE SIGNED

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer) (Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X M6785423R8003 X

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

26-Jul-2023

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

31-Oct-2023

CODE

COMMANDER MARCORSYSCOM

CONTRACTS, 2.78 12211 SCIENCE DRIVE

ORLANDO FL 32826-3224

M67854

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODE

CODE

EMAIL:

TEL:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION G - CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

The following have been modified:

G.1.

G.1. GOVERNMENT CONTACT POINTS (JUN 2023)

The names and contact information that follows is respectively for the contracting officer and contract specialist with oversight responsibility for this contract:

Noriko O’Brien Marine Corps Systems Command

PM TRASYS

12211 Science Drive Orlando, FL 32826 Phone: (571) 545-1057 E-mail: noriko.obrien@usmc.mil La’Venji Daniels Marine Corps Systems Command

PM TRASYS

12211 Science Drive Orlando, FL 32826 E-mail: lavenji.daniels@usmc.mil

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

SECTION L INFORMATION

L.1. PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS (OCT 2023)

PART A: GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 GENERAL

The entire source selection process is properly and efficiently conducted in accordance with this solicitation, FAR Subpart 15.3, and Department of Defense (DoD) Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) Subpart 215.3, and the Director, Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy memorandum dated 1 April 2016, Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures.

The Offeror must respond to all requirements of the solicitation and not alter or rearrange the solicitation. The Offeror is advised that the Government may incorporate any portions of the Offeror’s proposal into the resulting contract.

In presenting material in the proposal, the Offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization shall be emphasized during proposal preparation. Statements that the prospective Offeror understands, can comply with, or will comply with, the specifications, and paraphrasing the requirements or parts thereof without supporting information are considered inadequate by the Government, and may result in assessing weaknesses and/or deficiencies.

The Government advises the Offeror that taking exception or deviating from any term or condition of the solicitation may result in the assessment of a deficiency to the proposal.

Throughout these instructions, “Offeror” is defined as the prime contractor with its CAGE code identified in Block 15A on Standard Form (SF) 33, Solicitation offer and Award.

2.0 ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL FORMAT

This section is intended to provide information to the Offerors on the electronic format and application software to be used for submitting proposals. Do not submit hardcopy proposals for this solicitation. Use of the software and procedures described in this section will reduce the amount of time and effort needed to receive and upload proposals and will ensure the proposals received are suitable for reading electronically during evaluation.

Proposals must be formatted using a Times New Roman 12-point Normal font (no reduction permitted), single-spaced with 1-inch margins all around, and formatted for standard 8.5 x 11-inch paper. All pages must be numbered with section and page numbers. Graphs and tables shall be presented in no smaller than a 10-point font and should contain a grid, which allows values to be read directly from the graph. Graphs and tables that fit on an 8.5” X 14” printed page will be counted as one page. Drawing may be of any size and will count as one page. Graphic resolution, including such data as tables or charts, should be consistent with the purpose of the data presented. When using Government supplied templates, no modifications to font or scaling required. All proposal documents must be compatible with Microsoft Office 2016 and/or the latest Adobe Acrobat Reader Portable Document Format (PDF), as applicable.

The Offeror is responsible for ensuring electronic proposals are virus free and shall run an anti-virus scan before submission. Offerors may use hyperlinks within and among proposal volumes that do not include price information. However, there shall be no links from any other volume into the Price Volume or into any other portion of the proposal that contains price information. In order to reduce file sizes, the Offeror shall not embed sound or video (e.g., MPEG) files within the proposal submission. The Offeror is encouraged to simplify the color palette used in creating figures; and minimize size of graphics files; and avoid scanned images.

All electronic files submitted shall follow the following naming convention:

For Volume 1 Technical proposal electronic files: Vol_1_XXX For Volume 2 Past Performance proposal electronic files: Vol_2_XXX For Volume 3 Price proposal electronic files: Vol_3_XXX

The XXX represents the appropriate title the Offeror can identify. Naming files in the format above will allow the Government to store electronic files for each volume accordingly.

3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT AND VOLUMES

The Offeror must present proposal information in a manner that facilitates a one-to-one comparison between the information proposed and these proposal instructions. Proposal information must be structured such that its Volume/paragraph number matches the proposal instructions’ Volume/paragraph number provided in section “Part B Specific Instructions” to which it is responding though the Offeror may add lower tier subparagraphs. The Offeror must provide reasons it will not provide information for a particular paragraph. The proposal information instructions are structured by paragraph numbers where first, second, third, and fourth parts correspond to the volume, section, and element, etc., in the Offeror’s proposal.

Each volume of the proposal shall be submitted as specified in the table below. The table below supersedes the copies requested in Block 9 of the Standard Form (SF) 33. All volumes of the proposal shall be received electronically via the Solicitation Module in PIEE prior to the closing date/time stated in this solicitation. Page limitations for each volume, if any, are also specified in the table below; title and table of contents pages do not count towards the page limit.

Each volume shall contain the following information:

· Cover and title page

· Title of proposal and proposal number as applicable

· Offeror’s name, address, and POC

· Solicitation number

· Proposal volume

· Table of Contents (The table of contents must provide sufficient detail to enable easy location of important elements)

The following table lists the attachments provided to the offeror within Section L.

4.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

Electronic copies of each volume shall be submitted through the Solicitation Module of PIEE at https://piee.eb.mil. No other submission methods (e.g., mail, hand carried, or DOD Safe submissions) are allowable. Proposals submitted through other than the Solicitation Module referenced will not be evaluated. For instructions on how to post an offer, please refer to the Posting Offer demonstration on the following webpage: https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/Posting_Offer.pdf

It is the Offeror’s responsibility to obtain written confirmation of receipt of all electronic files of the full proposal by the Contracting office.

The submission date of all Volumes shall be no later than the date and time specified in Block 9 of the SF 33 of the solicitation.

5.0 CLASSIFIED DATA

All proposals must be UNCLASSIFIED

6.0 SOLICITATION CHANGES

All amendments to the solicitation, if necessary, will be posted at https://sam.gov. Offerors and potential Offerors should search the database for the solicitation number M67854-23-R-8003.

7.0 SOLICITATION QUESTIONS/COMMENTS

Questions regarding the solicitation should be submitted in PIEE via the Contracting Communication Module (CCM) by utilizing the Solicitation Questions and Answer Form, Attachment L-1. Each question or comment should reference the applicable document, page number, and paragraph number. Offerors shall not include any proprietary information in a question, because the Government will provide the question and answer to all potential offerors. All questions must be submitted no later than 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time on October 18, 2023. The Government is under no obligation to try to answer questions received after that date but may answer questions if time permits using Attachment L-6.

PART B SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

Cost or pricing information shall only appear in the Price volume.

1. VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL (Factor 1)

1.1 Technical Overview

The Technical Proposal shall reflect a clear understanding of the nature of the work being undertaken and be structured as outlined below and consistent with all other instructions provided in Section L of this solicitation. To be eligible for award, Proposals must clearly demonstrate the Offeror’s competence, technical understanding experience, and capabilities and resourced sufficiently to perform every requirement set forth in the solicitation. Once again, Offerors are advised that if any exceptions, deviations and/or waivers are taken, the proposal may be determined noncompliant and ineligible for award. Therefore, Offerors should first propose a fully compliant approach, then offer an optional alternative that explains all benefits and detriments of the alternative approach.

1. The Offeror shall propose its technical approach to provide one Project Manager who shall be responsible for the performance of all work at a given training site. The Project Manager prerequisites are based on the following:

0. Project Manager who has corporate decision-making authority to effectively and rapidly respond to the contract’s requirements. The Project Manager shall be the principal point of contact between the contractor, the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), and Contracts Officer Representative (COR) for all administrative and technical requirements. (Attachment 1, paragraph 3.2.5)

1. The Offeror shall at a minimum propose one Site Manager per training site who will be responsible for the performance of the day-to-day work, training and operations at a given training site. The minimum Site Manager prerequisite position qualifications are based on: (Attachment 1, paragraphs 1.2, 1.4.21, 3.1, and 3.2.5).

1. The Offeror shall propose its minimum numbers of Instructor(s) and Deck Observer(s) per training site the Offeror will employ to meet the required Student-to-Instructor (S:I) ratios defined in Attachment 1, Appendix B along with the Programs of Instructions (POIs).

2. Provide, sustain, and ensure qualified UET staffing for Okinawa site are provided for each scheduled training requirement per Attachment 1, Paragraph 3.1.5.3., 3.2.2.1, 3.2.2.4, and 3.2.2.5.

2. Provide, sustain, and ensure qualified UET staffing for Hawaii, Guam, Camp Pendleton (Del Mar), Camp Pendleton, and Camp Lejeune sites are provided for each scheduled training requirement per Attachment 1, Paragraphs 3.2.2.1, 3.2.2.4, and 3.2.2.5.

1. The Offeror shall propose at a minimum, one designated Instructor/Operator who will also serve as a Maintainer per training site who will be responsible for the performance of all day-to-day work, maintenance, and inspections at a given training site. The minimum Maintainer prerequisite position qualifications based on are: (Attachment 1, paragraphs 3.1.3, 3.2.5.7, 3.2.15, 3.2.16, 3.2.19 and 3.2.30).

3. Qualified Overhead Crane Inspector per a nationally certified or DoD organization.

1. The Offeror shall propose performance of the Phase-In requirements delineated in paragraph 3.2.6 of Attachment 1. Offeror shall specifically address how its performance will avoid negatively impacting or causing any stoppage to training during Phase-In. Offerors shall specifically explain how its proposed phase-in schedule plan will avoid delaying full performance upon contract award and transition from the incumbent.

4. In light of the criticality of the UET training requirement, the Offeror is encouraged to propose a Phase-In schedule plan that expedites/shortens the duration of transition to full accomplishment of all the phase-in requirements delineated in paragraph 3.2.6 of the Attachment 1 while still meeting the full performance requirements for Phase-In and that does not interrupt the Offeror’ assumption of full contract performance by the end of the phase-in period.

1. The Offeror shall propose its comprehensive Maintenance Support Plan that details how and where maintenance shall be scheduled, performed, and documented for all training systems and all other gear used to support training and operations (Attachment 1, paragraph 3.2.5.7)

5. The Offeror shall propose how it’s maintenance and material support approach will meet or exceed Operational Availability (Ao) (Attachment 1, paragraphs 3.2.17 & 3.2.17.1) for each training system site identified in paragraph 1.4 of Attachment 1.

2.0 VOLUME 2: PAST PERFORMANCE (Factor 2)

Note:

· The Offeror shall not provide any references to cost or price aspects of the offer in this volume.

0. For itself and any associated principal subcontractor or Joint Venture (JV) team members who will be involved with the performance of the contract, the Offeror shall use Attachment L-4 to identify contracts that were active within five years of the proposal submission date and are relevant in terms of size, scope, and complexity to the requirements of the solicitation. A principal subcontractor for the purposes of the past performance evaluation is any subcontractor who is projected to provide contributions valued at 20% or more of the total proposed price in response to this solicitation, less the Offeror’s profit/fee.

0. The Offeror shall include no more than three Past Performance contract references (Government or commercial) for the Government’s evaluation consisting of the Offeror’s and principal subcontractors or JV team members relevant past performance. The Offeror shall include a maximum of two references from the principal subcontractors.

0. The Offeror shall NOT submit past performance references that include classified supporting documentation, as the Government needs to be able to easily obtain and review information pertaining to past performance.

0. In Attachment L-4, block 18, the Offeror shall provide details to how the size, scope and complexity of work for the past contract relates to the requirements described in this solicitation’s performance work statement size, scope, and complexity.

0. In Attachment L-4, block 19, if a past performance problem was noted in the CPARS, the Offeror shall describe the status of the improvement effort and how improvement efforts resolved or improved the performance problem to avoid repeat occurrences of the identified problem.

0. For any contracts identified which do not have a CPAR, the Offeror shall complete Attachment L-5, Contractor Performance Assessment Questionnaire (CPAQ) and forward to the Past Performance contract customer within one week from the RFP release to allow responses to be received by the Government concurrently with (if not, sooner than) the submission of the Offeror’s Volume 2. The Offeror shall include past performance instructions to the customers. The submittal information is provided at the top of the questionnaire(s) to facilitate the Offeror’s efforts in meeting these instructions. The Offeror shall not conduct follow-up actions with regards to the questionnaire(s). The CPAQ respondent shall return the CPAQ to the Government.

0. The Government may send any other questionnaires as necessary.

0. Offerors shall provide written consent from any involved entity that is a principal subcontractor or JV team member to permit the Government to coordinate each identified past performance issue for those entities with the Offeror. If Offerors do not submit that written consent, the Government will address any past performance issues directly with the relevant principal subcontractor or JV team member . Consequently, the Offeror will forfeit the opportunity to participate in any related discussions. Moreover, for any principal subcontractor or JV team member that does not provide such written consent, the Offeror must provide a name, address, and phone number for a point-of-contact from that entity.

3.0 VOLUME 3: PRICE PROPOSAL (Factor 3)

3.1 Volume Content:

All price information shall be contained only in the price proposal.

1. Offerors are responsible for submitting sufficient information to enable the Government to fully evaluate their price proposal.

Offeror shall submit a completed copy of Attachment L-3, which represents Section B pricing. The Offeror shall submit pricing for each CLIN listed in Attachment L-3 unless otherwise described within L-3 by the Government, as these CLINs are completed/calculated by the Government. Failure to submit pricing for required CLINs will result in the proposal being unawardable. Offerors shall not include additional tabs to spreadsheet. Note: the spreadsheet automatically calculates the pricing for 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services, which is for evaluation purposes.

This Solicitation, and the resulting Contract, are subject to the Service Contract Act of 1965, as amended along with FAR 52.222-41 and 52.222-43. The Offeror shall propose in compliance with FY24 hourly rates set forth under the Service Contact Act and shall not include escalation for adjustments for covered employees under the Service Contact Act.

1. Offerors shall utilize Attachment L-3 in completing Section B of the Solicitation.

3.2 Certified Cost or Pricing:

As this is a competitive acquisition with adequate price competition anticipated, certified cost or pricing data IAW FAR 15.403-1 is not required. However, in the event that adequate price competition does not exist after receipt of proposals, the Government reserves the right to request additional cost or pricing data as necessary from both the Offeror and subcontractors and may conduct negotiations with the Offeror pursuant to FAR Part 15.403-4 in order to ensure a reasonable and realistic price. Further, the Offeror may be required to provide a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data prior to award pursuant to FAR 15.406-2. The Offeror shall acknowledge the requirement to provide additional cost or pricing information and certify the data prior to award if requested by the Government.

3.3 Administrative Requirements

1. The Offeror shall complete the following administrative requirements:

1. The Offeror shall provide a completed and signed SF33 cover page for the basic solicitation and each solicitation amendment.

1. Joint Ventures: If proposing as a Joint Venture, the Offeror shall provide copies of any approved Joint Venture agreements or Joint Venture agreements submissions not yet approved.

1. A completed Attachment L-3.

1. Signed Representations, Certifications and Acknowledgements required in Section K or System for Award Management (www.sam.gov) reference.

1. Offeror Representatives and Information: The Offeror shall provide a summary sheet comprised of the information listed below:

1. PRIME CONTRACTOR

1. Business Name;

1. Address;

1. Principal point of contact for this solicitation (Name, title, phone number, email);

1. Secondary point of contact for this solicitation (Name, title, phone number, email);

1. Individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government and contractually bind the Offeror (Name, title, phone number, email);

1. Establishment Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN);

1. TIN of Parent Corporation (if applicable);

1. Unique Entity Identifier (UEI);

1. CAGE code;

1. Business size for this effort (large or small); and

1. Percentage of work proposed to perform on solicitation effort.

1. ALL OTHER ENTITIES (one for each additional entity, even it is not considered a principal subcontractor member, as defined in the Past Performance section above)

1. Business Name;

1. Address;

1. DCMA point of contact and telephone number, if applicable;

1. DCAA point of contact and telephone number, if applicable;

1. UEI; and

1. CAGE code

1. The Offeror shall include a statement that the proposal shall remain valid for a period of at least 270 days from the designated closing date indicated for receipt of proposals in this solicitation.

1. The Offeror shall confirm that they are registered under NAICS code on www.SAM.gov.

1. A mathematical calculation that shows that the offeror’s proposal meets the requirements of contract clause 52.219-14 for services.

1. Exceptions and Deviations All exceptions and deviations that the Offeror takes from the provisions of the solicitation and its applicable documents shall be included in this section.

An exception is where an Offeror states it will not comply with a solicitation requirement, usually involving contract terms and conditions. A deviation is where an Offeror states it will not comply with a solicitation requirement but proposes an alternative to meet the intent of the requirement, usually involving a SOW requirement.

Offerors are highly encouraged to submit questions regarding any areas of the solicitation as early as possible if they may lead to an exception or deviation so it can be resolved. If the Offeror takes any exceptions or deviations to the provisions of the solicitation and its applicable documents, the Offeror shall provide the following statement: “All exceptions and deviations taken from the solicitation terms, conditions or requirements, including any applicable documents, are included in this section.” If the Offeror does not take any such exceptions or deviations, then the Offeror shall provide the following statement: “No exceptions or deviations are taken to the terms and conditions or any requirement of the solicitation.”

1. Contractor Accounting Systems (Prime Only): Pursuant to FAR 16.301-3(a)(3) and DFARS clause 252.242-7006, “Accounting System Administration,” the contractor’s accounting system must be adequate during the entire period of contract performance for determining costs applicable to the cost-reimbursable CLINs under this contract.

As a result, Offerors shall provide evidence from the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), other federal civilian audit agency, or a private accounting firm that, as of the proposal due date, the Offeror’s accounting system has been audited and has been determined adequate and suitable for administration of a cost-reimbursable contract. An Offeror that is an unpopulated JV entity shall provide evidence of an adequate cost accounting system for the managing venturer IAW FAR 52.219-30. Offerors that submit evidence from a private accounting firm must submit a Standard Form 1408, completed and signed by the private accounting firm that performed the audit. This shall include full contact information for the private accounting firm so that this can be verified.

1. Notice of Potential Organizational Conflict of Interest: All Offerors are required to affirm whether an Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) or Potential Organizational Conflict of Interest (POCI) exists among themselves or any proposed subcontractors. If the prime Offeror or a subcontractor has an identified OCI or POCI, the Offeror shall submit an OCI Mitigation Plan of the contractor who has the identified OCI or POCI IAW the following Provision: DFARS 252.209-7008.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

SECTION M INFORMATION

M.1 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD (OCT 2023)

PART A: GENERAL INFORMATION

1.0 DEFINITIONS

0. “Deficiency” means 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. See FAR 15.001.

0. “Significant Weakness” means a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

0. “Significant Strength” means an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal with appreciable merit that both exceeds specified performance or capability requirements and provide considerable advantage of the Government during contract performance.

0. “Strength” means an aspect of an offeror's proposal with merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the advantage of the Government during contract performance.

0. “Weakness” means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

2.0 GENERAL

The Government will select one Offeror whose proposal offers the “best value” to the Government, using the trade-off method. "Best value" means the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the Government's estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit(s) in response to the requirement. The Offeror is advised that the lowest priced proposal meeting the solicitation requirements may not be selected for an award if award to a higher priced Offeror is determined to be more beneficial to the Government. However, the perceived benefits of the higher priced proposal must merit the additional price.

2.0 EVALUATION PROCESS

The Government intends to evaluate each proposal and award a contract without discussions to the responsible Offeror whose proposal, conforms to the solicitation, provides the greatest overall benefit to the Government, all factors considered. Therefore, Offeror’s are cautioned that their initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a Technical, past performance, and price standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions and request proposal revisions if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government. If a competitive range is established, the Government may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals. The Government may use information other than that provided by the Offeror in its evaluation, including past performance information and the results of questionnaires.

3.0 EVALUATION FACTORS

Proposals will be evaluated using the following factors:

Factor 1: Technical Factor 2: Past Performance Factor 3: Price

Technical is more important than Past Performance. Technical and Past Performance Factors, when combined are significantly more important than price. Because the non-price factors when combined are significantly more important than price, the Source Selection Authority (SSA) is permitted to select an Offeror that has proposed a higher price if the Technical and/or Past Performance proposal of their Offeror is worth the price premium. Thus, the SSA may perform a best-value tradeoff between Offeror’s evaluated price and the relative merit identified within their evaluated Technical and Past Performance Factors.

PART B: SPECIFIC INFORMATION

1. TECHNICAL (Factor 1)

0. The Government will evaluate how well each Offeror’s Technical Proposal demonstrates the Offeror’s understanding of requirements, the adequacy of the proposed approach, the impact to the proposal of any Strengths, Weaknesses, Significant Weaknesses, and Deficiencies identified, and any identified risks.

a) A proposal that contains an exception or deviation from requirements is unawardable.

0. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s response to the submission requirements detailed in Section L, Part B, paragraph 1.1(a – f).

1. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed Project Manager who shall be responsible for the performance of all work at a given training site. The Project Manager prerequisites are based on : (Attachment 1, paragraph 3.2.5)

0. Project Manager who has corporate decision-making authority to effectively and rapidly respond to the contract’s requirements. The Project Manager shall be the principal point of contact between the contractor, the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), and Contracts Officer Representative (COR) for all administrative and technical requirements.

1. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed staffing of Site Managers, focusing on the Offerors proposed ratio of site manager to training site and the Offeror’s plan for managing and ensuring the successful performance of all required work at each training site per Attachment 1, paragraph 3.2.5.

1. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed staffing of Instructor(s) and Deck Observer(s) for each UET site and the proposal’s conformance with the required Student-to-Instructor (S:I) ratios per instructional event delineated in the Attachment 1, paragraph 3.1.3 and Appendix B, and Programs of Instructions per Attachment 1, paragraph 3.2.30.

0. Qualified Instructor and Deck Observer staffing for Okinawa site. Per Attachment 1, Paragraph 3.1.5.3.

0. Qualified Instructor and Deck Observer staffing for Camp Lejeune, Camp Pendleton, Okinawa, and Kaneohe Bay sites. Per Attachment 1, Paragraphs 3.1.3, 3.2.2.1, 3.2.2.4 3.2.2.5, and Appendix B.

1. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed staffing of designated Instructor/Operator and the Offeror’s plan for the I/O to perform as a Maintainer per each training site. Offerors shall detail its plan for performance of all work at each training site. The minimum Maintainer prerequisite position qualifications based on are:

1. Qualified Overhead Crane Inspector per a nationally certified or DoD organization.

1. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s schedule plan, with a focus on how the Offeror’s phase-in period will avoid negatively impacting, disrupting or delaying full performance of training upon contract award and transition.

1. The Government also seeks for Offerors to include a plan to expedite its accomplishment of Phase-In requirements before the required times delineated in paragraph 3.2.6 of the Attachment 1.

2. An Offeror’s failure to provide a plan to expedite the Phase-In period will not be considered a deficiency, significant weakness, or weakness with respect to the expedited phase-in requirement, but instead is an opportunity for Offerors to distinguish additional merit within its proposal.

1. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s comprehensive Maintenance Support Plan and how well it explains the Offeror’s methods and procedures for scheduling and performing maintenance and documenting all such services for all training systems and other gear used to support training and operations, per Attachment 1, paragraph 3.2.5.7)

1. The Government will evaluate how well the Offeror’s submitted maintenance and material support approach meets or exceeds Operational Availability (Ao) (Attachment 1, paragraphs 3.2.17 & 3.2.17.1) for each training system per site identified in paragraph 1.4 of the Attachment 1.

0. The Government will assign each Offeror’s Technical Proposal a single rating (Combined Technical/Risk Rating) that reflects the degree to which the technical aspects of the Offeror’s proposal meets, exceeds, or does not meet the solicitation’s Technical factor requirements identified above through a qualitative assessment of the Offeror’s Technical Proposal’s Strengths, Weaknesses, Significant Weaknesses, and Deficiencies. The adjectival ratings listed in Table 1 below will be applied only at the Factor level for the Technical factor. Technical factor ratings are merely guides for intelligent decision making. Thus, even if one or more Offerors receive the same Technical factor rating, the fact that the rating is the same does not indicate the proposals are technically equal or the same. Qualitative distinctions may exist even between proposals that receive the same Factor rating. Proposals not rated at least Acceptable for Factor 1, will not be further evaluated, unless no other proposal is rated Acceptable or better. Offerors whose proposals are subsequently eliminated from the competition will be notified immediately after all otherwise eligible proposals are initially evaluated.

Table 1 Combined Technical/Risk Rating

low.

1. PAST PERFORMANCE (Factor 2)

0. The Past Performance Factor will be assigned a Past Performance Evaluation Rating (“PPER”) based on the descriptions provided in Table M-1 below. The PPER reflects the acceptability of the expectation of successful contract performance by an Offeror. Each Offeror will be evaluated based upon its team’s (prime contractor, principal subcontractor, or JV Team Member) past performance under contracts or subcontracts currently ongoing or completed within the last five years for similar efforts.

Table M - 1. Past Performance Evaluation Ratings

0. There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation. The first aspect is to evaluate whether the past performance of the Offeror, including any applicable principal subcontractor or JV team member is relevant to this solicitation’s requirements. The criteria used to determine relevant past performance is based on—

1. recent contracts having performance within five years of the required proposal submission date and

1. the similarity of the (a) size, (b) scope, and (c) complexity.

0. The second aspect of the past performance evaluation is to determine how well the Offeror, including any applicable principal subcontractor and JV Team Members, performed on the relevant contracts or subcontracts. Problems not addressed by the Offeror will be considered to still exist. The degree to which the Offeror can demonstrate that it has successfully applied continuous systemic improvement to resolve past performance problems will be evaluated. In the case of an Offeror (1) without a record of relevant past performance or (2) for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance, which will yield an Acceptable PPER.

0. For any relevant contracts that are currently in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (“CPARS”) and for which annual reporting has been performed, the Government will assess the report. To be assigned a PPER of “Acceptable”, the contract must have received an evaluation rating of “Satisfactory or above” for all areas evaluated. Any evaluation rating below “Satisfactory” in any evaluation area will be assigned a PPER of “Unacceptable.”

0. For any relevant contracts where the latest report in CPARS is more than 12 months old (the “Outdated Report”) and at least one Contractor Performance Assessment Questionnaire (“CPAQ”) has been received, the Government will assess the Outdated Report, weighing its contents against the input provided in all available CPAQs. An acceptable PPER will be assigned for the contract only if (1) the Outdated Report received an evaluation rating of Satisfactory or above in all elements evaluated and (2) each PPQ received does not materially conflict with the Outdated Report.

0. For any relevant contracts identified that were not reported in CPARS and at least one CPAQ has been received, the Government will make a separate acceptability determination for each contract based on all available CPAQs for that contract. To be assigned an Acceptable PPER, there must be no Unacceptable responses to any area evaluated in each CPAQ received by the Government. A single Unacceptable response amongst the CPAQs for a contract will prompt the assignment of an Unacceptable PPER for that contract.

0. The PPER applied to each contract reviewed—despite whether it was based on information from CPARS, CPAQs, or any another source—will determine the overall Past Performance Factor PPER. An unacceptable rating for any contract results in a corresponding unacceptable rating for the Past Performance Factor.

1. PRICE (Factor 3)

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Price Volume for its proposed total evaluated price; price reasonableness; whether the Offeror’s proposed CLIN prices are balanced; and whether the Offeror completed the information requested in Section L. In its evaluation, the Government may use commercial published data, same or similar DoD contracts, Government estimates, industry standards, DCAA audit information, or other information as deemed appropriate by the Government.

2.1 Price Reasonableness

Normally, competition establishes price reasonableness. It is expected that the award decision will include a determination that there is adequate price competition and that the proposed prices are reasonable. In limited situations, additional analysis will be required by the Government to determine reasonableness. If, after receipt of a proposal, the Procuring Contracting Officer determines that adequate price competition does not exist and a determination is made that none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1(b) apply, the Offeror may be requested to provide certified cost and pricing data IAW FAR 15.403-4.

2.2 Balanced Pricing

As required by FAR § 15.404-1(g)(2), the Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items or subline items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government. This is not a price realism analysis.

2.3 Total Evaluated Price (TEP)

The total evaluated price shall be calculated by adding the total price for each CLIN, inclusive of the option to extend service CLINs. The Government will utilize its total evaluated price for purposes of the selection official’s best value tradeoff decision.

2.4 Completeness

Completeness shall be determined based on the information requested in Section L.B.3.3, Administrative information submitted as part of the Price Volume, will be evaluated for completeness and compliance. This evaluation is not part of the source selection authority’s “best value” tradeoff, but some of the information may be necessary for an offeror’s proposal to be acceptable for contract award. Unless otherwise noted, questions to offerors to resolve issues with the administrative information are not considered Deficiencies that make an offeror unacceptable for award, even if the information is necessary for contract award, unless the offeror refuses to provide the requested information.

Exceptions and deviations are Deficiencies. A proposal that contains an exception or deviation from requirements is unawardable.

An Offeror’s proposal that fails to provide the evidence requested in Section L of an acceptable accounting system will be determined unawardable, will be removed from the competitive range if discussions are held, and will be ineligible for award.

(End of Summary of Changes)